Daniel H Hovelson1, Aaron M Udager2, Andrew S McDaniel2, Petros Grivas3, Phillip Palmbos3, Shuzo Tamura4, Lorena Lazo de la Vega5, Ganesh Palapattu6, Brendan Veeneman7, Layla El-Sawy8, Seth E Sadis9, Todd M Morgan10, Jeffrey S Montgomery8, Alon Z Weizer8, Kathleen C Day11, Nouri Neamati4, Monica Liebert11, Evan T Keller12, Mark L Day11, Rohit Mehra13, Scott A Tomlins14. 1. Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Computational Medicine and Bioinformatics, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 2. Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 3. Rogel Cancer Center, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Internal Medicine (Hematology/Oncology), Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 4. Rogel Cancer Center, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Medicinal Chemistry, College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 5. Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 6. Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 7. Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 8. Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 9. ThermoFisher Scientific, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 10. Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 11. Rogel Cancer Center, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 12. Rogel Cancer Center, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 13. Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Rogel Cancer Center, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 14. Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Rogel Cancer Center, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Urology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. Electronic address: tomlinss@umich.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Integrated molecular profiling has identified intrinsic expression-based bladder cancer molecular subtypes. Despite frequent histological diversity, robustness of subtypes in paired conventional (urothelial) and squamous components of the same bladder tumor has not been reported. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of histological heterogeneity on expression-based bladder cancer subtypes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed clinically applicable, targeted DNA and/or RNA sequencing (multiplexed DNA and RNA sequencing [mxDNAseq and mxRNAseq, respectively]) on 112 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) bladder cancer samples, including 12 cases with paired urothelial/squamous components and 21 bladder cancer cell lines. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Unsupervised hierarchical and consensus clustering of target gene expression enabled derivation of basal/luminal molecular subtyping. RESULTS AND LIMITATION: Across 21 bladder cancer cell lines, our custom mxRNAseq panel was highly concordant with whole transcriptome sequencing, and assessed targets robustly determined expression-based basal/luminal subtypes from The Cancer Genome Atlas data (in silico) and internally sequenced FFPE tissues. Frequent deleterious TP53 (56%) and activating hotspot PIK3CA (30%) somatic mutations were seen across 69 high-quality tissue samples. Potentially targetable focal ERBB2 (6%) or EGFR (6%) amplifications were also identified, and a novel subgene copy-number detection approach is described. Combined DNA/RNA analysis showed that focally amplified samples exhibit outlier EGFR and ERBB2 expression distinct from subtype-intrinsic profiles. Critically, paired urothelial and squamous components showed divergent basal/luminal status in three of 12 cases (25%), despite identical putatively clonal prioritized somatic genomic alterations. Limitations include lack of profiled paired normal tissues for formal somatic alteration determination, and the need for formal analytical and clinical validation. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the feasibility of clinically relevant integrative bladder cancer profiling and challenge the intrinsic nature of expression subtypes in histologically diverse bladder cancers. PATIENT SUMMARY: A targeted RNA sequencing assay is capable of assessing gene expression-based subtypes in individual components of clinical bladder cancer tissue specimens. Different histological components of the same tumor may yield divergent expression profiles, suggesting that expression-based subtypes should be interpreted with caution in heterogeneous cancers.
BACKGROUND: Integrated molecular profiling has identified intrinsic expression-based bladder cancer molecular subtypes. Despite frequent histological diversity, robustness of subtypes in paired conventional (urothelial) and squamous components of the same bladder tumor has not been reported. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of histological heterogeneity on expression-based bladder cancer subtypes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed clinically applicable, targeted DNA and/or RNA sequencing (multiplexed DNA and RNA sequencing [mxDNAseq and mxRNAseq, respectively]) on 112 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) bladder cancer samples, including 12 cases with paired urothelial/squamous components and 21 bladder cancer cell lines. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Unsupervised hierarchical and consensus clustering of target gene expression enabled derivation of basal/luminal molecular subtyping. RESULTS AND LIMITATION: Across 21 bladder cancer cell lines, our custom mxRNAseq panel was highly concordant with whole transcriptome sequencing, and assessed targets robustly determined expression-based basal/luminal subtypes from The Cancer Genome Atlas data (in silico) and internally sequenced FFPE tissues. Frequent deleterious TP53 (56%) and activating hotspot PIK3CA (30%) somatic mutations were seen across 69 high-quality tissue samples. Potentially targetable focal ERBB2 (6%) or EGFR (6%) amplifications were also identified, and a novel subgene copy-number detection approach is described. Combined DNA/RNA analysis showed that focally amplified samples exhibit outlier EGFR and ERBB2 expression distinct from subtype-intrinsic profiles. Critically, paired urothelial and squamous components showed divergent basal/luminal status in three of 12 cases (25%), despite identical putatively clonal prioritized somatic genomic alterations. Limitations include lack of profiled paired normal tissues for formal somatic alteration determination, and the need for formal analytical and clinical validation. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the feasibility of clinically relevant integrative bladder cancer profiling and challenge the intrinsic nature of expression subtypes in histologically diverse bladder cancers. PATIENT SUMMARY: A targeted RNA sequencing assay is capable of assessing gene expression-based subtypes in individual components of clinical bladder cancer tissue specimens. Different histological components of the same tumor may yield divergent expression profiles, suggesting that expression-based subtypes should be interpreted with caution in heterogeneous cancers.
Authors: Vasty Osei-Amponsa; Jenna M Buckwalter; Lauren Shuman; Zongyu Zheng; Hironobu Yamashita; Vonn Walter; Thomas Wildermuth; Justine Ellis-Mohl; Chang Liu; Joshua I Warrick; Lisa M Shantz; Robert P Feehan; Hikmat Al-Ahmadie; Cathy Mendelsohn; Jay D Raman; Klaus H Kaestner; Xue-Ru Wu; David J DeGraff Journal: Oncogene Date: 2019-10-21 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Natalie J Miller; Ali Raza Khaki; Leonidas N Diamantopoulos; Mehmet A Bilen; Victor Santos; Neeraj Agarwal; Rafael Morales-Barrera; Michael Devitt; Ariel Nelson; Christopher J Hoimes; Evan Shreck; Hussein Assi; Benjamin A Gartrell; Alex Sankin; Alejo Rodriguez-Vida; Mark Lythgoe; David J Pinato; Alexandra Drakaki; Monika Joshi; Pedro Isaacsson Velho; Noah Hahn; Sandy Liu; Lucia Alonso Buznego; Ignacio Duran; Marcus Moses; Jayanshu Jain; Jure Murgic; Pedro Barata; Abhishek Tripathi; Yousef Zakharia; Matthew D Galsky; Guru Sonpavde; Evan Y Yu; Gary H Lyman; Petros Grivas Journal: J Urol Date: 2020-01-23 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Joshua J Meeks; Hikmat Al-Ahmadie; Bishoy M Faltas; John A Taylor; Thomas W Flaig; David J DeGraff; Emil Christensen; Benjamin L Woolbright; David J McConkey; Lars Dyrskjøt Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2020-03-31 Impact factor: 14.432
Authors: Phillip L Palmbos; Stephanie Daignault-Newton; Scott A Tomlins; Neeraj Agarwal; Przemyslaw Twardowski; Alicia K Morgans; Wm Kevin Kelly; Vivek K Arora; Emmanuel S Antonarakis; Javed Siddiqui; Jon A Jacobson; Matthew S Davenport; Dan R Robinson; Arul M Chinnaiyan; Karen E Knudsen; Maha Hussain Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Samuel W Plaska; Chia-Jen Liu; Jung Soo Lim; Juilee Rege; Nolan R Bick; Antonio M Lerario; Gary D Hammer; Thomas J Giordano; Tobias Else; Scott A Tomlins; William E Rainey; Aaron M Udager Journal: Horm Metab Res Date: 2020-08-13 Impact factor: 2.936