Luisa Toffolatti

DOG1 and CD117 are the antibodies of choice in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumours.

Novelli M, Rossi S, Rodriguez‐Justo M, Taniere P, Seddon B, Toffolatti L, Sartor C, Hogendoorn P C W, Sciot R, Van Glabbeke M, Verweij J, Blay J Y, Hohenberger P, Flanagan A & Dei Tos A P
(2010) Histopathology57, 259–270
DOG1 and CD117 are the antibodies of choice in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumours

Natural history of imatinib-naive GISTs: a retrospective analysis of 929 cases with long-term follow-up and development of a survival nomogram based on mitotic index and size as continuous variables.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) natural history per se has not been extensively investigated yet, with most data being drawn from large studies with a relevant referral bias. Hence, the estimation of prognosis still remains a critical issue. We retrospectively evaluated 929 GISTs resected between 1980 and 2000 in 35 Italian institutions. A total of 526 patients were found to be suitable for refining risk assessment through the development of a survival nomogram. Median follow-up was 126 months. On testing for potential prognostic parameters, age, tumor site, size, and mitotic index proved to be predictors of OS on both univariable and multivariable Cox model analyses, whereas necrosis and cytonuclear atypia were significant on univariable analysis only. The discriminative ability of the model, including the parameters selected after a backward procedure (C=0.72), improved compared with the National Institutes of Health 2002 (C=0.64) and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2007 (C=0.63). On the basis of these data we developed a prognostic nomogram for survival that considers site, size, and mitotic index as continuous variables, providing estimates stratified for patients aged ⩽65 and >65 years. This nomogram is a tool based on survival. It overcomes problems that result from artificial categorization of continuous variables. We believe that in the future this should also be attempted by nomograms based on the risk of relapse.

Molecular and clinicopathologic characterization of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) of small size.

Although Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) affect about 0.0014% of the population, GISTs smaller than 1 cm (microGISTs) are detectable in about 20% to 30% of elderly individuals. This suggests that microGISTs likely represent premalignant precursors that evolve only in a minute fraction of cases toward overt GISTs. We sought histopathologic and molecular explanations for the infrequent clinical progression in small GISTs. To investigate the mechanisms of GIST progression and identify subsets with differential malignant potential, we carried out a thorough characterization of 170 GISTs <2 cm and compared their KIT/PDGFRA status with overt GISTs. The proliferation was lower in microGISTs compared with GISTs from 1 to 2 cm (milliGISTs). In addition, microGISTs were more frequently incidental, gastric, spindle, showed an infiltrative growth pattern, a lower degree of cellularity, and abundant sclerosis. The progression was limited to 1 ileal and 1 rectal milliGISTs. KIT/PDGFRA mutations were detected in 74% of the cases. The overall frequency of KIT/PDGFRA mutation and, particularly, the frequency of KIT exon 11 mutations was significantly lower in small GISTs compared with overt GISTs. Five novel mutations, 3 in KIT (p.Phe506Leu, p.Ser692Leu, p.Glu695Lys) 2 in PDGFRA (p.Ser847X, p.Ser667Pro), plus 4 double mutations were identified. Small GISTs share with overt GIST KIT/PDGFRA mutation. Nevertheless, microGISTs display an overall lower frequency of mutations, particularly canonical KIT mutations, and also carry rare and novel mutations. These molecular features, together with the peculiar pathologic characteristics, suggest that the proliferation of these lesions is likely sustained by weakly pathogenic molecular events, supporting the epidemiologic evidence that microGISTs are self-limiting lesions.

Impact of molecular analysis on the final sarcoma diagnosis: a study on 763 cases collected during a European epidemiological study.

Sarcomas are rare, heterogenous, and often difficult to classify. A large proportion of sarcomas are associated with specific molecular genetic lesions such as translocations, mutations, and amplifications, which are helpful in the diagnosis of individual cases. However, the exact impact of molecular genetics on the final diagnosis of sarcomas is unknown. In this study, all soft tissue and visceral sarcomas arising in patients living in 3 European regions in 2 countries (representing 13 million inhabitants) were collected and reviewed during 2 consecutive years. A molecular analysis was performed for all suspicions of sarcomas with specific genetic lesions [mutations of KIT/PDGFRA in gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), reciprocal translocation, or amplification of MDM2 in atypical lipomatous tumors, well-differentiated liposarcoma-dedifferentiated liposarcoma (ALT/WDLPS-DDLPS)]. To evaluate the impact of molecular tests, a premolecular analysis diagnosis was proposed with 3 categories of certainty: certain, probable, or possible. A molecular analysis was performed in 763/1484 tumors corresponding to 295 cases in which GIST was suspected, 248 sarcomas with a suspicion of translocation, and 220 cases in which ALT/WDLPS-DDLPS was suspected. Molecular analysis was found to be useful (confirms a probable diagnosis) in 11 (4%) GISTs, 62 (26%) suspicions of translocation, and 66 (31%) suspicions of ALT/WDLPS-DDLPS; and necessary (allows a possible diagnosis) in 2 (<1%) GISTs, 31 (12%) suspicions of translocation, and 19 (9%) suspicions of ALT/WDLPS-DDLPS. This study performed in an epidemiological setting demonstrates the significant impact of molecular analysis on the final sarcoma diagnosis and favors such an analysis on any tumor with a suspicion of a specific genomic abnormality and for which the diagnosis is uncertain.

Activity of sunitinib in extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma

BACKGROUND Extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma (EMC) is a rare soft tissue sarcoma, marked by NR4A3 rearrangement. Herein we report on the activity of sunitinib in a series of 10 patients, strengthening what initially observed in two cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS From July 2011, 10 patients with progressive metastatic translocated EMC have been consecutively treated with sunitinib 37.5mg/day, on a named-use basis. In an attempt to interpret the activity of sunitinib in EMC, genotype/phenotype correlations were carried out by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analyses. Moreover, transcriptome, immunohistochemical and biochemical analyses of a limited set of samples were performed focusing on some putative targets of sunitinib. RESULTS Eight of 10 patients are still on therapy. Six patients had a Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) partial response (PR), two were stable, two progressed. Positron emission tomography (PET) was consistent in 6/6 evaluable cases. One patient underwent surgery after sunitinib, with evidence of a pathologic response. At a median follow-up of 8.5 months (range 2-28), no secondary resistance was detected. Median progression free survival (PFS) has not been reached. Interestingly, all responsive cases turned out to express the typical EWSR1-NR4A3 fusion, while refractory cases carried the alternative TAF15-NR4A3 fusion. Among putative sunitinib targets, only RET was expressed and activated in analysed samples. CONCLUSIONS This report confirms the therapeutic activity of sunitinib in EMC. Genotype/phenotype analyses support a correlation between response and EWSR1-NR4A3 fusion. Involvement of RET deserves further investigation.

KIT, PDGFRA, and BRAF mutational spectrum impacts on the natural history of imatinib-naive localized GIST: a population-based study.

The mutation status of KIT or PDGFRA notoriously affects the response of advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) to tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Conversely, it is currently still unclear whether mutation status impinges on the prognosis of localized, untreated GISTs. Hence, at present, this variable is not included in decision making for adjuvant therapy. A series of 451 primary localized GISTs were analyzed for KIT, PDGFRA, and BRAF mutations. Univariable and multivariable analyses and a backward selection procedure were used to assess the impact of mutation status on overall survival and to identify prognostically homogenous groups. Mutation was a significant prognostic indicator of overall survival in naive, localized GISTs (P<0.001): KIT-mutated patients had a worse outcome than PDGFRA-mutated or triple-negative (KIT, PDGFRA, BRAF wild-type) cases. Multivariable Cox regression models allowed us to identify 3 molecular risk groups: group I exhibited the best outcome and included PDGFRA exon 12, BRAF, and KIT exon 13-mutated cases; group II, of intermediate clinical phenotype (HR=3.06), included triple-negative, KIT exon 17, PDGFRA exon 18 D842V, and PDGFRA exon 14-mutated cases; group III displayed the worst outcome (hazard ratio=4.52), and comprised KIT exon 9 and exon 11 and PDGFRA exon 18 mutations apart from D842V. This study highlights the prognostic impact of mutation status on the natural course of GIST and suggests that the molecular prognostic grouping may complement the conventional clinicopathologic risk stratification criteria in decision making for adjuvant therapy.

Concomitant KIT/BRAF and PDGFRA/BRAF mutations are rare events in gastrointestinal stromal tumors

AIM The BRAF mutation is a rare pathogenetic alternative to KIT/PDGFRA mutation in GIST and causes Imatinib resistance. A recent description of KIT and BRAF mutations co-occurring in an untreated GIST has challenged the concept of their being mutually exclusive and may account for ab initio resistance to Imatinib, even in the presence of Imatinib-sensitive KIT mutations. BRAF sequencing is generally limited to KIT/PDGFRA wild-type cases. Hence, the frequency of concomitant mutations may be underestimated. METHODS We screened for KIT (exon 9, 11, 13, 17), PDGFRA (exon 12,14, 18) and BRAF (exon 15) mutations a series of 407 GIST. Additionally, we evaluated the BRAF V600E mutation-specific antibody, VE1, as a surrogate for V600E mutation, on a series of 313 GIST (24 on whole sections, 288 cases on tissue array), including 6 cases molecularly ascertained to carry the BRAF V600E mutation. RESULTS No concomitant KIT/BRAF or PDGFRA/BRAF mutations were detected. BRAF mutation was detected only in one case, wild-type for KIT/PDGFRA. All the 6 BRAF-mutant cases stained positive with the VE1 antibody. A weak VE1 expression was observed in 14/287 (4.9%) BRAF wild-type cases, as observed also in 2/6 BRAF-mutant cases. Overall in our series, sensitivity and specificity of the VE1 antobody were 100% and 95.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION The concomitance of BRAF mutation with either KIT or PDGFRA mutation is rare in GIST. In these tumors, moderate/strong VE1 immunoreactivity is a valuable surrogate for molecular analysis. Instead, genotyping is warranted in the presence of weak VE1 staining.

Steroidal aromatase inhibitors in elderly patients

The choice of treatment for elderly breast cancer patients needs particular care because the presence of physiological functional impairments can modify the drug bioavailability in an unpredictable manner. Hormonal treatment remains one of the choices and, although tamoxifen has proved to be effective in any setting, the use of selective aromatase inhibitors is arousing. Depending on their chemical structure, aromatase inhibitors are either steroidal (such as exemestane and formestane) or non-steroidal (such as letrozole, vorozole and anastrozole). Formestane has been studied in elderly patients with breast cancer and has been found to induce an overall response rate of 51% (95% CI, 35-67%). The drug suppresses estradiol (E2) levels, and changes in other hormones (FSH, LH and SHBG) are observed, but with poor clinical significance, thus confirming its selectivity and potency. Formestane has also been demonstrated to be as effective as tamoxifen. Exemestane and non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors appear to be very promising drugs.

Efficacy of Treatment with Irinotecan and Oxaliplatin Combination in FU-Resistant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients

Objectives: As single agents, irinotecan and oxaliplatin are active in colorectal cancer after fluorouracil (FU)-containing regimen failure. Their synergistic activity and non-overlapping toxicity profile are well documented, but more data are needed to explore their exact sequence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity and tolerability of irinotecan followed by oxaliplatin in patients with FU-resistant colorectal cancer. Methods: FU resistance was defined as disease progression during or within 6 months of discontinuing first-line or adjuvant FU/leucovorin chemotherapy. The study treatment consisted of irinotecan 150 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 followed by oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks. In order to improve the safety profile, we changed the schedule during the study to irinotecan 300 mg/m2 on day 1 and oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 on day 2 every 3 weeks. Results: Of 54 patients treated, the 45 patients with measurable disease were assessed in the efficacy analysis, whereas all patients receiving at least one cycle were evaluated in the safety analysis. Of the patients assessed for efficacy analysis, 19 cases received the first schedule and 26 patients received the second schedule. Twenty-two patients (49%) responded, 10 of the first schedule and 12 of the second schedule group. Stable disease was observed in 35% of all patients. The median response duration was 6.5 months (range 3–10), the median time to progression was 8 months (range 6–10), and the overall survival was 15 months (10–26+). The NCI-CTC grade 3 side effects documented in all of the treated patients were: nausea/vomiting (11%), diarrhea (18%), and neutropenia (7%); grade 4 diarrhea was observed in 2% of patients. Conclusion: The combination of irinotecan followed by oxaliplatin combination is well tolerated and highly active in FU-resistant metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

The luteinising hormone-releasing hormone analogue triptorelin with or without the aromatase inhibitor formestane in premenopausal breast cancer: effects on bone metabolism markers.

BACKGROUND the combination of a luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) analogue and an aromatase inhibitor (AI) induces greater oestrogen suppression than the analogue alone in premenopausal breast cancer. However, very few data on the biological effects of such a combination are currently available. AIM OF THE STUDY the short-term effects of treatment with the LH-RH analogue triptorelin alone or in association with the AI formestane on bone metabolism were investigated in premenopausal breast cancer. Circulating levels of the bone formation markers carboxy-terminal and amino-terminal propeptides of type I procollagen (PICP and PINP) and the bone resorption marker cross-linked carboxy-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (ICTP) were assessed. In addition, serum levels of insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I, IGF binding protein (IGFBP)-3 and interleukin 6 (IL-6) were evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS twenty-one patients with advanced breast cancer were randomly given triptorelin monthly alone (n=10, arm A) or in combination with formestane fortnightly (n=11, arm B). Blood samples were collected over a 3-month period. RESULTS serum PICP and PINP levels increased significantly over time (P=0.0065 and 0.0197 in arm A and B, respectively); no change in ICTP levels was observed. A rise in IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels was seen in each treatment group, but only the increase in IGF-I was significant (P=0.0138, always). The on-treatment levels of the bone turnover markers and IGF-system components were inversely correlated with serum oestrogens. Neither treatment modalities significantly affected serum IL-6 levels over time. No difference in the behaviour of any of the assessed biomarkers was observed between patients with or without skeletal metastases. CONCLUSION it is worth noting that complete oestrogen depletion, at least in our case series, seems to increase only osteoblastic activity markers. The observed modifications appear to be related to oestrogen depletion per se rather than the degree of oestrogen suppression or the different therapeutic regimen administered.