Dataset Information

Integrative molecular analysis of combined small-cell lung carcinomas identifies major subtypes with different therapeutic opportunities.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Combined small-cell lung cancer (C-SCLC) is composed of SCLC admixed with a non-small-cell cancer component. They currently receive the same treatment as SCLC. The recent evidence that SCLC may belong to either of two lineages, neuroendocrine (NE) or non-NE, with different vulnerability to specific cell death pathways such as ferroptosis, opens new therapeutic opportunities also for C-SCLC.

Materials and methods

Thirteen C-SCLCs, including five with adenocarcinoma (CoADC), five with large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (CoLCNEC) and three with squamous cell carcinoma (CoSQC) components, were assessed for alterations in 409 genes and transcriptomic profiling of 20 815 genes.

Results

All 13 cases harbored TP53 (12 cases) and/or RB1 (7 cases) inactivation, which was accompanied by mutated KRAS in 4 and PTEN in 3 cases. Potentially targetable alterations included two KRAS G12C, two PIK3CA and one EGFR mutations. Comparison of C-SCLC transcriptomes with those of 57 pure histology lung cancers (17 ADCs, 20 SQCs, 11 LCNECs, 9 SCLCs) showed that CoLCNEC and CoADC constituted a standalone group of NE tumors, while CoSQC transcriptional setup was overlapping that of pure SQC. Using transcriptional signatures of NE versus non-NE SCLC as classifier, CoLCNEC was clearly NE while CoSQC was strongly non-NE and CoADC exhibited a heterogeneous phenotype. Similarly, using ferroptosis sensitivity/resistance markers, CoSQC was classified as sensitive (as expected for non-NE), CoLCNEC as resistant (as expected for NE) and CoADC showed a heterogeneous pattern.

Conclusions

These data support routine molecular profiling of C-SCLC to search for targetable driver alterations and to precisely classify them according to therapeutically relevant subgroups (e.g. NE versus non-NE).

SUBMITTER: Simbolo M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8695295 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEsophageal cancer has the sixth highest rate of cancer-associated deaths worldwide, with many patients displaying metastases and chemotherapy resistance. We sought to find subtypes to see if precision medicine could play a role in finding new potential targets and predicting responses to therapy. Since metabolism not only drives cancers but also serves as a readout, metabolism was examined as a key reporter for differences.MethodsUnsupervised and supervised classification methods, including hierarchical clustering, partial least squares discriminant analysis, k-nearest neighbors, and machine learning techniques, were used to discover and display two major subgroups. Genes, pathways, gene ontologies, survival, and immune differences between the groups were further examined, along with biomarkers between the groups and against normal tissue.ResultsEsophageal cancer had two major unique metabolic profiles observed between the histological subtypes esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The metabolic differences suggest that ESCC depends on glycolysis, whereas EAC relies more on oxidative metabolism, catabolism of glycolipids, the tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle, and the electron transport chain. We also noted a robust prognostic risk associated with COQ3 expression. In addition to the metabolic alterations, we noted significant alterations in key pathways regulating immunity, including alterations in cytokines and predicted immune infiltration. ESCC appears to have increased signature associated with dendritic cells, Th17, and CD8 T cells, the latter of which correlate with survival in ESCC. We bioinformatically observed that ESCC may be more responsive to checkpoint inhibitor therapy than EAC and postulate targets to enhance therapy further. Lastly, we highlight correlations between differentially expressed enzymes and the potential immune status.ConclusionOverall, these results highlight the extreme differences observed between the histological subtypes and may lead to novel biomarkers, therapeutic strategies, and differences in therapeutic response for targeting each esophageal cancer subtype.