| Literature DB >> 32445084 |
Tician Schnitzler1, Nadina Ortiz-Brüchle1, Ursula Schneider1, Isabella Lurje1, Karolina Guricova1, Alexander Buchner2, Gerald Bastian Schulz2, Axel Heidenreich3,4, Nadine Therese Gaisa1, Ruth Knüchel1, Stefan Garczyk5.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Non-invasive high-grade (HG) bladder cancer is a heterogeneous disease that is characterized insufficiently. First-line Bacillus Calmette-Guérin instillation fails in a substantial amount of cases and alternative bladder-preserving treatments are limited, underlining the need to promote a further molecular understanding of non-invasive HG lesions. Here, we characterized pure HG papillary urothelial bladder cancer (pure pTa HG), a potential subgroup of non-invasive HG bladder carcinomas, with regard to molecular subtype affiliation and potential for targeted therapy.Entities:
Keywords: Luminal and basal markers; Molecular subtype; Non-muscle-invasive, high-grade bladder cancer; Papillary bladder cancer; Targeted therapy; pTa HG
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32445084 PMCID: PMC7581583 DOI: 10.1007/s13402-020-00524-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cell Oncol (Dordr) ISSN: 2211-3428 Impact factor: 6.730
Expression of luminal and basal protein markers in pure pTa HG and pure papillary pT1(a) HG in comparison to urothelial CIS samples [10]
| pTa HG/papillary pT1(a) HG samples | median | CIS samples | median | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n = 78a | (100%) | n = 156 | (100%) | |||
| KRT20 | ||||||
| negative | 20 | (26%) | positive | 24 | (15%) | positive |
| positive | 58 | (74%) | 132 | (85%) | ||
| ERBB2 | ||||||
| 0–1 | 33 | (42%) | 2 | 55 | (35%) | 2 |
| 2 | 23 | (30%) | 51 | (33%) | ||
| 3 | 22 | (28%) | 50 | (32%) | ||
| ESR2 | ||||||
| 0–2 | 3 | (4%) | 12 | 18 | (12%) | 12 |
| 3–12 | 75 | (96%) | 138 | (88%) | ||
| GATA3 | ||||||
| 0–2 | 1 | (1%) | 12 | 5 | (3%) | 12 |
| 3–12 | 77 | (99%) | 151 | (97%) | ||
| KRT5/6 | ||||||
| negative | 76 | (97%) | negative | 153 | (98%) | negative |
| positive | 2 | (3%) | 3 | (2%) | ||
| KRT14 | ||||||
| negative | 71 | (91%) | negative | 154 | (99%) | negative |
| positive | 7 | (9%) | 2 | (1%) | ||
| p53 | ||||||
| non-aberrant | 51 | (65%) | - | 57 | (37%) | - |
| aberrant | 27 | (35%) | 99 | (63%) | ||
| FGFR3 | - | - | - | |||
| negative/low | 65 | (90%) | negative | |||
| high | 7 | (10%) | ||||
Overview of protein expression of luminal and basal markers as well as of p53 and FGFR3 in a cohort of pure pTa HG and pure papillary pT1(a) HG samples. Only marker expression in exophytic tumor areas was scored. Data are compared to marker expression in a recently characterized CIS cohort [10]. a: For FGFR3, protein expression in 72 samples was analyzed
Fig. 1Immunohistochemical detection of luminal and basal marker expression in pure pTa HG and papillary pT1(a) HG specimens. Photographs are representative of median protein expression observed (except for p53). Aberrant KRT20 expression (a). ERBB2 Dako score 2 (b). ESR2 Remmele score 12 (c). GATA3 Remmele score 12 (d). KRT5/6 negativity in tumor cells, positivity limited to basal urothelial cells (e). KRT14 negative tumor cells (f). Aberrant p53 expression (35% of samples; null phenotype not shown) (g). FGFR3 negativity (h). Scale bar: 50 µm
ERBB2 protein expression in 66 pure pTa HG and pure papillary pT1(a) HG tumors analyzed by ERBB2 FISH
| Dako score | 0,1+ | 2+ | 3+ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neutral | n = 52 | 26 | 15 | 11 |
| Polysomy 17 | n = 11 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| n = 03 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
ERBB2 protein expression was quantified using the Dako score (0–3+). Samples were categorized into “neutral”, chromosome 17 polysomic (“polysomy 17”) and “ERBB2-amplified” tumors using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for ERBB2 and CEN17. Concerning the stroma-invasive samples, only the exophytic tumor area was considered for analysis
Fig. 2ERBB2 fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis (n = 66 samples). Neutral (non-amplified, non-polysomic for chromosome 17) (a), polysomy 17 (b), ERBB2 amplification (c), distribution of ERBB2-amplified, chromosome 17 polysomic and neutral samples among the ERBB2 Dako score groups “0/1”, “2” and “3” (d). Red hybridization signals indicate the centromeric region of chromosome 17 (CEN17), green signals localize to the ERBB2 gene locus on chromosome 17
Fig. 3Mutations and CNVs detected in a cohort of 19 pTa/papillary pT1 HG samples. *: Patient with pTa LG history; †: Patient with history of MIBC
Fig. 4Potentially actionable mutations detected in pTa HG/papillary pT1 HG samples and suggested targeted therapy. Impacted pathways and frequency of cases exhibiting at least one potentially actionable alteration in the respective pathway (upper part). The three most frequently affected genes of each pathway are depicted. Potential targeted therapies are shown (lower part)