Validity of a two-antibody testing algorithm for mismatch repair deficiency testing in cancer; a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Mismatch repair deficiency: how reliable is the two-antibody approach? A national real-life study

AIMS

Traditionally, mismatch repair (MMR) status is determined by a panel of four antibodies (MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, MSH6). If all proteins are retained, cases are MMR proficient (pMMR), while loss of one or more proteins is indicative of MMR deficiency (dMMR). This approach has been challenged in favour of a two-antibody approach, using PMS2 and MSH6 as a first screening. Their retainment is deemed sufficient to declare cases pMMR. In this study we aim to verify the validity of the two-antibody approach.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a nationwide study in colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer (EC) diagnosed between 2016 and 2023, including 47,657 patients to evaluate the two-antibody approach. In 0.17% and 0.4% of cases of CRC and EC, respectively, dMMR cases would be missed with the two-antibody approach. Subgroup analyses pointed towards slightly increased miss rates in younger patients (under the age of 50 years) in both groups and identified special subtypes (signet ring cell carcinoma, medullary carcinoma, and mucinous carcinoma in CRC and clear cell carcinoma in EC) with increased miss rates. For these specific subgroups, a low threshold should be used for further testing. In case of ambiguous or heterogeneous staining patterns, four antibodies should be used.

CONCLUSION

In general, the application of a two-antibody MMR testing strategy does not lead to considerable failure of dMMR identification and saves costs.

Advanced endometrial cancer-The next generation of treatment: A society of gynecologic oncology journal club clinical commentary

In February of 2024, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) hosted a journal club focused on new treatment options for the management of advanced and metastatic endometrial cancer. This clinical commentary is intended to provide a summary report of that presentation. The session described the importance of molecular characterization shown in the work of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). The updated 2023 FIGO staging of endometrial cancer was reviewed. The panel then described the role of upfront immunotherapy for the treatment of advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer as demonstrated in four recent trials (RUBY, NRG-GY018, AtTEnd, and DUO-E studies). The DUO-E study uniquely examined the combination immunotherapy with a PARP inhibitor. The trials had unique differences in inclusion criteria, primary outcomes, and length of maintenance therapy, but all boasted similarly promising results particularly in mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) endometrial cancer. This era of rapid innovation in advanced and recurrent endometrial cancer will hopefully enhance individualized treatment approaches and improved outcomes for patients with endometrial cancer.

A comparative analysis of MMR immunohistochemistry panels: Evaluating the utility of four-protein versus two-protein panels in endometrial cancer patients

AIMS

This study aimed to assess the accuracy of a two-protein panel for mismatch repair (MMR) immunohistochemistry (IHC) compared to a four-protein panel in a cohort of endometrial cancer patients.

METHODS

The study included patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer between January 2018 and December 2023 with patients underwent MMR IHC staining for the four-protein panel (MSH2, MSH6, MLH1, and PMS2) serving as the reference standard. Various combinations of two proteins were examined and evaluated for their accuracy against the four-protein panel. Sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), and negative likelihood ratio were calculated for each combination. McNemar's test was performed to assess discordance, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to evaluate diagnostic accuracy.

RESULTS

Of 593 patients, MMR deficiency defined as at least one protein loss was observed in 146 patients (24.62%). When compared with four-protein panel, the highest sensitivity was observed with the MSH6/PMS2 combination (99.32%), followed sequentially by MSH6/MLH1 (97.26%), MSH2/PMS2 (93.15%), MSH2/MLH1 (91.10%), MLH1/PMS2 (79.45%), and MSH2/MSH6 (21.92%). The MSH6/PMS2 combination also demonstrated the best NPV of 99.78% and negative likelihood ratio of 0.01, while MSH6/MLH1 showed satisfactory NPV of 99.11% and negative likelihood ratio of 0.03. McNemar's test revealed no statistical difference between the four-protein panel and the MSH6/PMS2 panel (p = 1.000), and the MSH6/MLH1 panel (p = 0.125).

CONCLUSIONS

The two-protein panel, particularly MSH6/PMS2, offers high sensitivity and negative predictive value, suggesting its potential as a cost-effective alternative to the four-protein panel in MMR testing for endometrial cancer patients.

Microsatellite instability and mismatch repair protein deficiency: equal predictive markers?

Current clinical guidelines recommend mismatch repair (MMR) protein immunohistochemistry (IHC) or molecular microsatellite instability (MSI) tests as predictive markers of immunotherapies. Most of the pathological guidelines consider MMR protein IHC as the gold standard test to identify cancers with MMR deficiency and recommend molecular MSI tests only in special circumstances or to screen for Lynch syndrome. However, there are data in the literature which suggest that the two test types may not be equal. For example, molecular epidemiology studies reported different rates of deficient MMR (dMMR) and MSI in various cancer types. Additionally, direct comparisons of the two tests revealed relatively frequent discrepancies between MMR IHC and MSI tests, especially in non-colorectal and non-endometrial cancers and in cases with unusual dMMR phenotypes. There are also scattered clinical data showing that the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors is different if the patient selection was based on dMMR versus MSI status of the cancers. All these observations question the current dogma that dMMR phenotype and genetic MSI status are equal predictive markers of the immunotherapies.

Molecular pathology in breast disease: diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic tools

Molecular testing in breast cancer gained increasing attention and importance as specific molecular results can tailor not only oncological decisions on systemic adjuvant or neoadjuvant or in metastatic setting, but increasingly serve in diagnostic routine histopathological services to differentiate between morphologically overlapping or ambiguous histological pictures. Diagnostic tools involve in most cases a broad spectrum of immunohistochemical panels, followed by entity-specific in situ hybridization probes and in given cases NGS-based sequencing. Workflow of which methodology is applied and in which order depends on the specific entity resp. on the given differential diagnosis in question. Regarding prognostic/predictive molecular testing, the choice of assay and the workflow are based on clinical algorithms and on the evidence of targeted therapies following the molecular alterations. In this review paper, we aim to address the use of molecular technics in [1] the histological diagnostic setting (such as subtyping of invasive carcinomas/malignant spindle cell tumors and sarcomas and some B3 lesions) and [2] in the context of adjuvant or neoadjuvant or other clinical settings with special focus of targeted therapies.

Molecular pathological classification of colorectal cancer-an update

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has a broad range of molecular alterations with two major mechanisms of genomic instability (chromosomal instability and microsatellite instability) and has been subclassified into 4 consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) based on bulk RNA sequence data. Here, we update the molecular pathological classification of CRC with an overview of more recent bulk and single-cell RNA data analysis for development of transcriptional classifiers and risk stratification methods, taking into account the marked inter-tumoural and intra-tumoural heterogeneity of CRC. The importance of the stromal and immune components or tumour microenvironment (TME) to prognosis has emerged from these analyses. Attempts to remove the contribution of the tumour microenvironment and reveal neoplastic-specific transcriptional traits involved identification of the CRC intrinsic subtypes (CRIS). The use of immunohistochemistry and digital pathology to implement classification systems are evolving fields. Conventional adenoma versus serrated polyp pathway transcriptomic analysis and characterisation of canonical LGR5+ crypt base columnar stem cell versus ANXA1+ regenerative stem cell phenotypes emerged as key properties for improved understanding of transcriptional signals involved in molecular subclassification of colorectal cancers. Recently, classification by three pathway-derived subtypes (PDS1-3) has been developed, revealing a continuum of intrinsic biology associated with biological, stem cell, histopathological, and clinical attributes.

Molecular-based classification of endometrial carcinoma in Northern Thailand: impact on prognosis and potential for implementation in resource-limited settings

BACKGROUND

Endometrial carcinoma is molecularly categorized into four subgroups: polymerase-E exonuclease domain-mutant (POLE-mut), mismatch repair-deficient (MMR-d), p53-abnormal (p53-abn), and no specific molecular profile (NSMP). This classification scheme has been included into clinical recommendation for post-operative risk-based management, although there have been few Asian studies on this topic. The present study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and clinical outcomes of endometrial carcinoma using this classification in Northern Thailand and the feasibility of implementation in resource-limited settings.

METHODS

Endometrial carcinomas from hysterectomy specimens were classified using immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins and p53, as well as POLE mutation testing. Clinicopathological variables and outcomes were analyzed. The costs of the molecular information-based approach were compared to those incurred by the conventional approach (without molecular classification).

RESULTS

Of 138 patients, 52.9% in the NSMP subgroup, 28.2% were in the MMR-d, 13.8% in the p53-abn, and 5.1% in the POLE-mut. After adjusting for other variables, patients with POLE-mut showed the most favorable outcomes, while those with p53-abn had the poorest survival. When estimating the costs for post-operative management, the use of molecular classification resulted in a 10% increase over the conventional approach. However, the cost increased only by 1% if only POLE testing was used to identify patients for treatment omission.

CONCLUSION

In Northern Thailand, endometrial carcinoma had comparable subgroup distribution and prognostic implications to previous reports, supporting the implementation of management guidelines that incorporate molecular information. In resource-limited settings, at least POLE mutation testing in early-stage patients should be considered.

Microsatellite instability in non-endometrioid ovarian epithelial tumors: a study of 400 cases comparing immunohistochemistry, PCR, and NGS based testing with mutation status of MMR genes

Testing of microsatellite instability is not only used as a triage for possible Lynch syndrome, but also to predict immunotherapy treatment response. The aim of this study was to assess the frequency of mismatch repair deficiency (MMR-D)/microsatellite instability (MSI) in 400 cases of non-endometrioid ovarian tumors (high-grade serous, low-grade serous, mucinous and clear cell), to compare different methodological approaches of testing, and to assess the optimal approach for next generation sequencing (NGS) MSI testing. For all tumors, we evaluated immunohistochemical (IHC) expression of MMR proteins and assessed microsatellite markers by PCR-based method. Except for high-grade serous carcinoma, we correlated the findings of IHC and PCR with NGS-based MSI testing. We compared the results with somatic and germline mutation in MMR genes. Among the whole cohort, seven MMR-D cases, all clear cell carcinomas (CCC), were found. On PCR analysis, 6 cases were MSI-high and one was MSS. In all cases, mutation of an MMR gene was found; in 2 cases, the mutation was germline (Lynch syndrome). An additional 5 cases with a mutation in MMR gene(s) with MSS status and without MMR-D were identified. We further utilized sequence capture NGS for MSI testing. Employing 53 microsatellite loci provided high sensitivity and specificity. Our study shows that MSI occurs in 7% of CCC while it is rare or absent in other nonendometrioid ovarian neoplasms. Lynch syndrome was present in 2% of patients with CCC. However, some cases with MSH6 mutation can evade all testing methods, including IHC, PCR, and NGS-MSI.

Comparison of Methods for Testing Mismatch Repair Status in Endometrial Cancer

Approximately 20-30% of endometrial carcinomas (EC) are characterized by mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (dMMR) or microsatellite instability (MSI), and their testing has become part of the routine diagnosis. The aim of this study was to establish and compare the MMR status using various approaches. Immunohistochemistry (IHC), PCR-based MSI, and the detection of defects in the four key MMR genes (MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6) via methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) and targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) were performed. MSH3 expression was also evaluated. A set of 126 early-stage EC samples were analyzed, 53.2% of which were dMMR and 46.8% of which were proficient MMR (pMMR) as determined using IHC, whereas 69.3% were classified as microsatellite stable, while 8.8% and 21.9% were classified MSI-low (MSI-L) and MSI-high (MSI-H), respectively. In total, 44.3% of the samples showed genetic or epigenetic alterations in one or more genes; MLH1 promoter methylation was the most common event. Although acceptable concordance was observed, there were overall discrepancies between the three testing approaches, mainly associated with the dMMR group. IHC had a better correlation with MMR genomic status than the MSI status determined using PCR. Further studies are needed to establish solid conclusions regarding the best MMR assessment technique for EC.

Molecular Classification Predicts Response to Radiotherapy in the Randomized PORTEC-1 and PORTEC-2 Trials for Early-Stage Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer

PURPOSE

The molecular classification of endometrial cancer (EC) has proven to have prognostic value and is predictive of response to adjuvant chemotherapy. Here, we investigate its predictive value for response to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) in early-stage endometrioid EC (EEC).

METHODS

Data of the randomized PORTEC-1 trial (n = 714) comparing pelvic EBRT with no adjuvant therapy in early-stage intermediate-risk EC and the PORTEC-2 trial (n = 427) comparing VBT with EBRT in early-stage high-intermediate-risk EC were used. Locoregional (including vaginal and pelvic) recurrence-free survival was compared between treatment groups across the four molecular classes using Kaplan-Meier's methodology and log-rank tests.

RESULTS

A total of 880 molecularly classified ECs, 484 from PORTEC-1 and 396 from PORTEC-2, were included. The majority were FIGO-2009 stage I EEC (97.2%). The median follow-up was 11.3 years. No locoregional recurrences were observed in EC with a pathogenic mutation of DNA polymerase-ε (POLEmut EC). In mismatch repair-deficient (MMRd) EC, locoregional recurrence-free survival was similar after EBRT (94.2%), VBT (94.2%), and no adjuvant therapy (90.3%; P = .74). In EC with a p53 abnormality (p53abn EC), EBRT (96.9%) had a substantial benefit over VBT (64.3%) and no adjuvant therapy (72.2%; P = .048). In EC with no specific molecular profile (NSMP EC), both EBRT (98.3%) and VBT (96.2%) yielded better locoregional control than no adjuvant therapy (87.7%; P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

The molecular classification of EC predicts response to radiotherapy in stage I EEC and may guide adjuvant treatment decisions. Omitting radiotherapy seems to be safe in POLEmut EC. The benefit of radiotherapy seems to be limited in MMRd EC. EBRT yields a significantly better locoregional recurrence-free survival than VBT or no adjuvant therapy in p53abn EC. VBT is the treatment of choice for NSMP EC as it is as effective as EBRT and significantly better than no adjuvant therapy for locoregional tumor control.

Performance of Immunohistochemical and Molecular Methods in Detecting Microsatellite Instability in Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is an important prognostic molecular biomarker for gastric cancer (GC). MSI status may be detected by immunohistochemistry (IHC) for mismatch repair (MMR) proteins and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Idylla™ MSI assay has not been validated for GC but may prove to be a valid alternative.

METHODS

In a series of 140 GC cases, MSI status was evaluated by IHC for MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6; gold-standard pentaplex PCR panel (PPP) (BAT-25, BAT-26, NR-21, NR-24, and NR-27); and Idylla. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 27.0.

RESULTS

PPP identified 102 microsatellite stable (MSS) cases and 38 MSI-high cases. Only 3 cases showed discordant results. Compared with PPP, the sensitivity was 100% for IHC and 94.7% for Idylla. Specificity was 99% for IHC and 100% for Idylla. MLH1 IHC alone showed sensitivity and specificity of 97.4% and 98.0%, respectively. IHC identified three indeterminate cases; all were MSS according to PPP and Idylla.

CONCLUSION

IHC for MMR proteins represents an optimal screening tool for MSI status in GC. If resources are limited, isolated MLH1 evaluation may constitute a valuable option for preliminary screening. Idylla may help detect rare MSS cases with MMR-loss and define MSI status in indeterminate cases.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of gynecologic cancer

Advanced gynecologic cancers have historically lacked effective treatment options. Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of cervical cancer and endometrial cancer, offering durable responses for some patients. In addition, many immunotherapy strategies are under investigation for the treatment of earlier stages of disease or in other gynecologic cancers, such as ovarian cancer and rare gynecologic tumors. While the integration of ICIs into the standard of care has improved outcomes for patients, their use requires a nuanced understanding of biomarker testing, treatment selection, patient selection, response evaluation and surveillance, and patient quality of life considerations, among other topics. To address this need for guidance, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to develop a clinical practice guideline. The Expert Panel drew on the published literature as well as their own clinical experience to develop evidence- and consensus-based recommendations to provide guidance to cancer care professionals treating patients with gynecologic cancer.

Review of 5-FU resistance mechanisms in colorectal cancer: clinical significance of attenuated on-target effects

The emergence of chemoresistant disease during chemotherapy with 5-Fluorouracil-based (5-FU-based) regimens is an important factor in the mortality of metastatic CRC (mCRC). The causes of 5-FU resistance are multi-factorial, and besides DNA mismatch repair deficiency (MMR-D), there are no widely accepted criteria for determining which CRC patients are not likely to be responsive to 5-FU-based therapy. Thus, there is a need to systematically understand the mechanistic basis for 5-FU treatment failure and an urgent need to develop new approaches for circumventing the major causes of 5-FU resistance. In this manuscript, we review mechanisms of 5-FU resistance with an emphasis on: (1) altered anabolic metabolism limiting the formation of the primary active metabolite Fluorodeoxyuridylate (5-Fluoro-2'-deoxyuridine-5'-O-monophosphate; FdUMP); (2) elevated expression or activity of the primary enzymatic target thymidylate synthase (TS); and (3) dysregulated programmed cell death as important causes of 5-FU resistance. Importantly, these causes of 5-FU resistance can potentially be overcome through the use of next-generation fluoropyrimidine (FP) polymers (e.g., CF10) that display reduced dependence on anabolic metabolism and more potent TS inhibitory activity.