AIP and MEN1 mutations and AIP immunohistochemistry in pituitary adenomas in a tertiary referral center

The clinical and therapeutic profiles of prolactinomas associated with germline pathogenic variants in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) gene

Introduction

Prolactinomas are the most frequent type of pituitary adenoma encountered in clinical practice. Dopamine agonists (DA) like cabergoline typically provide sign/ symptom control, normalize prolactin levels and decrease tumor size in most patients. DA-resistant prolactinomas are infrequent and can occur in association with some genetic causes like MEN1 and pathogenic germline variants in the AIP gene (AIPvar).

Methods

We compared the clinical, radiological, and therapeutic characteristics of AIPvar-related prolactinomas (n=13) with unselected hospital-treated prolactinomas ("unselected", n=41) and genetically-negative, DA-resistant prolactinomas (DA-resistant, n=39).

Results

AIPvar-related prolactinomas occurred at a significantly younger age than the unselected or DA-resistant prolactinomas (p<0.01). Males were more common in the AIPvar (75.0%) and DA- resistant (49.7%) versus unselected prolactinomas (9.8%; p<0.001). AIPvar prolactinomas exhibited significantly more frequent invasion than the other groups (p<0.001) and exhibited a trend to larger tumor diameter. The DA-resistant group had significantly higher prolactin levels at diagnosis than the AIPvar group (p<0.001). Maximum DA doses were significantly higher in the AIPvar and DA-resistant groups versus unselected. DA-induced macroadenoma shrinkage (>50%) occurred in 58.3% in the AIPvar group versus 4.2% in the DA-resistant group (p<0.01). Surgery was more frequent in the AIPvar and DA- resistant groups (43.8% and 61.5%, respectively) versus unselected (19.5%: p<0.01). Radiotherapy was used only in AIPvar (18.8%) and DA-resistant (25.6%) groups.

Discussion

AIPvar confer an aggressive phenotype in prolactinomas, with invasive tumors occurring at a younger age. These characteristics can help differentiate rare AIPvar related prolactinomas from DA-resistant, genetically-negative tumors.

The Spectrum of Familial Pituitary Neuroendocrine Tumors

Hereditary pituitary tumorigenesis is seen in a relatively small proportion (around 5%) of patients with pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs). The aim of the current review is to describe the main clinical and molecular features of such pituitary tumors associated with hereditary or familial characteristics, many of which have now been genetically identified. The genetic patterns of inheritance are classified into isolated familial PitNETs and the syndromic tumors. In general, the established genetic causes of familial tumorigenesis tend to present at a younger age, often pursue a more aggressive course, and are more frequently associated with growth hormone hypersecretion compared to sporadic tumors. The mostly studied molecular pathways implicated are the protein kinase A and phosphatidyl-inositol pathways, which are in the main related to mutations in the syndromes of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA), Carney complex syndrome, and X-linked acrogigantism. Another well-documented mechanism consists of the regulation of p27 or p21 proteins, with further acceleration of the pituitary cell cycle through the check points G1/S and M/G1, mostly documented in multiple endocrine neoplasia type 4. In conclusion, PitNETs may occur in relation to well-established familial germline mutations which may determine the clinical phenotype and the response to treatment, and may require family screening.

Molecular targets in acromegaly

Molecular therapeutic targets in growth hormone (GH)-secreting adenomas range from well-characterized surface receptors that recognize approved drugs, to surface and intracellular markers that are potential candidates for new drug development. Currently available medical therapies for patients with acromegaly bind to somatostatin receptors, GH receptor, or dopamine receptors, and lead to attainment of disease control in most patients. The degree of control is variable: however, correlates with both disease aggressiveness and tumor factors that predict treatment response including somatostatin receptor subtype expression, granulation pattern, kinases and their receptors, and other markers of proliferation. A better understanding of the mechanisms underlying these molecular markers and their relationship to outcomes holds promise for expanding treatment options as well as a more personalized approach to treating patients with acromegaly.

Real-world experience with pasireotide-LAR in resistant acromegaly: a single center 1-year observation

CONTEXT

Pasireotide-LAR, a second-generation somatostatin receptor ligand (SRL), is recommended for patients with acromegaly as second-line treatment. Its efficacy and safety were assessed in clinical trials; however, the real-world evidence is still scarce.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of 1-year treatment with pasireotide-LAR on disease control and glucose metabolism in acromegaly patients resistant to first-generation SRLs.

DESIGN

A single-center prospective study.

METHODS

Twenty-eight patients with active acromegaly or acrogigantism on first-generation SRLs following ineffective pituitary surgery were switched to treatment with pasireotide-LAR 40 or 60 mg i.m. every 28 days. To assess the efficacy of the treatment GH and IGF-1 levels were measured every 3 months. Safety of treatment was carefully evaluated, especially its impact on glucose metabolism.

RESULTS

Complete biochemical control (GH ≤ 1 ng/mL and IGF-1 ≤ 1 × ULN) was achieved in 26.9% of patients and partial + complete response (GH ≤ 2.5 ng/mL and IGF-1 ≤ 1.3 × ULN) in 50.0% of patients. Mean GH level decrease was the largest within first 6 months (P = 0.0001) and mean IGF-1 level decreased rapidly within the first 3 months (P < 0.0001) and they remained reduced during the study. Blood glucose and HbA1c levels increased significantly within 3 months (P = 0.0001) and stayed on stable level thereafter. Otherwise, the treatment was well tolerated and clinical improvement was noticed in majority of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-life study confirmed good effectiveness of pasireotide-LAR in patients resistant to first-generation SRLs. Pasireotide-LAR was overall safe and well tolerated, however significant glucose metabolism worsening was noted.

Aggressive prolactinoma (Review)

Aggressive prolactinoma (APRL) is a subgroup of aggressive pituitary tumors (accounting for 10% of all hypophyseal neoplasia) which are defined by: invasion based on radiological and/or histological features, a higher proliferation profile when compared to typical adenomas and rapidly developing resistance to standard medication/protocols in addition to an increased risk of early recurrence. This is a narrative review focusing on APRL in terms of both presentation and management. Upon admission, the suggestive features may include increased serum prolactin with a large tumor diameter (mainly >4 cm), male sex, early age at diagnosis (<20 years), and genetic predisposition [multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1), aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP), succinate dehydrogenase (SDHx) gene mutations]. Potential prognostic factors are indicated by assessment of E-cadherin, matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-9, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) status. Furthermore, during management, APRL may be associated with dopamine agonist (DA) resistance (described in 10-20% of all prolactinomas), post-hypophysectomy relapse, mitotic count >2, Ki-67 proliferation index ≥3%, the need for radiotherapy, lack of response in terms of controlling prolactin levels and tumor growth despite multimodal therapy. However, none of these as an isolated element serves as a surrogate of APRL diagnosis. A fourth-line therapy is necessary with temozolomide, an oral alkylating chemotherapeutic agent, that may induce tumor reduction and serum prolactin reduction in 75% of cases but only 8% have a normalization of prolactin levels. Controversies surrounding the duration of therapy still exist; also regarding the fifth-line therapy, post-temozolomide intervention. Recent data suggest alternatives such as somatostatin analogues (pasireotide), checkpoint inhibitors (ipilimumab, nivolumab), tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (lapatinib), and mTOR inhibitors (everolimus). APRL represents a complex condition that is still challenging, and multimodal therapy is essential.

Predictive and prognostic significance of tumour subtype, SSTR1-5 and e-cadherin expression in a well-defined cohort of patients with acromegaly

In somatotroph pituitary tumours, somatostatin analogue (SSA) therapy outcomes vary throughout the studies. We performed an analysis of cohort of patients with acromegaly from the Czech registry to identify new prognostic and predictive factors. Clinical data of patients were collected, and complex immunohistochemical assessment of tumour samples was performed (SSTR1‐5, dopamine D2 receptor, E‐cadherin, AIP). The study included 110 patients. In 31, SSA treatment outcome was evaluated. Sparsely granulated tumours (SGST) differed from the other subtypes in expression of SSTR2A, SSTR3, SSTR5 and E‐cadherin and occurred more often in young. No other clinical differences were observed. Trouillas grading system showed association with age, tumour size and SSTR2A expression. Factors significantly associated with SSA treatment outcome included age, IGF1 levels, tumour size and expression of E‐cadherin and SSTR2A. In the group of SGST, poor SSA response was observed in younger patients with larger tumours, lower levels of SSTR2A and higher Ki67. We observed no relationship with expression of other proteins including AIP. No predictive value of E‐cadherin was observed when tumour subtype was considered. Multiple additional factors apart from SSTR2A expression can predict treatment outcome in patients with acromegaly.

miR-34a is upregulated in AIP-mutated somatotropinomas and promotes octreotide resistance

Pituitary adenomas (PAs) are intracranial tumors associated with significant morbidity due to hormonal dysregulation, mass effects and have a heavy treatment burden. Growth hormone (GH)-secreting PAs (somatotropinomas) cause acromegaly-gigantism. Genetic forms of somatotropinomas due to germline AIP mutations (AIPmut+) have an early onset and are aggressive and resistant to treatment with somatostatin analogs (SSAs), including octreotide. The molecular underpinnings of these clinical features remain unclear. We investigated the role of miRNA dysregulation in AIPmut+ vs AIPmut- PA samples by array analysis. miR-34a and miR-145 were highly expressed in AIPmut+ vs AIPmut- somatotropinomas. Ectopic expression of AIPmut (p.R271W) in Aip^-/- mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) upregulated miR-34a and miR-145, establishing a causal link between AIPmut and miRNA expression. In PA cells (GH3), miR-34a overexpression promoted proliferation, clonogenicity, migration and suppressed apoptosis, whereas miR-145 moderately affected proliferation and apoptosis. Moreover, high miR-34a expression increased intracellular cAMP, a critical mitogenic factor in PAs. Crucially, high miR-34a expression significantly blunted octreotide-mediated GH inhibition and antiproliferative effects. miR-34a directly targets Gnai2 encoding Gαi2, a G protein subunit inhibiting cAMP production. Accordingly, Gαi2 levels were significantly lower in AIPmut+ vs AIPmut- PA. Taken together, somatotropinomas with AIP mutations overexpress miR-34a, which in turn downregulates Gαi2 expression, increases cAMP concentration and ultimately promotes cell growth. Upregulation of miR-34a also impairs the hormonal and antiproliferative response of PA cells to octreotide. Thus, miR-34a is a novel downstream target of mutant AIP that promotes a cellular phenotype mirroring the aggressive clinical features of AIPmut+ acromegaly.

Differentiated thyroid carcinoma in sporadic and familial presentations of acromegaly: A case series

BACKGROUND

In acromegaly, chronic growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) exacerbate comorbidities in multiple organs. Differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC) has been reported as being a comorbid condition in acromegaly. Acromegaly is usuallysporadic, but 5% of cases may be genetic. The most frequent inheritable form of acromegaly is related to germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) gene. Epidemiological data on the relationship between active acromegaly, its familial forms and DTC are sparse. We present the investigation of a FIPA family (familial isolated pituitary adenoma) with homogeneous acromegaly and 6 sporadic acromegaly patients with DTC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A study of 59 acromegaly patients assessed thyroid nodules on ultrasound and fine-needle aspiration biopsy following the ATA 2015 criteria. We diagnosed 7 differentiated thyroid carcinomas. Resected thyroid carcinoma tissues were stained using an anti-AIP antibody. Analysis of germline and tumor-derived DNA for variants in the AIP and MEN1 genes were performed in the FIPA kindred.

RESULTS

We describe one FIPA patient and 6 sporadic acromegaly cases with DTC. The FIPA family (AIP mutation negative) consisted of two sisters, one of whom had a DTC with intermediate risk and incomplete structural response to therapy. In our study, DTC in sporadic acromegaly had a low recurrence rate (6/6), and excellent response to therapy (6/6). Immunohistochemistry for AIP showed similar or increased staining intensity in DTC versus normal thyroid tissue.

CONCLUSION

In our cohort of sporadic and familial forms of acromegaly with DTC, AIP did not appear to influence thyroid cancer progression.

Significant Benefits of AIP Testing and Clinical Screening in Familial Isolated and Young-onset Pituitary Tumors

CONTEXT

Germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene are responsible for a subset of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) cases and sporadic pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs).

OBJECTIVE

To compare prospectively diagnosed AIP mutation-positive (AIPmut) PitNET patients with clinically presenting patients and to compare the clinical characteristics of AIPmut and AIPneg PitNET patients.

DESIGN

12-year prospective, observational study.

PARTICIPANTS & SETTING

We studied probands and family members of FIPA kindreds and sporadic patients with disease onset ≤18 years or macroadenomas with onset ≤30 years (n = 1477). This was a collaborative study conducted at referral centers for pituitary diseases.

INTERVENTIONS & OUTCOME

AIP testing and clinical screening for pituitary disease. Comparison of characteristics of prospectively diagnosed (n = 22) vs clinically presenting AIPmut PitNET patients (n = 145), and AIPmut (n = 167) vs AIPneg PitNET patients (n = 1310).

RESULTS

Prospectively diagnosed AIPmut PitNET patients had smaller lesions with less suprasellar extension or cavernous sinus invasion and required fewer treatments with fewer operations and no radiotherapy compared with clinically presenting cases; there were fewer cases with active disease and hypopituitarism at last follow-up. When comparing AIPmut and AIPneg cases, AIPmut patients were more often males, younger, more often had GH excess, pituitary apoplexy, suprasellar extension, and more patients required multimodal therapy, including radiotherapy. AIPmut patients (n = 136) with GH excess were taller than AIPneg counterparts (n = 650).

CONCLUSIONS

Prospectively diagnosed AIPmut patients show better outcomes than clinically presenting cases, demonstrating the benefits of genetic and clinical screening. AIP-related pituitary disease has a wide spectrum ranging from aggressively growing lesions to stable or indolent disease course.

The Genetics of Pituitary Adenomas

The genetic landscape of pituitary adenomas (PAs) is diverse and many of the identified cases remain of unclear pathogenetic mechanism. Germline genetic defects account for a small percentage of all patients and may present in the context of relevant family history. Defects in AIP (mutated in Familial Isolated Pituitary Adenoma syndrome or FIPA), MEN1 (coding for menin, mutated in Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia type 1 or MEN 1), PRKAR1A (mutated in Carney complex), GPR101 (involved in X-Linked Acrogigantism or X-LAG), and SDHx (mutated in the so called "3 P association" of PAs with pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas or 3PAs) account for the most common familial syndromes associated with PAs. Tumor genetic defects in USP8, GNAS, USP48 and BRAF are some of the commonly encountered tissue-specific changes and may explain a larger percentage of the developed tumors. Somatic (at the tumor level) genomic changes, copy number variations (CNVs), epigenetic modifications, and differential expression of miRNAs, add to the variable genetic background of PAs.

Genetics of Growth Disorders-Which Patients Require Genetic Testing?

The second 360° European Meeting on Growth Hormone Disorders, held in Barcelona, Spain, in June 2017, included a session entitled Pragmatism vs. Curiosity in Genetic Diagnosis of Growth Disorders, which examined current concepts of genetics and growth in the clinical setting, in terms of both growth failure and overgrowth. For patients with short stature, multiple genes have been identified that result in GH deficiency, which may be isolated or associated with additional pituitary hormone deficiencies, or in growth hormone resistance, primary insulin-like growth factor (IGF) acid-labile subunit deficiency, IGF-I deficiency, IGF-II deficiency, IGF-I resistance, and primary PAPP-A2 deficiency. While genetic causes of short stature were previously thought to primarily be associated with the GH-IGF-I axis, it is now established that multiple genetic anomalies not associated with the GH-IGF-I axis can result in short stature. A number of genetic anomalies have also been shown to be associated with overgrowth, some of which involve the GH-IGF-I axis. In patients with overgrowth in combination with an intellectual disability, two predominant gene families, the epigenetic regulator genes, and PI3K/AKT pathway genes, have now been identified. Specific processes should be followed for decisions on which patients require genetic testing and which genes should be examined for anomalies. The decision to carry out genetic testing should be directed by the clinical process, not merely for research purposes. The intention of genetic testing should be to direct the clinical options for management of the growth disorder.

Clinical Relevance of Genetic Analysis in Patients With Pituitary Adenomas: A Systematic Review

Pituitary adenomas (PA) are amongst the most prevalent intracranial tumors, causing complications by hormonal overproduction or deficiency and tumor mass effects, with 95% of cases occurring sporadically. Associated germline mutations (AIP, MEN1, CDKN1B, PRKAR1A, SDHx) and Xq26.3 microduplications are increasingly identified, but the clinical consequences in sporadic PA remain unclear. This systematic review evaluates predictors of a genetic cause of sporadic PA and the consequences for treatment outcome. We undertook a sensitive MEDLINE/Pubmed, EMBASE, and Web of Science search with critical appraisal of identified studies. Thirty-seven studies on predictors of mutations and 10 studies on the influence on treatment outcome were included. AIP and MEN1 mutations were associated with young age of PA diagnosis. AIP mutations were also associated with gigantism and macroadenomas at time of diagnosis. Xq26.3 microduplications were associated with PA below the age of five. AIP and MEN1 mutation analysis is therefore recommended in young patients (≤30 years). AIP mutation analysis is specifically recommended for patients with PA induced gigantism and macroadenoma. Screening for Xq26.3 microduplications is advisable in children below the age of five with increased growth velocity due to PA. There is no evidence supporting mutation analysis of other genes in sporadic PA. MEN1 mutation related prolactinoma respond well to dopamine agonists while AIP mutation associated somatotroph and lactotroph adenoma are frequently resistant to medical treatment. In patients harboring an Xq26.3 microduplication treatment is challenging, although outcome is not different from other patients with PA induced gigantism. Effective use of genetic analysis may lead to early disease identification, while knowledge of the impact of germline mutations on susceptibility to various treatment modalities helps to determine therapeutic strategies, possibly lowering disease morbidity.