Lu Chen1, Brienne E Engel2, Eric A Welsh3, Sean J Yoder4, Stephen G Brantley5, Dung-Tsa Chen3, Amer A Beg6, Chunxia Cao7, Frederic J Kaye7, Eric B Haura8, Matthew B Schabath9, W Douglas Cress10. 1. Department of Molecular Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida; Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida. 2. Department of Molecular Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida. 3. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida. 4. Molecular Genomics Core, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida. 5. Pathology Services M2Gen, Tampa, Florida. 6. Department of Immunology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida. 7. Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 8. Department of Thoracic Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida. 9. Department of Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida. 10. Department of Molecular Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida. Electronic address: Douglas.Cress@moffitt.org.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Serine/threonine kinase 11 gene (STK11), better known as liver kinase β1, is a tumor suppressor that is commonly mutated in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). Previous work has shown that mutational inactivation of the STK11 pathway may serve as a predictive biomarker for cancer treatments, including phenformin and cyclooxygenase-2 inhibition. Although immunohistochemical (IHC) staining and diagnostic sequencing are used to measure STK11 pathway disruption, there are serious limitations to these methods, thus emphasizing the importance of validating a clinically useful assay. METHODS: An initial STK11 mutation mRNA signature was generated using cell line data and refined using three large, independent patient databases. The signature was validated as a classifier using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) LUAD cohort as well as a 442-patient LUAD cohort developed at Moffitt. Finally, the signature was adapted to a NanoString-based format and validated using RNA samples isolated from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue blocks corresponding to a cohort of 150 patients with LUAD. For comparison, STK11 IHC staining was also performed. RESULTS: The STK11 signature was found to correlate with null mutations identified by exon sequencing in multiple cohorts using both microarray and NanoString formats. Although there was a statistically significant correlation between reduced STK11 protein expression by IHC staining and mutation status, the NanoString-based assay showed superior overall performance, with a -0.1588 improvement in area under the curve in receiver-operator characteristic curve analysis (p < 0.012). CONCLUSION: The described NanoString-based STK11 assay is a sensitive biomarker to study emerging therapeutic modalities in clinical trials.
INTRODUCTION:Serine/threonine kinase 11 gene (STK11), better known as liver kinase β1, is a tumor suppressor that is commonly mutated in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). Previous work has shown that mutational inactivation of the STK11 pathway may serve as a predictive biomarker for cancer treatments, including phenformin and cyclooxygenase-2 inhibition. Although immunohistochemical (IHC) staining and diagnostic sequencing are used to measure STK11 pathway disruption, there are serious limitations to these methods, thus emphasizing the importance of validating a clinically useful assay. METHODS: An initial STK11 mutation mRNA signature was generated using cell line data and refined using three large, independent patient databases. The signature was validated as a classifier using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) LUAD cohort as well as a 442-patient LUAD cohort developed at Moffitt. Finally, the signature was adapted to a NanoString-based format and validated using RNA samples isolated from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue blocks corresponding to a cohort of 150 patients with LUAD. For comparison, STK11 IHC staining was also performed. RESULTS: The STK11 signature was found to correlate with null mutations identified by exon sequencing in multiple cohorts using both microarray and NanoString formats. Although there was a statistically significant correlation between reduced STK11 protein expression by IHC staining and mutation status, the NanoString-based assay showed superior overall performance, with a -0.1588 improvement in area under the curve in receiver-operator characteristic curve analysis (p < 0.012). CONCLUSION: The described NanoString-based STK11 assay is a sensitive biomarker to study emerging therapeutic modalities in clinical trials.
Authors: Heinz-Josef Klümpen; Karla C S Queiroz; C Arnold Spek; Carel J M van Noesel; Helmy C Brink; Wendy W J de Leng; Roeland F de Wilde; Elisabeth M H Mathus-Vliegen; G Johan A Offerhaus; Maarten A Alleman; Anneke M Westermann; Dirk J Richel Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-12-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sophie Rousseaux; Alexandra Debernardi; Baptiste Jacquiau; Anne-Laure Vitte; Aurélien Vesin; Hélène Nagy-Mignotte; Denis Moro-Sibilot; Pierre-Yves Brichon; Sylvie Lantuejoul; Pierre Hainaut; Julien Laffaire; Aurélien de Reyniès; David G Beer; Jean-François Timsit; Christian Brambilla; Elisabeth Brambilla; Saadi Khochbin Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2013-05-22 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Mhairi C Towler; Sarah Fogarty; Simon A Hawley; David A Pan; David M A Martin; Nicolas A Morrice; Afshan McCarthy; María N Galardo; Silvina B Meroni; Selva B Cigorraga; Alan Ashworth; Kei Sakamoto; D Grahame Hardie Journal: Biochem J Date: 2008-11-15 Impact factor: 3.857
Authors: Zhao Chen; Katherine Cheng; Zandra Walton; Yuchuan Wang; Hiromichi Ebi; Takeshi Shimamura; Yan Liu; Tanya Tupper; Jing Ouyang; Jie Li; Peng Gao; Michele S Woo; Chunxiao Xu; Masahiko Yanagita; Abigail Altabef; Shumei Wang; Charles Lee; Yuji Nakada; Christopher G Peña; Yanping Sun; Yoko Franchetti; Catherine Yao; Amy Saur; Michael D Cameron; Mizuki Nishino; D Neil Hayes; Matthew D Wilkerson; Patrick J Roberts; Carrie B Lee; Nabeel Bardeesy; Mohit Butaney; Lucian R Chirieac; Daniel B Costa; David Jackman; Norman E Sharpless; Diego H Castrillon; George D Demetri; Pasi A Jänne; Pier Paolo Pandolfi; Lewis C Cantley; Andrew L Kung; Jeffrey A Engelman; Kwok-Kin Wong Journal: Nature Date: 2012-03-18 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: J Carretero; P P Medina; R Blanco; L Smit; M Tang; G Roncador; L Maestre; E Conde; F Lopez-Rios; H C Clevers; M Sanchez-Cespedes Journal: Oncogene Date: 2006-09-04 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Chunxia Cao; Ruli Gao; Min Zhang; Antonio L Amelio; Mohammad Fallahi; Zirong Chen; Yumei Gu; Chengbin Hu; Eric A Welsh; Brienne E Engel; Eric B Haura; W Douglas Cress; Lizi Wu; Maria Zajac-Kaye; Frederic J Kaye Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-12-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Chang-Qi Zhu; Keyue Ding; Dan Strumpf; Barbara A Weir; Matthew Meyerson; Nathan Pennell; Roman K Thomas; Katsuhiko Naoki; Christine Ladd-Acosta; Ni Liu; Melania Pintilie; Sandy Der; Lesley Seymour; Igor Jurisica; Frances A Shepherd; Ming-Sound Tsao Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-09-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M B Schabath; E A Welsh; W J Fulp; L Chen; J K Teer; Z J Thompson; B E Engel; M Xie; A E Berglund; B C Creelan; S J Antonia; J E Gray; S A Eschrich; D-T Chen; W D Cress; E B Haura; A A Beg Journal: Oncogene Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Nicholas T Gimbrone; Bhaswati Sarcar; Edna R Gordian; Jason I Rivera; Christian Lopez; Sean J Yoder; Jamie K Teer; Eric A Welsh; Alberto A Chiappori; Matthew B Schabath; Gary W Reuther; Julie Dutil; Miosotis Garcia; Ronald Ventosilla-Villanueva; Luis Vera-Valdivia; Alejandro Yabar-Berrocal; Rodrigo Motta-Guerrero; Pedro G Santiago-Cardona; Teresita Muñoz-Antonia; W Douglas Cress Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2017-09-11 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Christopher W Murray; Jennifer J Brady; Min K Tsai; Chuan Li; Ian P Winters; Rui Tang; Laura Andrejka; Rosanna K Ma; Christian A Kunder; Pauline Chu; Monte M Winslow Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2019-07-26 Impact factor: 39.397
Authors: Jacob M Kaufman; Tadaaki Yamada; Kyungho Park; Cynthia D Timmers; Joseph M Amann; David P Carbone Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2016-11-07 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Edna Gordian; Eric A Welsh; Nicholas Gimbrone; Erin M Siegel; David Shibata; Ben C Creelan; William Douglas Cress; Steven A Eschrich; Eric B Haura; Teresita Muñoz-Antonia Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2019-01-25
Authors: Lu Chen; Courtney A Kurtyka; Eric A Welsh; Jason I Rivera; Brienne E Engel; Teresita Muñoz-Antonia; Sean J Yoder; Steven A Eschrich; Ben C Creelan; Alberto A Chiappori; Jhanelle E Gray; Jose Luis Ramirez; Rafael Rosell; Matthew B Schabath; Eric B Haura; Dung-Tsa Chen; W Douglas Cress Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2016-12-13
Authors: Jaileene Pérez-Morales; Darielys Mejías-Morales; Stephanie Rivera-Rivera; Jonathan González-Flores; Mónica González-Loperena; Fernando Y Cordero-Báez; Wilfredo M Pedreira-García; Camille Chardón-Colón; Jennifer Cabán-Rivera; W Douglas Cress; Edna R Gordian; Teresita Muñoz-Antonia; Mauricio Cabrera-Ríos; Angel Isidro; Domenico Coppola; Marilin Rosa; Theresa A Boyle; Victoria Izumi; John M Koomen; Pedro G Santiago-Cardona Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-11-19 Impact factor: 3.240