Consensus abstract Background The management of primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes (PRC-bTME) and recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) is challenging. There is global variation in standards and no guidelines exist. To achieve cure most patients require extended, multivisceral, exenterative surgery, beyond conventional total mesorectal excision planes. The aim of the Beyond TME Group was to achieve consensus on the definitions and principles of management, and to identify areas of research priority. Methods Delphi methodology was used to achieve consensus. The Group consisted of invited experts from surgery, radiology, oncology and pathology. The process included two international dedicated discussion conferences, formal feedback, three rounds of editing and two rounds of anonymized web-based voting. Consensus was achieved with more than 80 per cent agreement; less than 80 per cent agreement indicated low consensus. During conferences held in September 2011 and March 2012, open discussion took place on areas in which there is a low level of consensus. Results The final consensus document included 51 voted statements, making recommendations on ten key areas of PRC-bTME and RRC. Consensus agreement was achieved on the recommendations of 49 statements, with 34 achieving consensus in over 95 per cent. The lowest level of consensus obtained was 76 per cent. There was clear identification of the need for referral to a specialist multidisciplinary team for diagnosis, assessment and further management. Conclusion The consensus process has provided guidance for the management of patients with PRC-bTME or RRC, taking into account global variations in surgical techniques and technology. It has further identified areas of research priority.
Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators and Pharmacogenomic Variation in ZNF423 Regulation of BRCA1 Expression: Individualized Breast Cancer Prevention
Consensus abstract Background The management of primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes (PRC-bTME) and recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) is challenging. There is global variation in standards and no guidelines exist. To achieve cure most patients require extended, multivisceral, exenterative surgery, beyond conventional total mesorectal excision planes. The aim of the Beyond TME Group was to achieve consensus on the definitions and principles of management, and to identify areas of research priority. Methods Delphi methodology was used to achieve consensus. The Group consisted of invited experts from surgery, radiology, oncology and pathology. The process included two international dedicated discussion conferences, formal feedback, three rounds of editing and two rounds of anonymized web-based voting. Consensus was achieved with more than 80 per cent agreement; less than 80 per cent agreement indicated low consensus. During conferences held in September 2011 and March 2012, open discussion took place on areas in which there is a low level of consensus. Results The final consensus document included 51 voted statements, making recommendations on ten key areas of PRC-bTME and RRC. Consensus agreement was achieved on the recommendations of 49 statements, with 34 achieving consensus in over 95 per cent. The lowest level of consensus obtained was 76 per cent. There was clear identification of the need for referral to a specialist multidisciplinary team for diagnosis, assessment and further management. Conclusion The consensus process has provided guidance for the management of patients with PRC-bTME or RRC, taking into account global variations in surgical techniques and technology. It has further identified areas of research priority.
Abstract PR4: Biochemical recurrence is not a definitive surrogate endpoint for development of clinically useful predictive models for post-prostatectomy patients
Abstract Introduction: Multivariable models that predict biochemical recurrence (BCR) can indicate patients at higher risk for developing clinical progression after prostatectomy. However, most patients that experience BCR do not metastasize or die from prostate cancer, making BCR an unreliable surrogate endpoint. In this study we compared the clinical and genomic characteristics of prostatectomy patients in order to better delineate the relationship between BCR and aggressive prostate cancer. Methods: Postoperative patients were retrospectively classified into three outcome groups: NED (no evidence of disease recurrence); BCR-only (patients that experienced BCR but didn't have progressive disease as evidenced by bone or CT scans); and CP (clinical progression with BCR plus positive CT or bone scans). Patient specimens were from the Mayo Clinic Radical Prostatectomy Registry, selected using a nested case-control design with 14 years median follow-up. RNA expression levels from FFPE tumor specimens were measured with 1.4 million feature whole-transcriptome oligonucleotide microarrays on 106 matching patients from each outcome group (total 318 patients). We analyzed the clinical covariates of the outcome groups in a pairwise manner (NED vs. BCR-only; NED vs. CP; CP vs. BCR-only), using a conditional logistic model in univariable and multivariable analyses. We performed feature reduction for the genomic data set using Kruskal-Wallis tests and regularized logistic regression. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used to quantify the variance of the genomic data with respect to the patient outcome groups. Results: Our initial hypothesis was that all three outcome groups would have different clinical and genomic characteristics. Univariable analysis of clinical variables failed to show statistically significant differences between NED and BCR-only groups. Multivariable analysis of the clinical variables also failed to show statistically significant differences between NED and BCR-only groups. Among the clinical variables only pathological Gleason score was statistically significant when comparing the BCR-only vs. CP and NED vs. CP groups. Genomic analysis found 363 coding and non-coding features that passed thresholds for differential expression between the three outcome groups. PCA established that the primary source of variance in the genomic data stemmed from the separation of CP from NED and BCR-only patients; whereas only a small amount of variance separates NED and BCR-only groups. The 363 features were further compared in the three outcome groups using Wilcoxon tests, adjusting for false-discovery using Benjamini-Hochberg. At a cutoff of p < 0.001 there were no features differentially expressed between NED and BCR-only, while 52 and 34 statistically significant features were found in the NED vs. CP and CP vs. BCR-only comparisons, respectively. Conclusion: Considering the clinical and genomic results together, we find that: 1) Patients that developed clinical progression were significantly different from those that did not, irrespective of whether they experienced BCR or not; 2) the NED and BCR-only groups were statistically very similar to each other. We therefore conclude that BCR may not be the most appropriate endpoint for predictive models that attempt to stratify patients at risk for progression. This abstract is also presented as Poster B44. Citation Format: Anamaria Crisan, Elai Davicion, R. Jeffery Karnes, Robert B. Jenkins, Mercedeh H. Ghadessi, Christine Buerki, Eric J. Bergstrahl, Nicholas Erho, Ismael A. Vergara, Karla V. Ballman, Peter C. Black, Timothy J. Triche. Biochemical recurrence is not a definitive surrogate endpoint for development of clinically useful predictive models for post-prostatectomy patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Advances in Prostate Cancer Research; 2012 Feb 6-9; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PR4.
Abstract B46: Identification of biomarkers for stratification of Gleason score 7 patients using whole-transcriptome expression profiling
Abstract Motivations: Gleason score is the most prognostic variable in prostate cancer pathology. Patients with high Gleason (8+) are the most likely to experience biochemical recurrence (BCR), clinical progression (CP) and prostate-cancer specific mortality (PCSM), whereas patients with Gleason ≤6 are expected to have excellent long-term outcomes. However, the majority of prostate cancer patients are diagnosed with Gleason score 7, a heterogeneous group in terms of patient outcomes. In the absence of adverse pathological factors (APF, such as preoperative PSA, SM+, ECE and SVI) most Gleason 7 patients will have excellent outcomes. In contrast, Gleason 7 patients with APF are considered at high-risk for recurrence and therefore are candidates for adjuvant therapy. In this study, we have investigated whether a classifier based on differentially expressed genomic features could be used to improve prognostication of Gleason 7 patients, independent of APF. Methods: Two whole-transcriptome (1.4 million feature) oligonucleotide microarray expression datasets from radical prostatectomy specimens were analyzed. The first one (GEO accession: GSE21032) consisted of 125 fresh frozen (FF) samples from the MSKCC Oncogenome Project and the second dataset had 545 formalin-fixed-paraffin- embedded (FFPE) samples from the Mayo Clinic tumor registry. For genomic feature selection, differential expression in the FF dataset between Gleason ≤6 (n=40) and ≥8 (n=15) was assessed with false discovery rate adjusted t-tests (p<0.05). Next, a k-nearest neighbor (KNN) classifier was trained and tuned using the selected features to predict clinical progression (i.e., positive bone or CT scans after BCR) in the FFPE dataset, again using samples with Gleason score ≤6 (n=63) and ≥8 (n=211). The KNN classifier was evaluated on Gleason score 7 (n=209) FFPE samples (not used for training) using multivariable logistic regression. Results: The KNN classifier segregated the Gleason 7 samples into high and low risk CP groups. The KNN odds ratios were 2.9 (p<0.005), 2.1 (p<0.05) and 2.8 (p<0.05) for BCR, CP and PCSM end-points, respectively when comparing high and low risk groups. Multivariable analysis revealed that the KNN classifier was independently prognostic. Conclusions: A KNN classifier developed using differentially expressed genomic features significantly stratified Gleason score 7 patients for several clinically relevant endpoints. Future validation studies will address the utility of this classifier in predicting pathological Gleason score from biopsy specimens, which may be particularly useful for evaluation of biopsy Gleason 6 cases. In these patients, deferring prostatectomy in favour of active surveillance is an appealing treatment option unless the ‘true’ Gleason of the index lesion is in fact a Gleason 7 or higher, where immediate surgery is likely a life-saving procedure. Citation Format: Nicholas Erho, Thomas Sierocinski, Elai Davicioni, Robert B. Jenkins, Mercedeh Gadhessi, Christine Buerki, Ismael A. Vergara, Anamaria Crisan, Zaid Haddad, Benedikt Zimmermann, Anirban Mitra, Timothy J. Triche. Identification of biomarkers for stratification of Gleason score 7 patients using whole-transcriptome expression profiling [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Advances in Prostate Cancer Research; 2012 Feb 6-9; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(4 Suppl):Abstract nr B46.
Impact of PTEN Protein Expression on Benefit From Adjuvant Trastuzumab in Early-Stage Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Positive Breast Cancer in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 Trial
Purpose It has been suggested that PTEN, a negative regulator of PI3K/AKT signaling, is involved in tumor sensitivity to trastuzumab. We investigated the association between tumor PTEN protein expression and disease-free survival (DFS) of patients randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy alone (arm A) or chemotherapy with sequential (arm B) or concurrent trastuzumab (arm C) in the phase III early-stage human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) –positive trial—North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) N9831. Patients and Methods The intensity and percentage of invasive cells with cytoplasmic PTEN staining were determined in tissue microarray sections containing three cores per block (n = 1,286) or in whole tissue sections (WS; n = 516) by using standard immunohistochemistry (138G6 monoclonal antibody). Tumors were considered positive for PTEN (PTEN-positive) if any core or WS had any invasive cells with ≥ 1+ staining. Median follow-up was 6.0 years. Results Of 1,802 patients included in this analysis (of 3,505 patients registered to N9831), 1,342 (74%) had PTEN-positive tumors. PTEN positivity was associated with hormone receptor negativity (χ2 P < .001) and nodal positivity (χ2 P = .04). PTEN did not have an impact on DFS within the various arms. Comparing DFS of arm C to arm A, patients with PTEN-positive and PTEN-negative tumors had hazard ratios (HRs) of 0.65 (P = .003) and 0.47 (P = .005), respectively (interaction P = .16). For arm B versus arm A, patients with PTEN-positive and PTEN-negative tumors had HRs of 0.70 (P = .009) and 0.85 (P = .44), respectively (interaction P = .47). Conclusion In contrast to selected preclinical and limited clinical studies suggesting a decrease in trastuzumab sensitivity in patients with PTEN-negative tumors, our data show benefit of adjuvant trastuzumab for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer, independent of tumor PTEN status.
Identification of Novel Variants in Colorectal Cancer Families by High-Throughput Exome Sequencing