Association of Fusobacterium nucleatum with clinical and molecular features in colorectal serrated pathway

Human gut microbiota is being increasingly recognized as a player in colorectal cancers (CRCs). Evidence suggests that Fusobacterium nucleatum (F. nucleatum) may contribute to disease progression and is associated with CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) and microsatellite instability (MSI) in CRCs; however, to date, there are no reports about the relationship between F. nucleatum and molecular features in the early stage of colorectal tumorigenesis. Therefore, we investigated the presence of F. nucleatum in premalignant colorectal lesions. In total, 465 premalignant lesions (343 serrated lesions and 122 non‐serrated adenomas) and 511 CRCs were studied. We determined the presence of F. nucleatum and analyzed its association with molecular features including CIMP, MSI and microRNA‐31 status. F. nucleatum was detected in 24% of hyperplastic polyps, 35% of sessile serrated adenomas (SSAs), 30% of traditional serrated adenomas (TSAs) and 33% of non‐serrated adenomas. F. nucleatum was more frequently detected in CIMP‐high premalignant lesions than in CIMP‐low/zero lesions (p = 0.0023). In SSAs, F. nucleatum positivity increased gradually from sigmoid colon to cecum (p = 0.042). F. nucleatum positivity was significantly higher in CRCs (56%) than in premalignant lesions of any histological type (p < 0.0001). In conclusion, F. nucleatum was identified in premalignant colorectal lesions regardless of histopathology but was more frequently associated with CIMP‐high lesions. Moreover, F. nucleatum positivity increased according to histological grade, suggesting that it may contribute to the progression of colorectal neoplasia. Our data also indicate that F. nucleatum positivity in SSAs may support the “colorectal continuum” concept.     

Long-term outcome in BRAFV600E melanoma patients treated with vemurafenib: Patterns of disease progression and clinical management of limited progression

IntroductionVemurafenib induces tumour regression in most patients with BRAF^V600E-mutant melanoma; eventually, most experience progressive disease (PD). Long-term follow-up of patients with BRAF^V600E melanoma treated in the phase 1 vemurafenib trial is reported.MethodsPatients received vemurafenib 240–1120 mg (dose escalation cohort) or 960 mg (extension cohort) orally twice daily. Clinical response was evaluated every 8 weeks by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST). Patients with PD amenable to local therapy (surgery or radiotherapy) were allowed to continue vemurafenib after progression. Overall survival (OS) from time of treatment initiation and from PD was estimated. Sites of PD were recorded.ResultsForty-eight patients (escalation cohort, n = 16; extension cohort, n = 32) received therapeutic doses of vemurafenib (⩾240 mg twice daily). Forty-four patients had PD by the time of this analysis and four remained progression free (follow-up time, 1.2–56.1 months). Median OS was 14 months (range, 1.2–56.1); 3- and 4-year melanoma-specific survival rate in the extension cohort was 26% and 19%, respectively. Median OS was 26.0 months (range, 7.7–56.1) among 20 patients who continued vemurafenib after local therapy. Median treatment duration beyond initial PD was 3.8 months (range, 1.1–26.6). In the extension cohort, six and five patients were alive after 3 and 4 years, respectively, on vemurafenib monotherapy.ConclusionsSome patients with melanoma achieved long-term survival with vemurafenib monotherapy. Continuation of vemurafenib after PD might be beneficial in some patients because remaining disease might continue to respond to BRAF inhibition.     

Truncated RAF kinases drive resistance to MET inhibition in MET-addicted cancer cells

Constitutively active receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) are known oncogenic drivers and provide valuable therapeutic targets in many cancer types. However, clinical efficacy of RTK inhibitors is limited by intrinsic and acquired resistance. To identify genes conferring resistance to inhibition of the MET RTK, we conducted a forward genetics screen in the GTL-16 gastric cancer cell line, carrying MET amplification and exquisitely sensitive to MET inhibition. Cells were transduced with three different retroviral cDNA expression libraries and selected for growth in the presence of the MET inhibitor PHA-665752. Selected cells displayed robust and reproducible enrichment of library-derived cDNAs encoding truncated forms of RAF1 and BRAF proteins, whose silencing reversed the resistant phenotype. Transduction of naïve GTL-16 cells with truncated, but not full length, RAF1 and BRAF conferred in vitro and in vivo resistance to MET inhibitors, which could be reversed by MEK inhibition. Induction of resistance by truncated RAFs was confirmed in other MET-addicted cell lines, and further extended to EGFR-addicted cells. These data show that truncated RAF1 and BRAF proteins, recently described as products of genomic rearrangements in gastric cancer and other malignancies, have the ability to render neoplastic cells resistant to RTK-targeted therapy.     

Similar but different: distinct roles for KRAS and BRAF oncogenes in colorectal cancer development and therapy resistance

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is characterized by recurrent mutations deregulating key cell signaling cascades and providing the cancer cells with novel functional traits. Among the most frequent mutations in CRC are gain-of-function missense mutations in KRAS and BRAF. Oncogenic activation of KRAS and BRAF is mutually exclusive and occurs in approximately 40% and 10% of all CRCs, respectively. Here we summarize genetic alterations currently described in the literature and databases, indicating overlapping but also specific co-occurrences with either mutated BRAF or KRAS. We describe common and potentially specific biological functions of KRAS and BRAF oncoproteins in the intestinal epithelial cells and during initiation and progression of CRC. We discuss signal transduction networks, highlighting individual functions of oncogenic KRAS and BRAF in terms of feedback loops and their impact on treatment outcome. Finally, we give an update on current strategies of targeted therapeutic intervention in oncogenic RAS-RAF signaling networks for the treatment of metastatic CRC and outline future directions.     

BRAF mutation testing with a rapid,fully integrated molecular diagnostics system

Fast and accurate diagnostic systems are needed for further implementation of precision therapy of BRAF-mutant and other cancers. The novel Idylla^TM BRAF Mutation Test has high sensitivity and shorter turnaround times compared to other methods. We used Idylla to detect BRAF V600 mutations in archived formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor samples and compared these results with those obtained using the cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test or MiSeq deep sequencing system and with those obtained by a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-certified laboratory employing polymerase chain reaction–based sequencing, mass spectrometric detection, or next-generation sequencing. In one set of 60 FFPE tumor samples (15 with BRAF mutations per Idylla), the Idylla and cobas results had an agreement of 97%. Idylla detected BRAF V600 mutations in two additional samples. The Idylla and MiSeq results had 100% concordance. In a separate set of 100 FFPE tumor samples (64 with BRAF mutation per Idylla), the Idylla and CLIA-certified laboratory results demonstrated an agreement of 96% even though the tests were not performed simultaneously and different FFPE blocks had to be used for 9 cases. The Idylla^TM BRAF Mutation Test produced results quickly (sample to results time was about 90 minutes with about 2 minutes of hands on time) and the closed nature of the cartridge eliminates the risk of PCR contamination. In conclusion, our observations demonstrate that the Idylla test is rapid and has high concordance with other routinely used but more complex BRAF mutation–detecting tests.     

Overexpression of Mcl-1 confers resistance to BRAFV600E inhibitors alone and in combination with MEK1/2 inhibitors in melanoma

Melanoma harboring BRAF mutations frequently develop resistance to BRAF inhibitors, limiting the impact of treatment. Here, we establish a mechanism of resistance and subsequently identified a suitable drug combination to overcome the resistance. Single treatment of BRAF mutant melanoma cell lines with vemurafenib or dabrafenib (BRAF inhibitors) alone or in combination with trametinib (MEK1/2 inhibitor) resulted in overexpression of Mcl-1. Overexpression of Mcl-1 in A375 and SK-MEL-28 by transfection completely blocked BRAF and MEK1/2 inhibitor-mediated inhibition of cell survival and apoptosis. Melanoma cells resistant to BRAF inhibitors showed massive expression of Mcl-1 as compared to respective sensitive cell lines. Silencing of Mcl-1 using siRNA completely sensitized resistant melanoma cells to growth suppression and induction of apoptosis by BRAF inhibitors. In vivo, vemurafenib resistant A375 xenografts implanted in athymic nude mice showed substantial tumor growth inhibition when treated with a combination of vemurafenib and Mcl-1 inhibitor or siRNA. Immunohistochemistry and western blot analyses demonstrated enhanced expression of Mcl-1 and activation of ERK1/2 in vemurafenib-resistant tumors whereas level of Mcl-1 or p-ERK1/2 was diminished in the tumors of mice treated with either of the combination. Biopsied tumors from the patients treated with or resistant to BRAF inhibitors revealed overexpression of Mcl-1. These results suggest that the combination of BRAF inhibitors with Mcl-1 inhibitor may have therapeutic advantage to melanoma patients with acquired resistance to BRAF inhibitors alone or in combination with MEK1/2 inhibitors.     

VE1 immunohistochemistry predicts BRAF V600E mutation status and clinical outcome in colorectal cancer

Aim

VE1 is a monoclonal antibody detecting mutant BRAF^V600E protein by immunohistochemistry. Here we aim to determine the inter-observer agreement and concordance of VE1 with mutational status, investigate heterogeneity in colorectal cancers and metastases and determine the prognostic effect of VE1 in colorectal cancer patients.

Methods

Concordance of VE1 with mutational status and inter-observer agreement were tested on a pilot cohort of colorectal cancers (n = 34), melanomas (n = 23) and thyroid cancers (n = 8). Two prognostic cohorts were evaluated (n = 259, Cohort 1 and n = 226, Cohort 2) by multiple-punch tissue microarrays. VE1 staining on preoperative biopsies (n = 118 patients) was compared to expression in resections. Primary tumors and metastases from 13 patients were tested for VE1 heterogeneity using a tissue microarray generated from all available blocks (n = 100 blocks).

Results

Inter-observer agreement was 100% (kappa = 1.0). Concordance between VE1 and V600E mutation was 98.5%. Cohort 1: VE1 positivity (seen in 13.5%) was associated with older age (p = 0.0175) and MLH1 deficiency (p < 0.0001). Cohort 2: VE1 positivity (seen in 12.8%) was associated with female gender (p = 0.0016), right-sided tumor location (p < 0.0001), higher tumor grade (p < 0.0001) and mismatch repair (MMR)-deficiency (p < 0.0001). In survival analysis, MMR status and postoperative therapy were identified as possible confounding factors. Adjusting for these features, VE1 was an unfavorable prognostic factor. Preoperative biopsy staining matched resections in all cases except one. No heterogeneity was found across any primary/metastatic tumor blocks.

Conclusion

VE1 is highly concordant for V600E and homogeneously expressed suggesting staining can be analysed on resection specimens, preoperative biopsies, metastatic lesions and tissue microarrays.