DNA Mismatch Repair–deficient Rectal Cancer Is Frequently Associated With Lynch Syndrome and With Poor Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy

Lama F Farchoukh, J. Celebrezze, D. Medich, Kellie E. Cunningham, J. Holder-Murray, M. Holtzman, Kenneth Lee, H. Choudry, R. Pai
{"title":"DNA Mismatch Repair–deficient Rectal Cancer Is Frequently Associated With Lynch Syndrome and With Poor Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy","authors":"Lama F Farchoukh, J. Celebrezze, D. Medich, Kellie E. Cunningham, J. Holder-Murray, M. Holtzman, Kenneth Lee, H. Choudry, R. Pai","doi":"10.1097/PAS.0000000000001918","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We evaluated 368 consecutively resected rectal cancers with neoadjuvant therapy for DNA mismatch repair (MMR) protein status, tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy, histopathologic features, and patient survival. Nine (2.4%) rectal cancers were mismatch repair–deficient (MMRD): 8 (89%) Lynch syndrome–associated tumors and 1 (11%) sporadic MLH1-deficient tumor. Of the 9 MMRD rectal cancers, 89% (8/9) had a tumor regression score 3 (poor response) compared with 23% (81/359) of MMR proficient rectal cancers (P<0.001). Patients with MMRD rectal cancer less often had downstaging after neoadjuvant therapy compared with patients with MMR proficient rectal cancer (11% vs. 57%, P=0.007). In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, MMRD in rectal cancer was associated with a 25.11-fold increased risk of poor response to neoadjuvant therapy (tumor regression score 3) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.08-44.63, P=0.003). In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, the only variables significantly associated with disease-free survival were pathologic stage III disease (hazard ratio [HR]=2.46, 95% CI: 1.54-3.93, P<0.001), College of American Pathologists (CAP) tumor regression score 2 to 3 (HR=3.44, 95% CI: 1.76-6.73, P<0.001), and positive margins (HR=2.86, 95% CI: 1.56-5.25, P=0.001). In conclusion, we demonstrated that MMRD in rectal cancer is an independent predictor of poor response to neoadjuvant therapy and infrequently results in pathologic downstaging following neoadjuvant therapy. We also confirmed that MMRD in rectal cancer is strongly associated with a diagnosis of Lynch syndrome. Our results suggest that MMR status may help to provide a more patient-centered approach when selecting neoadjuvant treatment regimens and may help predict tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy.","PeriodicalId":275221,"journal":{"name":"The American Journal of Surgical Pathology","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Journal of Surgical Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000001918","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

We evaluated 368 consecutively resected rectal cancers with neoadjuvant therapy for DNA mismatch repair (MMR) protein status, tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy, histopathologic features, and patient survival. Nine (2.4%) rectal cancers were mismatch repair–deficient (MMRD): 8 (89%) Lynch syndrome–associated tumors and 1 (11%) sporadic MLH1-deficient tumor. Of the 9 MMRD rectal cancers, 89% (8/9) had a tumor regression score 3 (poor response) compared with 23% (81/359) of MMR proficient rectal cancers (P<0.001). Patients with MMRD rectal cancer less often had downstaging after neoadjuvant therapy compared with patients with MMR proficient rectal cancer (11% vs. 57%, P=0.007). In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, MMRD in rectal cancer was associated with a 25.11-fold increased risk of poor response to neoadjuvant therapy (tumor regression score 3) (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.08-44.63, P=0.003). In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, the only variables significantly associated with disease-free survival were pathologic stage III disease (hazard ratio [HR]=2.46, 95% CI: 1.54-3.93, P<0.001), College of American Pathologists (CAP) tumor regression score 2 to 3 (HR=3.44, 95% CI: 1.76-6.73, P<0.001), and positive margins (HR=2.86, 95% CI: 1.56-5.25, P=0.001). In conclusion, we demonstrated that MMRD in rectal cancer is an independent predictor of poor response to neoadjuvant therapy and infrequently results in pathologic downstaging following neoadjuvant therapy. We also confirmed that MMRD in rectal cancer is strongly associated with a diagnosis of Lynch syndrome. Our results suggest that MMR status may help to provide a more patient-centered approach when selecting neoadjuvant treatment regimens and may help predict tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
DNA错配修复缺陷直肠癌常与Lynch综合征相关,且对新辅助治疗反应较差
我们评估了368例经新辅助治疗的连续切除直肠癌的DNA错配修复(MMR)蛋白状态、肿瘤对新辅助治疗的反应、组织病理学特征和患者生存率。9例(2.4%)直肠癌为错配修复缺陷(MMRD): Lynch综合征相关肿瘤8例(89%),散发性mlh1缺陷肿瘤1例(11%)。在9例MMRD直肠癌中,89%(8/9)的肿瘤消退评分为3分(不良反应),而MMR熟练直肠癌的这一比例为23% (81/359)(P<0.001)。与MMR熟练的直肠癌患者相比,MMRD直肠癌患者在新辅助治疗后降低分期的情况较少(11%比57%,P=0.007)。在多变量logistic回归分析中,直肠癌的MMRD与新辅助治疗不良反应的风险增加25.11倍相关(肿瘤回归评分3)(95%置信区间[CI]: 3.08-44.63, P=0.003)。在多变量Cox回归分析中,与无病生存显著相关的变量只有病理性III期疾病(风险比[HR]=2.46, 95% CI: 1.54-3.93, P<0.001)、美国病理学会(CAP)肿瘤回归评分2 -3 (HR=3.44, 95% CI: 1.76-6.73, P<0.001)和阳性边缘(HR=2.86, 95% CI: 1.56-5.25, P=0.001)。总之,我们证明直肠癌的MMRD是对新辅助治疗反应不良的独立预测因子,并且很少导致新辅助治疗后的病理分期降低。我们还证实,直肠癌的MMRD与Lynch综合征的诊断密切相关。我们的研究结果表明,MMR状态可能有助于在选择新辅助治疗方案时提供更多以患者为中心的方法,并可能有助于预测肿瘤对新辅助治疗的反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Superficial CD34-Positive Fibroblastic Tumor Localized Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma (LMPeM) in Women: A Clinicopathologic Study of 18 Cases Gastroesophageal Glomus Tumors “Malignant Mesenchymoma” Revisited Clinicopathologic and Immunohistochemical Characterization of Sarcomatoid Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1