Improved next-generation sequencing pre-capture library yields and sequencing parameters using on-bead PCR

A comparison of DNA sequencing and gene expression profiling to assist tissue of origin diagnosis in cancer of unknown primary

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a syndrome defined by clinical absence of a primary cancer after standardised investigations. Gene expression profiling (GEP) and DNA sequencing have been used to predict primary tissue of origin (TOO) in CUP and find molecularly guided treatments; however, a detailed comparison of the diagnostic yield from these two tests has not been described. Here, we compared the diagnostic utility of RNA and DNA tests in 215 CUP patients (82% received both tests) in a prospective Australian study. Based on retrospective assessment of clinicopathological data, 77% (166/215) of CUPs had insufficient evidence to support TOO diagnosis (clinicopathology unresolved). The remainder had either a latent primary diagnosis (10%) or clinicopathological evidence to support a likely TOO diagnosis (13%) (clinicopathology resolved). We applied a microarray (CUPGuide) or custom NanoString 18-class GEP test to 191 CUPs with an accuracy of 91.5% in known metastatic cancers for high-medium confidence predictions. Classification performance was similar in clinicopathology-resolved CUPs - 80% had high-medium predictions and 94% were concordant with pathology. Notably, only 56% of the clinicopathology-unresolved CUPs had high-medium confidence GEP predictions. Diagnostic DNA features were interrogated in 201 CUP tumours guided by the cancer type specificity of mutations observed across 22 cancer types from the AACR Project GENIE database (77,058 tumours) as well as mutational signatures (e.g. smoking). Among the clinicopathology-unresolved CUPs, mutations and mutational signatures provided additional diagnostic evidence in 31% of cases. GEP classification was useful in only 13% of cases and oncoviral detection in 4%. Among CUPs where genomics informed TOO, lung and biliary cancers were the most frequently identified types, while kidney tumours were another identifiable subset. In conclusion, DNA and RNA profiling supported an unconfirmed TOO diagnosis in one-third of CUPs otherwise unresolved by clinicopathology assessment alone. DNA mutation profiling was the more diagnostically informative assay. © 2022 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

ROS1 rearrangements in non-small cell lung cancer: screening by immunohistochemistry using proportion of cells staining without intensity and excluding cases with MAPK pathway drivers improves test performance

Therapeutically actionable ROS1 rearrangements have been described in 1-3% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Screening for ROS1 rearrangements is recommended to be by immunohistochemistry (IHC), followed by confirmation with fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) or sequencing. However, in practise ROS1 IHC presents difficulties due to conflicting scoring systems, multiple clones and expression in tumours that are wild-type for ROS1. We assessed ROS1 IHC in 285 consecutive cases of NSCLC with non-squamous histology over a nearly 2-year period. IHC was scored with ROS1 clone D4D6 (n=270), clone SP384 (n=275) or both clones (n=260). Results were correlated with ROS1 break-apart FISH (n=67), ALK status (n=194), and sequence data of EGFR (n=178) and other drivers, where possible. ROS1 expression was detected in 161/285 cases (56.5%), including 13/14 ROS1 FISH-positive cases. There was no ROS1 expression in one ROS1 FISH-positive case in which sequencing detected an ALK-EML4 fusion, but not a ROS1 fusion. The other 13 ROS1 FISH-positive cases showed moderate to strong staining with both IHC clones. However, one case with a TPM3-ROS1 fusion would have been scored as negative with SP384 and D4D6 clones by some previous criteria. ROS1 expression was also detected in 58/285 cases (20.4%) that had driver mutations in genes other than ROS1. A sensitivity of 100% for detecting a ROS1 rearrangement by FISH was achieved by omitting intensity from the IHC scoring criteria and expression in >0% cells with D4D6 or in ≥50% cells with SP384. Excluding cases with driver events in any MAPK pathway gene (e.g., in ALK, EGFR, KRAS, BRAF, ERBB2 and MET) substantially reduced the number of cases proceeding to ROS1 FISH. Only 15.9% of MAPK-negative NSCLC would proceed to FISH for an IHC threshold of >0% cells with D4D6, with a specificity of 42.4%. For a threshold of ≥50% cells with SP384, only 18.5% of MAPK-negative cases would proceed to FISH, with a specificity of 31.4%. Based on our data we suggest an algorithm for screening for ROS1 rearrangements in NSCLC in which ROS1 FISH is only performed in cases that have been demonstrated to lack activating mutations in any MAPK pathway gene by comprehensive sequencing and ALK IHC, and show staining at any intensity in ≥50% of cells with clone SP384, or >0% cells with D4D6.

A MXI1-NUTM1 fusion protein with MYC-like activity suggests a novel oncogenic mechanism in a subset of NUTM1-rearranged tumors

Most NUTM1-rearranged neoplasms (NRNs) have fusions between NUTM1 and BRD (bromodomain-containing) family members and are termed NUT carcinomas (NCs) because they show some squamous differentiation. However, some NRNs are associated with fusions between NUTM1 and members of the MAD (MAX dimerization) gene family of MYC antagonists. Here we describe a small round cell malignancy from the gastro-esophageal junction with a previously unreported fusion between NUTM1 and the MAD family member MXI1. In contrast to NCs, the MXI1-NUTM1 tumor did not show squamous differentiation and did not express MYC, TP63 or SOX2, genes known to be targets of BRD-NUTM1 proteins and critical for NC oncogenesis. Transcriptome analysis showed paradoxical enrichment of MYC target genes in the MXI1-NUTM1 tumor despite the lack of MYC expression. When expressed in vitro MXI1-NUTM1 partially phenocopied MYC, enhancing cell proliferation and cooperating with oncogenic HRAS to produce anchorage-independent cell growth. These data provide evidence that MAD family members, which are normally repressors of MYC activity, can be converted into MYC-like mimics by fusion to NUTM1. The pathological features and novel oncogenic mechanism of the MXI1-NUTM1 tumor show that identification of NUTM1 fusion partners can be important for accurate diagnostic classification of some NRN subtypes, and potentially may guide therapeutic options.

RAF1 rearrangements are common in pancreatic acinar cell carcinomas

There is now evidence that gene fusions activating the MAPK pathway are relatively common in pancreatic acinar cell carcinoma with potentially actionable BRAF or RET fusions being found in ~30%. We sought to investigate the incidence of RAF1 fusions in pancreatic malignancies with acinar cell differentiation. FISH testing for RAF1 was undertaken on 30 tumors comprising 25 'pure' acinar cell carcinomas, 2 mixed pancreatic acinar-neuroendocrine carcinomas, 1 mixed acinar cell-low grade neuroendocrine tumor and 2 pancreatoblastomas. RAF1 rearrangements were identified in 5 cases and confirmed by DNA and RNA sequencing to represent oncogenic fusions (GATM-RAF1, GOLGA4-RAF1, PDZRN3-RAF1, HERPUD1-RAF1 and TRIM33-RAF1) and to be mutually exclusive with BRAF and RET fusions, as well as KRAS mutations. Large genome-wide copy number changes were common and included 1q gain and/or 1p loss in all five RAF1 FISH-positive acinar cell carcinomas. RAF1 expression by immunohistochemistry was found in 3 of 5 (60%) of fusion-positive cases and no FISH-negative cases. Phospho-ERK1/2 expression was found in 4 of 5 RAF1-fusion-positive cases. Expression of both RAF1 and phospho-ERK1/2 was heterogeneous and often only detected at the tumor-stroma interface, thus limiting their clinical utility. We conclude that RAF1 gene rearrangements are relatively common in pancreatic acinar cell carcinomas (14.3% to 18.5% of cases) and can be effectively identified by FISH with follow up molecular testing. The combined results of several studies now indicate that BRAF, RET or RAF1 fusions occur in between one third and one-half of these tumors but are extremely rare in other pancreatic malignancies. As these fusions are potentially actionable with currently available therapies, a strong argument can be made to perform FISH or molecular testing on all pancreatic acinar cell carcinomas.

A Malignant Neoplasm From the Jejunum With a MALAT1-GLI1 Fusion and 26-Year Survival History

The transcription factor GLI1 is a critical effector of the sonic hedgehog pathway. Gene fusions that activate GLI1 have recently been reported in several tumor types including gastroblastoma, plexiform fibromyxoma, a subset of pericytomas, and other soft tissue tumors. These tumors arise in a wide variety of anatomical origins and have variable malignant potentials, morphologies, and immunohistochemistry profiles. In this case report, we describe a malignant tumor from the jejunum with a MALAT1-GLI1 gene fusion that expressed a truncated constitutively active GLI1 protein and GLI1 targets that were detectable by immunohistochemistry. The tumor showed high-grade epithelioid and spindle cell morphology, strongly expressed CD56, and focally expressed other neuroendocrine markers and cytokeratins, but not S100 protein or SMA. The tumor recurred multiple times in liver, soft tissue, and lung over the course of 26 years, the longest reported follow-up for a GLI1 fusion-associated tumor. These metastatic tumors were also composed of epithelioid and spindle cells, but showed lower morphological grade than the primary tumor. The metastatic tumors resembled the recently reported "malignant epithelioid neoplasms with GLI1 rearrangements." The tumor also had a relatively high tumor mutation burden for a sarcoma. This case report expands the sites of origin for GLI1 rearranged neoplasms and shows that despite being associated with high-grade morphology, these malignancies can be associated with very long-term survival.