Seth C Lummus1,2, Andrew M Donson2,3, Katherine Gowan3, Kenneth L Jones3, Rajeev Vibhakar2,3, Nicholas K Foreman2,3,4, B K Kleinschmidt-DeMasters1,4,5. 1. Department of Pathology, The University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. 2. Children's Hospital Colorado, Aurora, Colorado. 3. Department of Pediatrics, The University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, The University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. 5. Department of Neurology, The University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Posterior fossa (PF) ependymomas (EPNs) in infants less than 1 year of age (iEPN-PF) have a poorer clinical outcome than EPNs in older children. While radiation therapy is the standard of care for the latter, it is withheld in infants to avoid neurotoxicity to immature brain. It is unknown whether the adverse outcome in iEPN-PFs is due to treatment differences or aggressive biology. We examined this question using molecular profiling. METHODS: Six anaplastic iEPN-PFs were subjected to transcriptomic analysis and FISH for p16 loss and gains of 1q, and compared with anaplastic PF EPNs from older children. Results were validated by immunohistochemistry (IHC). RESULTS: All six iEPN-PFs were grouped within EPN PF subgroup A (PFA). E2F targets and G2M checkpoint were identified as the most enriched gene sets in iEPN-PF, which was validated in a larger independent cohort. Accordingly, MIB-1 IHC demonstrated a higher mitotic rate in iEPN-PFs than noninfant anaplastic EPN PFA. Genetic and protein analyses demonstrated that p16 loss and low p16 protein expression is a hallmark of iEPN-PF, and that none harbored 1q gains. Kaplan-Meier analysis confirmed the poorer clinical outcome of the iEPN-PF cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Biological differences, characterized by loss of p16 expression without gains of 1q in iEPN-PFs, as well as deregulated E2F target gene transcription, are indicative of deregulated p16-CDK4/6-pRB-E2F pathway activity. This may underlie the poor clinical outcome seen in this group of iEPN-PFs, rather than the withholding of radiation therapy. Results suggest a potential actionable therapy for iEPN-PF, namely cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors.
BACKGROUND: Posterior fossa (PF) ependymomas (EPNs) in infants less than 1 year of age (iEPN-PF) have a poorer clinical outcome than EPNs in older children. While radiation therapy is the standard of care for the latter, it is withheld in infants to avoid neurotoxicity to immature brain. It is unknown whether the adverse outcome in iEPN-PFs is due to treatment differences or aggressive biology. We examined this question using molecular profiling. METHODS: Six anaplastic iEPN-PFs were subjected to transcriptomic analysis and FISH for p16 loss and gains of 1q, and compared with anaplastic PF EPNs from older children. Results were validated by immunohistochemistry (IHC). RESULTS: All six iEPN-PFs were grouped within EPN PF subgroup A (PFA). E2F targets and G2M checkpoint were identified as the most enriched gene sets in iEPN-PF, which was validated in a larger independent cohort. Accordingly, MIB-1 IHC demonstrated a higher mitotic rate in iEPN-PFs than noninfant anaplastic EPN PFA. Genetic and protein analyses demonstrated that p16 loss and low p16 protein expression is a hallmark of iEPN-PF, and that none harbored 1q gains. Kaplan-Meier analysis confirmed the poorer clinical outcome of the iEPN-PF cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Biological differences, characterized by loss of p16 expression without gains of 1q in iEPN-PFs, as well as deregulated E2F target gene transcription, are indicative of deregulated p16-CDK4/6-pRB-E2F pathway activity. This may underlie the poor clinical outcome seen in this group of iEPN-PFs, rather than the withholding of radiation therapy. Results suggest a potential actionable therapy for iEPN-PF, namely cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors.
Authors: Andrea M Griesinger; Rebecca J Josephson; Andrew M Donson; Jean M Mulcahy Levy; Vladimir Amani; Diane K Birks; Lindsey M Hoffman; Steffanie L Furtek; Phillip Reigan; Michael H Handler; Rajeev Vibhakar; Nicholas K Foreman Journal: Cancer Immunol Res Date: 2015-05-12 Impact factor: 11.151
Authors: John-Paul Kilday; Biswaroop Mitra; Caroline Domerg; Jennifer Ward; Felipe Andreiuolo; Teresa Osteso-Ibanez; Audrey Mauguen; Pascale Varlet; Marie-Cecile Le Deley; James Lowe; David W Ellison; Richard J Gilbertson; Beth Coyle; Jacques Grill; Richard G Grundy Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-02-14 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Hendrik Witt; Stephen C Mack; Marina Ryzhova; Sebastian Bender; Martin Sill; Ruth Isserlin; Axel Benner; Thomas Hielscher; Till Milde; Marc Remke; David T W Jones; Paul A Northcott; Livia Garzia; Kelsey C Bertrand; Andrea Wittmann; Yuan Yao; Stephen S Roberts; Luca Massimi; Tim Van Meter; William A Weiss; Nalin Gupta; Wiesia Grajkowska; Boleslaw Lach; Yoon-Jae Cho; Andreas von Deimling; Andreas E Kulozik; Olaf Witt; Gary D Bader; Cynthia E Hawkins; Uri Tabori; Abhijit Guha; James T Rutka; Peter Lichter; Andrey Korshunov; Michael D Taylor; Stefan M Pfister Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2011-08-16 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Arnold C Paulino; B-Chen Wen; John M Buatti; David H Hussey; Weining K Zhen; Nina A Mayr; Arnold H Menezes Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Khalida Wani; Terri S Armstrong; Elizabeth Vera-Bolanos; Aditya Raghunathan; David Ellison; Richard Gilbertson; Brian Vaillant; Stewart Goldman; Roger J Packer; Maryam Fouladi; Ian Pollack; Tom Mikkelsen; Michael Prados; Antonio Omuro; Riccardo Soffietti; Alicia Ledoux; Charmaine Wilson; Lihong Long; Mark R Gilbert; Ken Aldape Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2012-02-10 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Mariko D DeWire; Christine Fuller; Olivia Campagne; Tong Lin; Haitao Pan; Tina Young Poussaint; Patricia A Baxter; Eugene I Hwang; Andrew Bukowinski; Kathleen Dorris; Lindsey Hoffman; Angela J Waanders; Matthias A Karajannis; Clinton F Stewart; Arzu Onar-Thomas; Maryam Fouladi; Ira J Dunkel Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 12.531