Matthew L Hemming1,2, Kelly S Klega3, Justin Rhoades4, Gavin Ha5, Kate E Acker2, Jessica L Andersen2, Edwin Thai6, Anwesha Nag6, Aaron R Thorner6, Chandrajit P Raut7, Suzanne George2, Brian D Crompton3,4. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 2. Center for Sarcoma and Bone Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Cancer Program, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA. 6. Center for Cancer Genome Discovery, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. 7. Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Leiomyosarcoma (LMS) is a soft tissue sarcoma characterized by multiple copy number alterations (CNAs) and without common recurrent single nucleotide variants. We evaluated the feasibility of detecting circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) with next-generation sequencing in a cohort of patients with LMS whose tumor burden ranged from no evidence of disease to metastatic progressive disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cell-free DNA in plasma samples and paired genomic DNA from resected tumors were evaluated from patients with LMS by ultra-low passage whole genome sequencing (ULP-WGS). Sequencing reads were aligned to the human genome and CNAs identified in cell-free DNA and tumor DNA by ichorCNA software to determine the presence of ctDNA. Clinical data were reviewed to assess disease burden and clinicopathologic features. RESULTS: We identified LMS ctDNA in eleven of sixteen patients (69%) with disease progression and total tumor burden over 5 cm. Sixteen patients with stable disease or low disease burden at the time of blood draw were found to have no detectable ctDNA. Higher ctDNA fraction of total cell-free DNA was associated with increasing tumor size and disease progression. Conserved CNAs were found between primary tumors and ctDNA in each case, and recurrent CNAs were found across LMS samples. ctDNA levels declined following resection of progressive disease in one case and became detectable upon disease relapse in another individual patient. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that ctDNA, assayed by a widely available sequencing approach, may be useful as a biomarker for a subset of uterine and extrauterine LMS. Higher levels of ctDNA correlate with tumor size and disease progression. Liquid biopsies may assist in guiding treatment decisions, monitoring response to systemic therapy, surveying for disease recurrence and differentiating benign and malignant smooth muscle tumors.
PURPOSE: Leiomyosarcoma (LMS) is a soft tissue sarcoma characterized by multiple copy number alterations (CNAs) and without common recurrent single nucleotide variants. We evaluated the feasibility of detecting circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) with next-generation sequencing in a cohort of patients with LMS whose tumor burden ranged from no evidence of disease to metastatic progressive disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cell-free DNA in plasma samples and paired genomic DNA from resected tumors were evaluated from patients with LMS by ultra-low passage whole genome sequencing (ULP-WGS). Sequencing reads were aligned to the human genome and CNAs identified in cell-free DNA and tumor DNA by ichorCNA software to determine the presence of ctDNA. Clinical data were reviewed to assess disease burden and clinicopathologic features. RESULTS: We identified LMS ctDNA in eleven of sixteen patients (69%) with disease progression and total tumor burden over 5 cm. Sixteen patients with stable disease or low disease burden at the time of blood draw were found to have no detectable ctDNA. Higher ctDNA fraction of total cell-free DNA was associated with increasing tumor size and disease progression. Conserved CNAs were found between primary tumors and ctDNA in each case, and recurrent CNAs were found across LMS samples. ctDNA levels declined following resection of progressive disease in one case and became detectable upon disease relapse in another individual patient. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that ctDNA, assayed by a widely available sequencing approach, may be useful as a biomarker for a subset of uterine and extrauterine LMS. Higher levels of ctDNA correlate with tumor size and disease progression. Liquid biopsies may assist in guiding treatment decisions, monitoring response to systemic therapy, surveying for disease recurrence and differentiating benign and malignant smooth muscle tumors.
Entities:
Keywords:
Leiomyosarcoma; circulating tumor DNA; copy number alteration; liquid biopsy
Authors: Aaron McKenna; Matthew Hanna; Eric Banks; Andrey Sivachenko; Kristian Cibulskis; Andrew Kernytsky; Kiran Garimella; David Altshuler; Stacey Gabriel; Mark Daly; Mark A DePristo Journal: Genome Res Date: 2010-07-19 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: Jorge R Toro; Lois B Travis; Hongyu Julian Wu; Kangmin Zhu; Christopher D M Fletcher; Susan S Devesa Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2006-12-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: M Otaño-Joos; G Mechtersheimer; S Ohl; K K Wilgenbus; W Scheurlen; T Lehnert; F Willeke; H F Otto; P Lichter; S Joos Journal: Cytogenet Cell Genet Date: 2000
Authors: Martee L Hensley; Nicole Ishill; Robert Soslow; Joseph Larkin; Nadeem Abu-Rustum; Paul Sabbatini; Jason Konner; William Tew; David Spriggs; Carol A Aghajanian Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2009-01-09 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: N S Reed; C Mangioni; H Malmström; G Scarfone; A Poveda; S Pecorelli; S Tateo; M Franchi; J J Jobsen; C Coens; I Teodorovic; I Vergote; J B Vermorken Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2008-04-02 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Jean V Fischer; Melissa Mejia-Bautista; Brian Vadasz; Ping Yin; Serdar Bulun; Edward J Tanner; Xinyan Lu; Jian-Jun Wei Journal: Int J Gynecol Pathol Date: 2022-01-31 Impact factor: 3.326
Authors: Matthew L Hemming; Changyu Fan; Chandrajit P Raut; George D Demetri; Scott A Armstrong; Ewa Sicinska; Suzanne George Journal: Mol Cancer Res Date: 2020-06-09 Impact factor: 5.852
Authors: Jordan Jones; Sarah Cain; Jonathan Pesic-Smith; Peter F M Choong; Andrew P Morokoff; Kate J Drummond; Gabriel Dabscheck Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2021-09-16 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Matthew L Hemming; Patrick Bhola; Michael A Loycano; Justin A Anderson; Madeleine L Taddei; Leona A Doyle; Elizaveta Lavrova; Jessica L Andersen; Kelly S Klega; Morgan R Benson; Brian D Crompton; Chandrajit P Raut; Suzanne George; Anthony Letai; George D Demetri; Ewa Sicinska Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 13.801
Authors: Nicholas Eastley; Aurore Sommer; Barbara Ottolini; Rita Neumann; Jin-Li Luo; Robert K Hastings; Thomas McCulloch; Claire P Esler; Jacqueline A Shaw; Robert U Ashford; Nicola J Royle Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2020-06-24 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Bryce Demoret; Jeff Gregg; David A Liebner; Gabriel Tinoco; Scott Lenobel; James L Chen Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2019-11-21 Impact factor: 6.639