Literature DB >> 27861143

Intratumoral heterogeneity and chemoresistance in nonseminomatous germ cell tumor of the testis.

Mehmet Asim Bilen1, Kenneth R Hess2, Matthew T Campbell3, Jennifer Wang3, Russell R Broaddus4, Jose A Karam5, John F Ward5, Christopher G Wood5, Seungtaek L Choi6, Priya Rao4, Miao Zhang4, Aung Naing7, Rosale General3, Diana H Cauley3, Sue-Hwa Lin8, Christopher J Logothetis3, Louis L Pisters5, Shi-Ming Tu3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nonseminomatous germ cell tumor of the testis (NSGCT) is largely curable. However, a small group of patients develop refractory disease. We investigated the hypothesis that intratumoral heterogeneity contributes to the emergence of chemoresistance and the development of refractory tumor subtypes.
RESULTS: Our institution's records for January 2000 through December 2010 included 275 patients whose primary tumor showed pure embryonal carcinoma (pure E); mixed embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, and teratoma (EYT); or mixed embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, and teratoma (EYST). Patients with EYST had the highest cancer-specific mortality rate (P = .001). They tended to undergo somatic transformation (P = .0007). Two of 5 patients with clinical stage I EYST who had developed recurrence during active surveillance died of their disease.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, we evaluated consecutive patients who had been diagnosed with the three most common histological phenotypes of NSGCT. Chemoresistance was defined as the presence of teratoma, viable germ cell tumor, or somatic transformation in the residual tumor or the development of progressive or relapsed disease after chemotherapy. In a separate prospective study, we performed next-generation sequencing on tumor samples from 39 patients to identify any actionable genetic mutations.
CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that patients with EYST in their primary tumor may harbor a potentially refractory NSGCT phenotype and are at increased risk of dying from disease. Despite intratumoral heterogeneity, improved patient selection and personalized care of distinct tumor subtypes may optimize the clinical outcome of patients with NSGCT.

Entities:  

Keywords:  chemoresistance; intratumoral heterogeneity; next-generation sequencing; nonseminomatous germ cell tumor; testicular cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27861143      PMCID: PMC5349913          DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.13380

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncotarget        ISSN: 1949-2553


INTRODUCTION

Intratumoral heterogeneity is pervasive in cancer and poses an obstacle to precision medicine; thus, it is critical to understand this phenomenon. Nonseminomatous germ cell tumor (NSGCT) of the testis provides a unique opportunity to elucidate the nature and implications of intratumoral heterogeneity in solid tumors. The pathological sample from NSGCT is usually complete and abundant. Its histological makeup is well established and self-evident. Its molecular profile is simple compared with that of other solid tumors [1]. In addition, its clinical course is relatively easy to trace and annotate. Importantly, NSGCT is one of the most curable solid tumors [2]. More than 90% of patients diagnosed with NSGCT are cured. In our recent analysis of 615 patients, despite widespread metastases and increased tumor burden, about two thirds of patients with clinical stage IIIC NSGCT were cured with conventional treatments such as chemotherapy and surgery [3]. However, 5–10% of the patients in our study died of their NSGCT. Further analysis of the characteristics of tumors that are refractory to standard treatments will provide invaluable clues about chemoresistance in NSGCT and perhaps other solid tumors. In many respects, NSGCT is a prototype cancer for studying intratumoral heterogeneity [4]. The pathogenesis of NSGCT recapitulates the embryogenesis of germ cells [5-7]. A specific chromosome change, namely isochromosome 12p, is observed in 86% of germ cell tumors and all of their histological components [8]. The molecular profiles of its various histological components, primary and metastatic tumors, stromal and epithelial compartments, and teratomatous and somatically transformed constituents are highly concordant [9-12]. Despite a common clonal origin and a similar genetic profile, it is striking that chemosensitive embryonal carcinoma and chemoresistant teratoma co-exist in a mixed NSGCT; these components are usually treated by chemotherapy and surgery, respectively. These observations indicate that intratumoral heterogeneity is intrinsic in NSGCT and suggest that a specific subtype may be responsible for the 5–10% of patients who die of their disease. Such cases might be found and their significance magnified in patients with early-stage NSGCT (i.e., clinical stage I or II at the time of diagnosis) who would be expected to have been cured and yet, despite standard treatments, died of their disease. Previously, we demonstrated that intratumoral heterogeneity is caused in part by differentiation of pluripotent progenitor cells [3]. Importantly, we identified distinct subtypes of NSGCT that take into account intratumoral heterogeneity. In the present study, we focused on the clinical characteristics of the three most prevalent histological phenotypes that made up 44% of the NSGCTs in our population: EYT (24%), comprised of embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, and teratoma; pure E (11%), containing only embryonal carcinoma; and EYST (9%), composed of embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, and teratoma. We determined their chemosensitivity versus chemoresistance and examined which phenotypes were at risk of developing refractory disease after chemotherapy. We investigated whether identification of distinct NSGCT phenotypes might improve selection of patients with clinical stage I disease for active surveillance, adjuvant chemotherapy, or retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND).

RESULTS

Histological phenotype and refractory disease analysis

Among the 615 patients evaluated in this study, the most common histological makeup in the primary tumor comprised embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, and teratoma (EYT) (149 patients, or 24%). The second most common histological makeup in the primary tumor was pure embryonal carcinoma (pure E) (68 patients, or 11%). The third most common histological makeup comprised embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, and teratoma (EYST) (58 patients, or 9%). The 275 patients in these three groups constituted the population of the current study. Table 1 lists the clinical characteristics of the 275 patients and the pathological properties of their 276 primary testicular tumors (1 patient had metachronous NSGCT). Notably, more patients with EYST had received salvage chemotherapy for progressive or relapsed disease (P = .0004), had had somatic transformation in their resected metastatic lesions (P = .0007), and had died from their EYST (18%) compared to patients with EYT (8%) and especially patients with pure E (0%) (P = .001) (Figure 1).
Table 1

Clinical characteristics and pathological properties for patients with nonseminomatous germ cell tumor (NSGCT) of the testis and distinct histological phenotypes

CharacteristicNSGCT Phenotype
Pure EEYTEYST
Total patients, n6814958
Age, median years (range)25 (16–57)23 (12–47)29 (19–53)
Race, n (%)
 White52 (77)101 (68)39 (67)
 Hispanic15 (22)40 (27)18 (31)
 African-American0 (0)6 (4)1 (2)
 Asian1 (1)2 (1)0 (0)
Stage*, n (%)
 IA7 (10)52 (35)19 (33)
 IB18 (26)25 (17)9 (16)
 IS2 (3)12 (8)4 (7)
 IIA15 (22)12 (8)5 (9)
 IIB5 (7)13 (9)6 (10)
 IIC2 (3)5 (3)2 (3)
 IIIA9 (13)9 (6)4 (7)
 IIIB7 (10)9 (6)4 (7)
 IIIC3 (14)12 (8)5 (9)
Size of primary tumor, median cm (range)2.8 (0.65–12.0)4.5 (0.5–17.8)4.1 (2.0–20)
Therapy^, n (%)
 Salvage chemotherapy0 (0)14 (9)12 (21)
  -Progressive disease0 (0)6 (4)8 (14)
  -Relapse0 (0)8 (5)4 (7)
 High-dose chemotherapy with transplant support0 (0)3 (2)2 (3)
 Whole-brain radiation0 (0)3 (2)0 (0)
 RPLND19 (28)51 (34)23 (40)
  -Teratoma7 (10)36 (24)9 (16)
  -Somatic transformation0 (0)2 (1)8 (14)
  -Viable germ cell tumor1 (1)8 (5)4 (7)
  -No evidence of disease11 (16)5 (3)2 (3)
Died, n (%)1 (1)15 (10)11 (19)
 Died of NSGCT0 (0)11 (7)10 (17)
 Unrelated cause1 (1)4 (3)1 (2)
  -MDS/AML1 (1)0 (0)0 (0)
-Co-morbidities0 (0)2 (1)0 (0)
  -Trauma0 (0)0 (0)1 (2)
  -Unknown0 (0)2 (1)0 (0)

E, embryonal carcinoma; EYT, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, teratoma; EYST, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, teratoma; RPLND, retroperitoneal lymph node dissection; MDS/AML, myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myelogenous leukemia

*Time of diagnosis (orchiectomy).

^After standard chemotherapy.

Figure 1

Plot of the 5-year cumulative incidence (CI) of cancer death by phenotype, according to the histological makeup of the primary tumor

The three phenotypes are pure embryonal carcinoma (pure E) (green): embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, and teratoma (EYT) (blue): and embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, and teratoma (EYST) (orange).

E, embryonal carcinoma; EYT, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, teratoma; EYST, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, teratoma; RPLND, retroperitoneal lymph node dissection; MDS/AML, myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myelogenous leukemia *Time of diagnosis (orchiectomy). ^After standard chemotherapy.

Plot of the 5-year cumulative incidence (CI) of cancer death by phenotype, according to the histological makeup of the primary tumor

The three phenotypes are pure embryonal carcinoma (pure E) (green): embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, and teratoma (EYT) (blue): and embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, and teratoma (EYST) (orange). Table 2 shows the recurrence rates of the 128 patients with clinical stage I (IA or IB) disease who chose active surveillance, received adjuvant chemotherapy, or underwent an RPLND. Overall, the recurrence rates for those patients with clinical stage I tumor who underwent surveillance or received adjuvant chemotherapy were 29% and 4%, respectively (P=.0005). Notably, among patients who developed recurrent disease on active surveillance, 2 of 5 (40%) patients with clinical stage I EYST and 4 of 20 (20%) patients with clinical stage I EYT or EYST died from their NSGCT.
Table 2

Recurrence rates of patients with clinical stage I NSGCT who chose active surveillance, received adjuvant chemotherapy, or underwent a retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND)

Outcome by stage and treatment strategyNSGCT PhenotypeTotal
Pure EEYT*EYST
Stage IA
 Surveillance4361757
 Recurrence (%)2 (50%)7 (19%)2 (12%)11 (19%)
 Adjuvant chemo214218
 Recurrence (%)01 (7%)01 (6%)
 RPLND1001
 Recurrence (%)0000
Stage IB
 Surveillance610521
 Recurrence (%)3 (50%)6 (60%)3 (60%)12 (57%)
 Adjuvant chemo1215431
 Recurrence (%)01 (7%)01 (3%)
 RPLND0000
 Recurrence (%)0000
Recurrence
 Surveillance5/10 (50%)13/46 (28%)5/22 (23%)23/78 (29%)
 Adjuvant chemo0/14 (0%)2/29 (7%)0/6 (0%)2/49 (4%)
Total257528128
 Recurrence (%)5 (20%)15 (20%)5 (18%)25 (20%)
 CSM (%)0 (0%)2 (13%)2 (40%)4 (16%)

E, embryonal carcinoma; EYT, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, teratoma; EYST, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, teratoma; RPLND, retroperitoneal lymph node dissection; CSM, cancer-specific mortality in patients with recurrence

*Two patients without follow-ups.

E, embryonal carcinoma; EYT, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, teratoma; EYST, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, teratoma; RPLND, retroperitoneal lymph node dissection; CSM, cancer-specific mortality in patients with recurrence *Two patients without follow-ups. Table 3 shows the clinical presentations and the pathological findings for those patients whose primary tumor showed pure E, EYT, EYST, and who underwent surgery to resect residual disease after chemotherapy. Chemosensitivity was identified by either a complete radiographic or pathological response. Evidence of drug resistance was demonstrated by the presence of teratoma, viable non-teratomatous germ cell element, or somatic transformation in the pathological specimens.
Table 3

Clinical and pathological findings for patients whose primary tumor showed pure embryonal carcinoma; embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, and teratoma (EYT); embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, and teratoma (EYST), and who underwent surgery to resect residual disease after chemotherapy

ChemosensitiveChemoresistant
StagenRadiographicCRNegative PathologyTeratomaViable Germ Cell TumorSomatic TransformationCancer- Specific Death
Pure E
IA2101000
IB3111000
IIA151410000
IIB5311000
IIC2010100
IIIA9621000
IIIB7232000
IIIC3021000
Total*4627117100
EYT
IA8203120
IB7203112
IS3001110
IIA^10307000
IIB13326201
IIC5003112
IIIA9333000
IIIB#7006102
IIIC+11315204
Total*73166379511
EYST
IA2001011
IB3000121
IS2002000
IIA5311000
IIB^3102001
IIC2001101
IIIA4011022
IIIB#3100111
IIIC+5001223
Total*295295810

CR, complete response.

*Thirteen patients (2 with pure E, 9 with EYT, 2 with EYST) with clinical stage IS are excluded from the table because they had no radiographic disease before or after chemotherapy and did not undergo surgery.

^Four patients (2 with EYT, 2 with EYST) had RPLND followed by adjuvant chemotherapy, one patient with EYST never had post-chemotherapy RPLND, because of progressive disease.

#Two patients (1 with EYT, 1 with EYST) without follow-up; one patient with EYT never had post-chemotherapy surgery, because of progressive disease.

+Two patients (1 with EYT, 1 with EYST) never had post-chemotherapy RPLND, because of progressive disease; one patient with EYST had both viable germ cell tumor and somatic transformation.

CR, complete response. *Thirteen patients (2 with pure E, 9 with EYT, 2 with EYST) with clinical stage IS are excluded from the table because they had no radiographic disease before or after chemotherapy and did not undergo surgery. ^Four patients (2 with EYT, 2 with EYST) had RPLND followed by adjuvant chemotherapy, one patient with EYST never had post-chemotherapy RPLND, because of progressive disease. #Two patients (1 with EYT, 1 with EYST) without follow-up; one patient with EYT never had post-chemotherapy surgery, because of progressive disease. +Two patients (1 with EYT, 1 with EYST) never had post-chemotherapy RPLND, because of progressive disease; one patient with EYST had both viable germ cell tumor and somatic transformation. Table 4 shows clinical characteristics of the 28 patients who developed progressive or relapsed NSGCT after chemotherapy. None had pure E in their primary tumor. A majority of the patients with EYT or EYST who underwent surgery to remove residual tumor after chemotherapy, had viable germ cell tumor or somatic transformation in the pathological specimens, and died of their NSGCT, including those patients who were initially diagnosed with a clinical stage I or II NSGCT.
Table 4

Clinical characteristics of patients who developed progressive or relapsed NSGCT after chemotherapy

PatientsStageRefractory diseaseCSM (mo)Pathology*
EYT
 1IIICR52
 2IIICR85Viable GCT
 3IIIBR76
 4IIBRNecrosis
 5ISRViable GCT
 6IBR74Transformation
 7IBR56Viable GCT
 8IARViable GCT
 9IIICP22
 10IIICP12Viable GCT
 11IIIBP26Transformation
 12IICP35Viable GCT
 13IICP21
 14IIBP28Viable GCT
EYST
 15IIICR107Teratoma
 16IIIBRViable GCT
 17IIARTransformation
 18IICRTeratoma
 19IAR49Transformation
 20IIICP22Viable GCT
 21IIICPNA
 22IIICPViable GCT
 23IIIBP24Transformation
 24IIIAP17Transformation
 25IIIAP34Transformation
 26IICP45Viable GCT
 27IBP55Transformation
 28IIBP13

EYT, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, teratoma; EYST, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, teratoma; P, progressive disease; R, relapsed disease; CSM, cancer-specific mortality; GCT, germ cell tumor; NA, not available.

*Pathology was not obtained for patients whose disease was fulminant and who did not undergo surgery because it was not clinically indicated.

EYT, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, teratoma; EYST, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, teratoma; P, progressive disease; R, relapsed disease; CSM, cancer-specific mortality; GCT, germ cell tumor; NA, not available. *Pathology was not obtained for patients whose disease was fulminant and who did not undergo surgery because it was not clinically indicated.

Exome sequencing

Thirty-nine patients whose primary tumors comprised pure E, EYT, or EYST were prospective enrolled in a separate laboratory study to examine whether the presence of genetic aberrations differed within the three NSGCT phenotypes. Next-generation sequencing was performed of the common coding regions (“hotspots”) of 50 genes in their primary and/or available metastatic tumors (Table 5). One patient with EYST had both his primary tumor and metastatic retroperitoneal lymph node tested. One patient with pure E had a KIT mutation involving exon 14. Another patient with EYST had a KIT mutation involving exon 17.
Table 5

Molecular profiles for 39 patients with NSGCT of the testis by histological phenotype

NSGCT Phenotype
Pure EEYTEYST
Patients, n12198
Stage,* n
 IA2 (2)42
 IB310
 IS020
 IIA320
 IIB252
 IIIA24 (3)1
 IIIB000
 IIIC013 (1)
Tumor sample, n
 Testis12 (2)154
 RPLN02 (3)2
 LN, other023 (1)
Somatic mutations, n
KIT, exon 17001 (1)
KIT, exon 141 (2)00
PIK3CA, exon 2101 (3)0

E, embryonal carcinoma; EYT, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, teratoma; EYST, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, teratoma; RPLN, retroperitoneal lymph node; LN, lymph node.

*Time of diagnosis (orchiectomy).

(n)Denotes specific patient. For example, patient 2 had stage 1A disease, and his primary (testis) tumor sample revealed a mutation in KIT exon 14.

Standardized nomenclature:

(1)NM_0002222.2(KIT):c.2447A > T p.D816V.

(2)14 NM_000222.2(KIT):c.2040T > G p.N680K.

(3)NM_006218.2(PIK3CA):c.3140A > G p.H1047R.

E, embryonal carcinoma; EYT, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, teratoma; EYST, embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor, seminoma, teratoma; RPLN, retroperitoneal lymph node; LN, lymph node. *Time of diagnosis (orchiectomy). (n)Denotes specific patient. For example, patient 2 had stage 1A disease, and his primary (testis) tumor sample revealed a mutation in KIT exon 14. Standardized nomenclature: (1)NM_0002222.2(KIT):c.2447A > T p.D816V. (2)14 NM_000222.2(KIT):c.2040T > G p.N680K. (3)NM_006218.2(PIK3CA):c.3140A > G p.H1047R.

DISCUSSION

Results of this study showed that patients whose primary tumor comprised the three most common NSGCT histological phenotypes (45% of our 11-year patient population) [3], i.e., pure E, EYT, or EYST, experienced disparate cancer-specific mortality rates at 5 years (Figure 1, P =.001). Although it is commonly assumed that recurrent clinical stage I NSGCT is very curable with standard chemotherapy and surgery (hence our rationale for active surveillance in all patients), certain patients with a particular tumor phenotype (i.e., EYST) and recurrent disease (i.e., clinical stage IB) may harbor potentially chemoresistant or refractory disease that becomes deadly when it is neglected or delayed and warrants an intensive surveillance or proactive treatment strategy (e.g., adjuvant chemotherapy). Currently, active surveillance is advocated for patients with clinical stage I NSGCT on the basis of its safe approach, excellent cure rate, and overall low treatment burden [13]. However, a recurrence rate of about 30% was observed at 5 years after orchiectomy [13]. For patients whose primary tumor had showed lymphovascular invasion, presence of embryonal carcinoma, or rete testes invasion, the recurrence rate was 50%, and without any of these features, the recurrence rate was 12% [13]. Importantly, the 29% of patients who had developed recurrent disease received at least 3 courses of chemotherapy (e.g., BEP), and 8% underwent additional surgery apart from orchiectomy [13]. Identification of patients at increased risk of developing recurrent disease and especially of dying from it may enable prudent use of appropriate treatments. We sought to determine whether intratumoral heterogeneity contributed to chemoresistance and whether a particular subtype of NSGCT benefited from a specific therapeutic strategy to maximize clinical outcome. Our results suggest that patients with clinical stage IA EYT or EYST might not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy, because the recurrence rate of 6% on adjuvant chemotherapy was only slightly better than that of 17% for patients on active surveillance. In contrast, patients with clinical stage IB disease might benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy, because the recurrence rate of 5% for patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly better than that of 60% for patients on active surveillance (Table 2), P =.006. Importantly, our data suggest that the risk of cancer-specific death from recurrent clinical stage I NSGCT might not be equal among the different phenotypes. Although the recurrence rate of patients with clinical stage I pure E was high (i.e., 50%), all of these patients were cured. However, 40% of patients with clinical stage I EYST and 20% of patients with clinical stage I EYT or EYST who developed recurrent disease on active surveillance died from their NSGCT. This observation has never been addressed in previous studies [13-15]. Paradoxically, increased recurrence rate did not translate to increased mortality rate in the pure E tumor phenotype. Therefore, we should be cognizant of a potential discordance between recurrence and mortality depending on the tumor subtype. The results indicate that there may be ways to improve the selection of patients with clinical stage I NSGCT for active surveillance or adjuvant chemotherapy [16]. It is plausible that the different clinical outcomes are related to differential chemoresistance and to a greater propensity for certain distinct NSGCT subtypes to contain refractory phenotypes, such as presence of teratoma with viable non-teratomatous germ cell tumor or somatic transformation after chemotherapy. Our data suggest that certain patients with clinical stage I NSGCT on active surveillance who develop recurrence may have a propensity to harbor such chemoresistant tumors and are at increased risk of dying from disease. Additional studies are needed to validate this finding in a separate data base. We found a preponderance of refractory disease in certain NSGCT phenotypes, i.e., EYT and EYST compared with pure E. Hence, 22 of 29 (76%) patients with EYST had evidence of drug resistance as demonstrated by the presence of teratoma with or without viable non-teratomatous germ cell element or somatic transformation in the residual pathological specimens after chemotherapy, whereas 7 of 29 (24%) patients had either a complete radiographic or pathological response (Table 3). In contrast, 8 of 46 (17%) patients with pure E had evidence of drug resistance, whereas 38 of 46 (83%) patients had either a complete radiographic or pathological response (Table 3), P < .0001. This observation is evident across all clinical stages, even though statistical significance could not be demonstrated for patients with clinical stage I disease due to the limited sample size and number of events. Another way to assess chemoresistance in an otherwise extraordinarily chemosensitive and curable cancer such as NSGCT is to evaluate the nature of chemoresistance in the rare patients who developed refractory (i.e., progressive or relapsed) disease after chemotherapy (Table 4). This task was made possible and might be enhanced by focusing on a potentially lethal phenotype of NSGCT that contained yolk sac tumor in the primary tumor [3]. Importantly, refractory tumor and lethal NSGCT were not observed in any of our patients with pure E. However, viable germ cell tumor or somatic transformation was frequently detected in the residual tumor after chemotherapy in patients with refractory EYT (70% and 20%, respectively) or EYST (33% and 50%, respectively). Remarkably, 5 of 8 (63%) patients with refractory EYT and 4 of 6 (66%) patients with refractory EYST, who were initially diagnosed with a clinical stage I or II disease died of their NSGCT. Previously, we did not detect any consistent gene mutation among potentially lethal NSGCT tumors in the entire coding region of 409 genes [3]. In the current prospective study, using next-generation exome sequencing of common coding regions (“hotspots”) of 50 genes, we found a somatic mutation in the same KIT gene but different exons of a patient who was cured with pure E and of another patient who died with advanced EYST (Table 5). It is plausible that unknown “driver” genetic defects could still be involved in the pathogenesis and potential lethality of a particular subtype of NSGCT [17, 18]. However, NSGCT is known to be relatively simple tumor with a markedly low rate of somatic mutations (21). In addition, certain malignant tumors do not have any putative driver mutations [19], while benign tumors and normal tissues do [20, 21]. Importantly, available data have demonstrated that such genetic aberrations are likely to be similarly distributed among the different components of a mixed NSGCT [9–12, 22, 23]. Further research is needed to elucidate the basic mechanism of chemoresistance in refractory NSGCT. In summary, we demonstrated that distinct NSGCT phenotypes displayed different patterns of chemoresistance and disparate rates of cancer-specific mortality after chemotherapy. Certain patients with clinical stage I NSGCT who develop recurrence on active surveillance might be at increased risk of dying from disease. Despite intratumoral heterogeneity, improved patient selection and personalized care may maximize therapeutic efficacy in the management of different NSGCT phenotypes with curative intent.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The current analysis involves a subset of a previously published population of patients with NSGCT [3]. As described previously, using the Tumor Registry database at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, Texas), we identified all consecutive cases of testicular cancer diagnosed from January 2000 to December 2010. Only patients with NSGCTs (i.e., mixed germ cell tumor, embryonal carcinoma, choriocarcinoma, teratoma, or yolk sac tumor) were included (patients with pure seminoma were excluded). Exclusion criteria were orchiectomy after chemotherapy, pathological sample not available for review, non-germ cell tumor (i.e., paratesticular tumor), age < 3 years with a pure yolk sac tumor or teratoma, and extragonadal germ cell tumor. For the 615 patients who met these criteria, we evaluated the specimens for histological makeup as described previously [3]. The present analysis, which has overlapping methods, evaluated the 275 patients found to have primary tumor phenotypes of EYT, pure E, or EYST. After orchiectomy and staging, patients with clinical stage I disease either underwent RPLND, received adjuvant chemotherapy, or pursued active surveillance. Patients with stage II underwent RPLND or received adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with stage III disease received adjuvant chemotherapy. We evaluated the pathological features of all specimens from postchemotherapy RPLND and metastasectomies. Specifically, we determined whether patients with certain histological makeups were found to have teratomas, contain viable germ cell tumors other than teratomas, or develop somatic transformation. Chemoresistance was defined as the presence of any of these elements in residual metastatic lesions after chemotherapy. Chemosensitivity was defined as the occurrence of no viable tumor or complete radiographic remission. The data from RPLND performed prior to chemotherapy for the purposes of diagnosis, staging, or therapy were analyzed separately. Clinical stage I tumors for which progression was identified more than 3 months after orchiectomy were defined as stage I disease with recurrence. Those that progressed within 3 months of orchiectomy were staged according to the highest stage of disease presentation before treatment. Salvage chemotherapy was defined as the use of any second-line chemotherapy, usually after first-line treatment regimens (i.e., BEP [bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin] or EP [etoposide and cisplatin]), for progressive or relapsed disease. Patients with progressive or relapsed disease were those whose disease required chemotherapy, not RPLND or metastasectomy, within or after 6 months of their last chemotherapy treatment, respectively. A change in chemotherapy regimen to consolidate a complete response was not considered salvage therapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy was also not counted as salvage therapy in the analysis. Patients’ pathological reports, laboratory test results, and clinical histories were collected from MD Anderson's clinical data-management computer system. The dates of patients’ deaths were obtained from their medical records or the Social Security Death Index (http://ssdi.genealogy.rootsweb.com/). More than 99% of the pathological diagnoses were reviewed and confirmed by at least one pathologist who specialized in genitourinary malignancies at MD Anderson. If the pathological reports from both MD Anderson and an outside institution were available, the report from MD Anderson was used to maximize consistency. Both cancer-specific and overall mortality were assessed for this study. Patients with no evidence of active NSGCT who died as a result of other causes, such as treatment-related complications, accidents, or comorbidities, were included in the analysis. The survival duration was measured from the date of diagnosis to the date of death, or the most recent date of record if the patient was still alive. For the one patient with metachronous tumors, the survival duration was measured from the date of his first diagnosis of NSGCT. Between June 2014 and January 2016, 39 patients with a diagnosis of NSGCT were prospectively enrolled in a laboratory protocol (PA11–0852) for sequencing of the common coding regions (“hotspots”) of 50 genes in the tumor and available paired germline tissue (CMS-50 panel). Pathologists in MD Anderson's Tissue Qualification Laboratory identified the optimal formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue blocks for the study. For each paraffin block, a hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained slide and unstained sections were prepared. The tumor tissue was dissected from an unstained sequential section using the H&E slide as a template. DNA was then extracted from the dissected tumor using a QIAamp DNA FFPE Tissue Kit (Qiagen Inc) and used for sequencing of genes in a CMS-50 panel (Ion Proton System, Life Technologies). All procedures were well established for the testing of solid tumors [24].

Statistical considerations

For the histological phenotype and refractory disease analysis, we estimated the cumulative incidence functions for NSGCT-related death, treating non-NSGCT-related death as a competing risk [25]. The differences between these functions were assessed using Gray's test for cause-specific death. Because of its bias for cancer-specific death due to competing risks from death without cancer, we did not use the Kaplan-Meier method in our calculations. The Fine-Gray proportional hazards regression analysis was used to assess the relationships between study factors and NSGCT-related death while treating non-NSGCT-related death as a competing risk [26]. Pearson's chi-square test and Fisher's exact test were used to compare proportions between independent samples. All statistical analyses were performed using TIBCO Spotfire S+ 8.0 software for Windows and StatXact-9 (Cytel Software Corporation).

Regulatory issues

This study (PA14–0099 and PA14–0894) was approved by the institutional review board of MD Anderson.
  23 in total

1.  Lack of correlation between cisplatin-induced apoptosis, p53 status and expression of Bcl-2 family proteins in testicular germ cell tumour cell lines.

Authors:  H Burger; K Nooter; A W Boersma; C J Kortland; G Stoter
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1997-11-14       Impact factor: 7.396

2.  Management of Clinical Stage I Testicular Cancer: How Should We Define Success?

Authors:  Lance C Pagliaro; Nizar M Tannir; Shi-Ming Tu; Christopher J Logothetis
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Specific chromosome change, i(12p), in testicular tumours?

Authors:  N B Atkin; M C Baker
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1982-12-11       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  International Germ Cell Consensus Classification: a prognostic factor-based staging system for metastatic germ cell cancers. International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Patterns of relapse in patients with clinical stage I testicular cancer managed with active surveillance.

Authors:  Christian Kollmannsberger; Torgrim Tandstad; Philippe L Bedard; Gabriella Cohn-Cedermark; Peter W Chung; Michael A Jewett; Tom Powles; Padraig R Warde; Siamak Daneshmand; Andrew Protheroe; Scott Tyldesley; Peter C Black; Kim Chi; Alan I So; Malcom J Moore; Craig R Nichols
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-08-18       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Molecular genetic evidence supporting the origin of somatic-type malignancy and teratoma from the same progenitor cell.

Authors:  Jennifer B Kum; Thomas M Ulbright; Sean R Williamson; Mingsheng Wang; Shaobo Zhang; Richard S Foster; David J Grignon; John N Eble; Stephen D W Beck; Liang Cheng
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 6.394

Review 7.  What are we learning from the cancer genome?

Authors:  Eric A Collisson; Raymond J Cho; Joe W Gray
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-09-11       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 8.  Revisiting DNA damage repair, p53-mediated apoptosis and cisplatin sensitivity in germ cell tumors.

Authors:  Francesca Cavallo; Darren R Feldman; Marco Barchi
Journal:  Int J Dev Biol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 2.203

9.  Tumor evolution. High burden and pervasive positive selection of somatic mutations in normal human skin.

Authors:  Iñigo Martincorena; Amit Roshan; Moritz Gerstung; Peter Ellis; Peter Van Loo; Stuart McLaren; David C Wedge; Anthony Fullam; Ludmil B Alexandrov; Jose M Tubio; Lucy Stebbings; Andrew Menzies; Sara Widaa; Michael R Stratton; Philip H Jones; Peter J Campbell
Journal:  Science       Date:  2015-05-22       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Defining a New Prognostic Index for Stage I Nonseminomatous Germ Cell Tumors Using CXCL12 Expression and Proportion of Embryonal Carcinoma.

Authors:  Duncan C Gilbert; Reem Al-Saadi; Khin Thway; Ian Chandler; Daniel Berney; Rhian Gabe; Sally P Stenning; Joan Sweet; Robert Huddart; Janet M Shipley
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 12.531

View more
  13 in total

1.  Recent developments in the management of germ cell tumors.

Authors:  Pavlos Msaouel; Mehmet A Bilen; Miao Zhang; Matthew Campbell; Jennifer Wang; Shi-Ming Tu
Journal:  Curr Opin Oncol       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 3.645

Review 2.  Systemic therapy for primary and extragonadal germ cell tumors: prognosis and nuances of treatment.

Authors:  Bilal A Siddiqui; Miao Zhang; Louis L Pisters; Shi-Ming Tu
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-01

Review 3.  Human germ cell tumours from a developmental perspective.

Authors:  J Wolter Oosterhuis; Leendert H J Looijenga
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 60.716

Review 4.  The Role of Tumor Microenvironment in Chemoresistance: To Survive, Keep Your Enemies Closer.

Authors:  Dimakatso Alice Senthebane; Arielle Rowe; Nicholas Ekow Thomford; Hendrina Shipanga; Daniella Munro; Mohammad A M Al Mazeedi; Hashim A M Almazyadi; Karlien Kallmeyer; Collet Dandara; Michael S Pepper; M Iqbal Parker; Kevin Dzobo
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 5.923

5.  Molecular heterogeneity and early metastatic clone selection in testicular germ cell cancer development.

Authors:  Lambert C J Dorssers; Ad J M Gillis; Hans Stoop; Ronald van Marion; Marleen M Nieboer; Job van Riet; Harmen J G van de Werken; J Wolter Oosterhuis; Jeroen de Ridder; Leendert H J Looijenga
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Curing Cancer: Lessons from a Prototype.

Authors:  Shi-Ming Tu; Louis L Pisters
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-07       Impact factor: 6.639

7.  Origin of Subsequent Malignant Neoplasms in Patients with History of Testicular Germ Cell Tumor.

Authors:  Eric C Umbreit; Bilal A Siddiqui; Michael J Hwang; Aron Y Joon; Tapati Maity; Mary E Westerman; Kelly W Merriman; Hussam Alhasson; Joma Uthup; Tao Guo; Joseph A Moore; John F Ward; Jose A Karam; Christopher G Wood; Louis L Pisters; Miao Zhang; Shi-Ming Tu
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-12-14       Impact factor: 6.639

8.  Evaluating Tumor Evolution via Genomic Profiling of Individual Tumor Spheroids in a Malignant Ascites.

Authors:  Sungsik Kim; Soochi Kim; Jinhyun Kim; Boyun Kim; Se Ik Kim; Min A Kim; Sunghoon Kwon; Yong Sang Song
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-08-24       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Paraneoplastic Limbic Encephalitis in a Patient with Primary Well-differentiated Teratoma and Metastatic Poorly Differentiated Embryonal Carcinoma.

Authors:  Chase J Wehrle; Asad Ullah; Margaret A Sinkler; Saleh G Heneidi; Zachary Klaassen; Paul Biddinger; Edward J Kruse; Gerald Wallace; Fenwick Nichols; Nikhil Patel
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  2020-09-30

Review 10.  Between a Rock and a Hard Place: An Epigenetic-Centric View of Testicular Germ Cell Tumors.

Authors:  Ratnakar Singh; Zeeshan Fazal; Sarah J Freemantle; Michael J Spinella
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 6.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.