Daley S Morera1, Sarrah L Hasanali1, Daniel Belew2, Santu Ghosh3, Zachary Klaassen2, Andre R Jordan4, Jiaojiao Wang1, Martha K Terris2, Roni J Bollag5, Axel S Merseburger6, Arnulf Stenzl7, Mark S Soloway8, Vinata B Lokeshwar1. 1. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia. 2. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia. 3. Biostatistics and Data Science, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia. 4. Sheila and David Fuente Graduate Program in Cancer Biology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami-Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida. 5. Departments of Pathology, Bio-Repository Alliance of Georgia for Oncology at Georgia Cancer Center, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia. 6. University-Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, Luebeck, Germany. 7. Departments of Urology, Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 8. Memorial Healthcare System, Aventura, Florida.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Studies indicate that molecular subtypes in muscle invasive bladder cancer predict the clinical outcome. We evaluated whether subtyping by a simplified method and established classifications could predict the clinical outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We subtyped institutional cohort 1 of 52 patients, including 39 with muscle invasive bladder cancer, an Oncomine™ data set of 151 with muscle invasive bladder cancer and TCGA (The Cancer Genome Atlas) data set of 402 with muscle invasive bladder cancer. Subtyping was done using simplified panels (MCG-1 and MCG-Ext) which included only transcripts common in published studies and were analyzed for predicting metastasis, and cancer specific, overall and recurrence-free survival. TCGA data set was further analyzed using the Lund taxonomy, the Bladder Cancer Molecular Taxonomy Group Consensus and TCGA 2017 mRNA subtype classifications. RESULTS: Muscle invasive bladder cancer specimens from cohort 1 and the Oncomine data set showed intratumor heterogeneity for transcript and protein expression. MCG-1 subtypes did not predict the outcome on univariate or Kaplan-Meier analysis. On multivariate analysis N stage (p ≤0.007), T stage (p ≤0.04), M stage (p=0.007) and/or patient age (p=0.01) predicted metastasis, cancer specific and overall survival, and/or the cisplatin based adjuvant chemotherapy response. In TCGA data set publications showed that subtypes risk stratified patients for overall survival. Consistently the MCG-1 and MCG-Ext subtypes were associated with overall but not recurrence-free survival on univariate and Kaplan-Meier analyses. TCGA data set included 21 low grade specimens of the total of 402 and subtypes associated with tumor grade (p=0.005). However, less than 1% of muscle invasive bladder cancer cases are low grade. In only high grade specimens the MCG-1 and MCG-Ext subtypes could not predict overall survival. On univariate analysis subtypes according to the Bladder Cancer Molecular Taxonomy Group Consensus, TCGA 2017 and the Lund taxonomy were associated with tumor grade (p <0.0001) and overall survival (p=0.01 to <0.0001). Regardless of classification, subtypes had about 50% to 60% sensitivity and specificity to predict overall and recurrence-free survival. On multivariate analyses N stage and lymphovascular invasion consistently predicted recurrence-free and overall survival (p=0.039 and 0.003, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Molecular subtypes reflect bladder tumor heterogeneity and are associated with tumor grade. In multiple cohorts and subtyping classifications the clinical parameters outperformed subtypes for predicting the outcome.
PURPOSE: Studies indicate that molecular subtypes in muscle invasive bladder cancer predict the clinical outcome. We evaluated whether subtyping by a simplified method and established classifications could predict the clinical outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We subtyped institutional cohort 1 of 52 patients, including 39 with muscle invasive bladder cancer, an Oncomine™ data set of 151 with muscle invasive bladder cancer and TCGA (The Cancer Genome Atlas) data set of 402 with muscle invasive bladder cancer. Subtyping was done using simplified panels (MCG-1 and MCG-Ext) which included only transcripts common in published studies and were analyzed for predicting metastasis, and cancer specific, overall and recurrence-free survival. TCGA data set was further analyzed using the Lund taxonomy, the Bladder Cancer Molecular Taxonomy Group Consensus and TCGA 2017 mRNA subtype classifications. RESULTS:Muscle invasive bladder cancer specimens from cohort 1 and the Oncomine data set showed intratumor heterogeneity for transcript and protein expression. MCG-1 subtypes did not predict the outcome on univariate or Kaplan-Meier analysis. On multivariate analysis N stage (p ≤0.007), T stage (p ≤0.04), M stage (p=0.007) and/or patient age (p=0.01) predicted metastasis, cancer specific and overall survival, and/or the cisplatin based adjuvant chemotherapy response. In TCGA data set publications showed that subtypes risk stratified patients for overall survival. Consistently the MCG-1 and MCG-Ext subtypes were associated with overall but not recurrence-free survival on univariate and Kaplan-Meier analyses. TCGA data set included 21 low grade specimens of the total of 402 and subtypes associated with tumor grade (p=0.005). However, less than 1% of muscle invasive bladder cancer cases are low grade. In only high grade specimens the MCG-1 and MCG-Ext subtypes could not predict overall survival. On univariate analysis subtypes according to the Bladder Cancer Molecular Taxonomy Group Consensus, TCGA 2017 and the Lund taxonomy were associated with tumor grade (p <0.0001) and overall survival (p=0.01 to <0.0001). Regardless of classification, subtypes had about 50% to 60% sensitivity and specificity to predict overall and recurrence-free survival. On multivariate analyses N stage and lymphovascular invasion consistently predicted recurrence-free and overall survival (p=0.039 and 0.003, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Molecular subtypes reflect bladder tumor heterogeneity and are associated with tumor grade. In multiple cohorts and subtyping classifications the clinical parameters outperformed subtypes for predicting the outcome.
Authors: Anne B Als; Lars Dyrskjøt; Hans von der Maase; Karen Koed; Francisco Mansilla; Helle E Toldbod; Jens L Jensen; Benedicte P Ulhøi; Lisa Sengeløv; Klaus M E Jensen; Torben F Orntoft Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-08-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Jakob Hedegaard; Philippe Lamy; Iver Nordentoft; Ferran Algaba; Søren Høyer; Benedicte Parm Ulhøi; Søren Vang; Thomas Reinert; Gregers G Hermann; Karin Mogensen; Mathilde Borg Houlberg Thomsen; Morten Muhlig Nielsen; Mirari Marquez; Ulrika Segersten; Mattias Aine; Mattias Höglund; Karin Birkenkamp-Demtröder; Niels Fristrup; Michael Borre; Arndt Hartmann; Robert Stöhr; Sven Wach; Bastian Keck; Anna Katharina Seitz; Roman Nawroth; Tobias Maurer; Cane Tulic; Tatjana Simic; Kerstin Junker; Marcus Horstmann; Niels Harving; Astrid Christine Petersen; M Luz Calle; Ewout W Steyerberg; Willemien Beukers; Kim E M van Kessel; Jørgen Bjerggaard Jensen; Jakob Skou Pedersen; Per-Uno Malmström; Núria Malats; Francisco X Real; Ellen C Zwarthoff; Torben Falck Ørntoft; Lars Dyrskjøt Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2016-06-16 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Woonyoung Choi; Sima Porten; Seungchan Kim; Daniel Willis; Elizabeth R Plimack; Jean Hoffman-Censits; Beat Roth; Tiewei Cheng; Mai Tran; I-Ling Lee; Jonathan Melquist; Jolanta Bondaruk; Tadeusz Majewski; Shizhen Zhang; Shanna Pretzsch; Keith Baggerly; Arlene Siefker-Radtke; Bogdan Czerniak; Colin P N Dinney; David J McConkey Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2014-02-10 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Bishoy M Faltas; Davide Prandi; Scott T Tagawa; Ana M Molina; David M Nanus; Cora Sternberg; Jonathan Rosenberg; Juan Miguel Mosquera; Brian Robinson; Olivier Elemento; Andrea Sboner; Himisha Beltran; Francesca Demichelis; Mark A Rubin Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2016-10-17 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Michalis Mastri; Swathi Ramakrishnan; Shruti D Shah; Ellen Karasik; Bryan M Gillard; Michael T Moser; Bailey K Farmer; Gissou Azabdaftari; Gurkamal S Chatta; Anna Woloszynska; Kevin H Eng; Barbara A Foster; Wendy J Huss Journal: Am J Clin Exp Urol Date: 2021-12-15
Authors: Florestan J Koll; Alina Schwarz; Jens Köllermann; Severine Banek; Luis Kluth; Clarissa Wittler; Katrin Bankov; Claudia Döring; Nina Becker; Felix K H Chun; Peter J Wild; Henning Reis Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-06-16
Authors: Soum D Lokeshwar; Maite Lopez; Semih Sarcan; Karina Aguilar; Daley S Morera; Devin M Shaheen; Bal L Lokeshwar; Vinata B Lokeshwar Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-05-24 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Vinata B Lokeshwar; Daley S Morera; Sarrah L Hasanali; Travis J Yates; Marie C Hupe; Judith Knapp; Soum D Lokeshwar; Jiaojiao Wang; Martin J P Hennig; Rohitha Baskar; Diogo O Escudero; Ronny R Racine; Neetika Dhir; Andre R Jordan; Kelly Hoye; Ijeoma Azih; Murugesan Manoharan; Zachary Klaassen; Sravan Kavuri; Luis E Lopez; Santu Ghosh; Bal L Lokeshwar Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2020-02-24 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Edward C Ottley; Robert Pell; Benedict Brazier; Julianne Hollidge; Christiana Kartsonaki; Lisa Browning; Eric O'Neill; Anne E Kiltie Journal: J Pathol Clin Res Date: 2020-05-06