Dataset Information

Insights from the genetic and transcriptional characterization of a cancer of unknown primary (CUP).

ABSTRACT: Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) defines a heterogeneous group of metastatic tumors that lack an identifiable primary tumor, despite a standardized diagnostic work-up (Fizazi et al, 2015). CUPs are characterized by an aggressive clinical course, unusual metastatic pattern, and poor prognosis. Research in this field has been encouraged to unravel the complexity of this enigmatic entity and improve clinical management and survival of CUP patients. In this issue of EMBO Molecular Medicine, Benvenuti et al (2020) describe the molecular characterization of multiple synchronous and spatially distinct metastases from a CUP patient, shedding light on the evolutionary dynamic and distinctive features of CUP.

SUBMITTER: Davalos V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7338800 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Insights from the genetic and transcriptional characterization of a cancer of unknown primary (CUP).

Davalos Veronica V Esteller Manel M

EMBO molecular medicine 20200617 7

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) defines a heterogeneous group of metastatic tumors that lack an identifiable primary tumor, despite a standardized diagnostic work-up (Fizazi et al, 2015). CUPs are characterized by an aggressive clinical course, unusual metastatic pattern, and poor prognosis. Research in this field has been encouraged to unravel the complexity of this enigmatic entity and improve clinical management and survival of CUP patients. In this issue of EMBO Molecular Medicine, Benvenuti ...[more]

PMID: 32558182

Similar Datasets

Project description:Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) designates an enigmatic cancer entity with histologic confirmation of malignancy from a metastasis but no identifiable primary tumor in spite of a thorough diagnostic work-up. In this review, we discuss the validity of CUP as a distinct cancer entity as well as diagnostic pitfalls. As arguments against a distinct entity, the diagnosis of CUP is erroneous in some cases. Diagnostic pitfalls include incomplete diagnostics, uncertainty in classifying a lesion as either primary or metastasis and mistaking a relapse of an antecedent malignancy as CUP due to histologic and immunohistologic disparities. Given the high frequency of prior malignancies in CUP patients, relapse of an antecedent cancer should always be carefully excluded. Gene expression profiling-based classifier assays aim at aligning the molecular profile of CUP patients with established primary cancer patterns for highest congruency in order to identify the putative primary and treat accordingly. However, the spectrum of predicted putative primaries by molecular techniques is somewhat at odds with the primaries identified in autopsy series. Also, a first randomized clinical trial did not show superiority of primary-tailored therapy over unspecific platinum-based chemotherapy. CUP cases share an aggressive clinical course, atypical metastasis pattern, rapid progression of metastases, a generally poor response to chemotherapy and dismal outcome as distinct clinical features. Metastatic spread appears to take place in the early stages of tumor evolution, with CUP metastases subsequently undergoing genetic evolution toward a chromosomally highly complex and instable karyotype independent from the primary tumor. In clinical practice, the diagnosis of CUP is valid when no primary tumor is detectable. Treatment should ideally offer broad spectrum coverage across numerous malignancies and be well-established in CUP as is the case for carboplatin/paclitaxel and cisplatin / gemcitabine in particular, but it should also cover the most likely putative primary. The diligent diagnosis of CUP is warranted for clinical trials, making the eligibility process particularly laborious. In conclusion, we deem CUP a distinct cancer entity and the diagnosis accurate in most patient cases.

Project description:Cancers of unknown primary (CUPs) comprise a heterogeneous group of rare metastatic tumors whose primary site cannot be identified after extensive clinical-pathological investigations. CUP patients are generally treated with empirical chemotherapy and have dismal prognosis. As recently reported, CUP genome presents potentially druggable alterations for which targeted therapies could be proposed. The paucity of tumor tissue, as well as the difficult DNA testing and the lack of dedicated panels for target gene sequencing are further relevant limitations. Here, we propose that circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) could be used to identify actionable mutations in CUP patients. Blood was longitudinally collected from two CUP patients. CTCs were isolated with CELLSEARCH® and DEPArrayTM NxT and Parsortix systems, immunophenotypically characterized and used for single-cell genomic characterization with Ampli1TM kits. Circulating cell-free DNA (ccfDNA), purified from plasma at different time points, was tested for tumor mutations with a CUP-dedicated, 92-gene custom panel using SureSelect Target Enrichment technology. In parallel, FFPE tumor tissue was analyzed with three different assays: FoundationOne CDx assay, DEPArray LibPrep and OncoSeek Panel, and the SureSelect custom panel. These approaches identified the same mutations, when the gene was covered by the panel, with the exception of an insertion in APC gene. which was detected by OncoSeek and SureSelect panels but not FoundationOne. FGFR2 and CCNE1 gene amplifications were detected in single CTCs, tumor tissue, and ccfDNAs in one patient. A somatic variant in ARID1A gene (p.R1276∗) was detected in the tumor tissue and ccfDNAs. The alterations were validated by Droplet Digital PCR in all ccfDNA samples collected during tumor evolution. CTCs from a second patient presented a pattern of recurrent amplifications in ASPM and SEPT9 genes and loss of FANCC. The 92-gene custom panel identified 16 non-synonymous somatic alterations in ccfDNA, including a deletion (I1485Rfs∗19) and a somatic mutation (p. A1487V) in ARID1A gene and a point mutation in FGFR2 gene (p.G384R). Our results support the feasibility of non-invasive liquid biopsy testing in CUP cases, either using ctDNA or CTCs, to identify CUP genetic alterations with broad NGS panels covering the most frequently mutated genes.

Project description:Carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) is a difficult-to-manage malignancy. Multi-omic profiles and treatment outcome vs. degree of precision matching were assessed. Tumours underwent next-generation sequencing (NGS) [tissue and/or blood-derived cell-free DNA (cfDNA)]. Selected patients had transcriptome-based immune profiling and/or programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry analysis. Patients could be reviewed by a Molecular Tumor Board, but physicians chose the therapy. Of 6497 patients in the precision database, 97 had CUP. The median number of pathogenic tissue genomic alterations was 4 (range, 0-25), and for cfDNA, was 2 (range, 0-9). Each patient had a distinct molecular landscape. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved biomarkers included the following: PD-L1+ ≥ 1%, 30.9% of CUPs tested; microsatellite instability, 3.6%; tumour mutational burden ≥ 10 mutations·Mb-1, 23%; and neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase (NTRK) fusions, 0%. RNA-based immunograms showed theoretically druggable targets: lymphocyte activation gene 3 protein (LAG-3), macrophage colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R), adenosine receptor A2 (ADORA2) and indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1). Overall, 56% of patients had ≥ 1 actionable biomarker (OncoKB database). To quantify the degree of matching (tumours to drugs), a Matching Score (MS; roughly equivalent to number of alterations targeted/total number of deleterious alterations) was calculated post hoc. Comparing evaluable treated patients [MS high, > 50% (N = 15) vs. low ≤ 50% (N = 47)], median progression-free survival was 10.4 vs. 2.8 months (95% CI 0.11-0.64; HR 0.27; P = 0.002); survival, 15.8 vs. 6.9 months (95% CI 0.17-1.16; HR 0.45; P = 0.09); and clinical benefit rate (stable disease ≥ 6 months/partial/complete response), 71% vs. 24% (P = 0.003). Higher MS was the only factor that predicted improvement in outcome variables after multivariate analysis. In conclusion, CUPs are molecularly complex. Treatments with high degrees of matching to molecular alterations (generally achieved by individualized combinations) correlated with improved outcomes.

Dataset Information

Insights from the genetic and transcriptional characterization of a cancer of unknown primary (CUP).

Publications

Insights from the genetic and transcriptional characterization of a cancer of unknown primary (CUP).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets