| Literature DB >> 29113157 |
Nathália C Campanella1, Cristovam Scapulatempo-Neto1,2, Lucas Faria Abrahão-Machado2, Antônio Talvane Torres De Oliveira3, Gustavo N Berardinelli1, Denise Peixoto Guimarães1,4, Rui M Reis1,5,6.
Abstract
The microsatellite instability (MSI) phenotype may constitute an important biomarker for patient response to immunotherapy, particularly to anti-programmed death-1 inhibitors. MSI is a type of genomic instability caused by a defect in DNA mismatch repair (MMR) proteins, which is present mainly in colorectal cancer and its hereditary form, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) development is associated with activating mutations of KIT proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase (KIT) or platelet-derived growth factor receptor α (PDGFRA), which are oncogenes that predict the response to imatinib mesylate. In addition to KIT/PDGFRA mutations, other molecular alterations are important in GIST development. In GISTs, the characterization of the MSI phenotype is scarce and the results are not consensual. The present study aimed to assess MSI in a series of 79 GISTs. The evaluation of MSI was performed by pentaplex polymerase chain reaction comprising five markers, followed by capillary electrophoresis. The expression of MMR proteins was evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Regarding the KIT/PDGFRA/B-Raf proto-oncogene, serine/threonine kinase molecular profile of the 79 GISTs, 83.6% of the tumors possessed KIT mutations, 10.1% had PDGFRA mutations and 6.3% were triple wild-type. The mutated-PDGFRA cases were associated with gastric location and a lower mitotic index compared with KIT-mutated and wild-types, and these patients were more likely to be alive and without cancer. MSI analysis identified 4 cases with instability in one marker, however, additional evaluation of normal tissue and immunohistochemical staining of MMR proteins confirmed their microsatellite-stable nature. The results of the present study indicated that MSI is not involved in GIST tumorigenesis and, therefore, cannot serve as a biomarker to immunotherapy response in GIST.Entities:
Keywords: KIT; gastrointestinal stromal tumor; immunotherapy; microsatellite instability; platelet-derived growth factor receptor α
Year: 2017 PMID: 29113157 PMCID: PMC5662911 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2017.6884
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Clinicopathological features of gastrointestinal stromal tumors.
| Variable | Patients, n (%) |
|---|---|
| Sex | |
| Female | 41 (46.6) |
| Male | 47 (53.4) |
| Histological subtype | |
| Spindle | 67 (81.7) |
| Epithelioid | 12 (14.6) |
| Mixed | 3 (3.7) |
| Primary localization | |
| Esophagus | 1 (1.1) |
| Stomach | 44 (50.0) |
| Small intestine | 25 (28.4) |
| Rectum | 6 (6.9) |
| Mesentery | 1 (1.1) |
| Retroperitoneum | 6 (6.9) |
| Colon | 1 (1.1) |
| Others[ | 4 (4.5) |
| Tumor size | |
| ≤5 cm | 28 (37.3) |
| 5.1–10 cm | 22 (33.3) |
| >10 cm | 25 (29.3) |
| Mitotic index | |
| ≤5 | 39 (58.2) |
| >5 | 25 (37.3) |
| 6–10 | 3 (4.5) |
| AFIP risk classification | |
| Benign | 7 (11.3) |
| Very low | 7 (11.3) |
| Low | 7 (11.3) |
| Intermediate | 9 (14.5) |
| High | 32 (51.6) |
| Imatinib | |
| Yes | 44 (95.7) |
| No | 2 (4.3) |
| Local disease recurrence | |
| Absent | 66 (77.6) |
| Present | 19 (22.4) |
| Metastasis | |
| Absent | 47 (54.7) |
| Present | 39 (45.5) |
| | 66 (83.6) |
| | 8 (10.1) |
| | 0 (0.0) |
| Wild-type | 5 (6.3) |
| Current status | |
| Mortality due to cancer | 28 (31.8) |
| Current status | |
| Mortality due to other causes | 2 (2.3) |
| Alive with cancer | 27 (30.7) |
| Alive without cancer | 28 (31.8) |
AFIP, Armed Forces Institutes of Pathology; KIT, KIT proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase; PDGFRA, platelet-derived growth factor receptor α.
Other localizations included rectovagina (2/4), vagina (1/4), and unknown (1/4).
Figure 1.Electropherogram of KIT-mutated gastrointestinal stromal tumor (exon 11, p.Glu554_Val559del).
Association between KIT/PDGFRA mutation status and clinicopathological features of gastrointestinal stromal tumors.
| Variable | Wild-type, n (%) | P-value[ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | 1.000 | |||
| Female | 32 (48.5) | 4 (50.0) | 2 (40.0) | |
| Male | 34 (51.5) | 4 (50.0) | 3 (60.0) | |
| Primary localization | 0.398 | |||
| Esophagus | 1 (1.5) | 0 | 0 | |
| Stomach | 29 (43.9) | 8 (100) | 4 (80) | |
| Small intestine | 20 (30.3) | 0 | 0 | |
| Rectum | 5 (7.6) | 0 | 1 (20) | |
| Mesentery | 1 (1.5) | 0 | 0 | |
| Retroperitoneum | 6 (9.1) | 0 | 0 | |
| Other | 4 (6.1) | 0 | 0 | |
| Tumor size | 0.963 | |||
| ≤5 cm | 19 (37.3) | 4 (50.0) | 2 (50.0) | |
| 5.1–10 cm | 13 (25.5) | 2 (25.0) | 1 (25.0) | |
| >10 cm | 19 (37.3) | 2 (25.0) | 1 (25.0) | |
| Mitotic index | 0.018 | |||
| ≤5 | 24 (51.1) | 6 (75.0) | 3 (60.0) | |
| 5.1–10 cm | 1 (2.1) | 2 (25.0) | 0 (0.0) | |
| >10 | 22 (46.8) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (40.0) | |
| AFIP risk classification | 0.198 | |||
| Benign | 3 (7.1) | 1 (12.5) | 1 (20.0) | |
| Very low | 5 (11.9) | 2 (25.0) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Low | 5 (11.9) | 1 (12.5) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Intermediate | 4 (9.5) | 2 (25.0) | 2 (40.0) | |
| High | 25 (59.5) | 2 (25.0) | 2 (40.0) | |
| Metastasis | 0.097 | |||
| Absent | 34 (52.3) | 7 (87.5) | 4 (80.0) | |
| Present | 31 (47.7) | 1 (12.5) | 1 (20.0) | |
| Status at last follow-up | 0.010 | |||
| Alive without cancer | 16 (25.4) | 7 (87.5) | 3 (60.0) | |
| Alive with cancer | 24 (38.1) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Mortality due to cancer | 21 (33.3) | 1 (12.5) | 2 (40.0) | |
| Mortality due to other causes | 2 (3.2) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
AFIP, Armed Forces Institutes of Pathology; KIT, KIT proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase; PDGFRA, platelet-derived growth factor receptor α.
Fisher's exact test.
Figure 2.Overall survival for KIT and PDGFRA-mutated and wild-type GISTs.
Figure 3.Electropherogram of fragment analysis in a representative gastrointestinal stromal tumor case, with the marker BAT-26 altered (9 nucleotides deletion, arrow).
Figure 4.Immunohistochemistry of mismatch repair proteins for 1 case with instability in one marker. Slides were visualized using DAB and counterstained using hematoxylin. (A) mutL homolog 1, (B) PMS1 homolog 2, (C) MSH6 and (D) MSH2. Magnification, ×200. MSH, mutS homolog.