Overview of a comparative analysis of microsatellite instability and standard mismatch repair protein-deficiency tests in a large cancer cohort.

Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-04 DOI:10.1007/s00292-024-01397-4
András Kiss, Maja L Nádorvári, Janina Kulka, Tamás Barbai, Erzsébet Rásó, István Kenessey, Gábor Lotz, József Tímár
{"title":"Overview of a comparative analysis of microsatellite instability and standard mismatch repair protein-deficiency tests in a large cancer cohort.","authors":"András Kiss, Maja L Nádorvári, Janina Kulka, Tamás Barbai, Erzsébet Rásó, István Kenessey, Gábor Lotz, József Tímár","doi":"10.1007/s00292-024-01397-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) with microsatellite instability (MSI) is frequent in cancer, particularly in gastrointestinal and endometrial malignancies. The increased tumor mutational burden renders dMMR/MSI tumors suitable targets for immune checkpoint inhibitors-provided the regulatory genetic defect can be detected. dMMR and MSI are considered equally effective predictors of the efficacy of ICIs; however, while dMMR testing is based on detection of missing MMR proteins in immunohistochemistry (IHC), MSI polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing focuses on the consequences of dMMR at the genomic level.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was carried out in a large cancer cohort (n = 1306). dMMR was tested by four IHC reactions (MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, MSH6), and MSI was assessed by pentaplex PCR (BAT-25, BAT-26, MONO-27, NR-21, NR-24) in 703 cases. In 64 cases (5%), technical failures (mostly poor preanalytical fixation) prevented dMMR/MSI testing. Tumors were colorectal (CRC; n: 978), cancer of unknown primary (n: 126), endometrial (n: 39), pancreatic (n: 36), and gastric (n: 33). dMMR was diagnosed as classical, nonclassical, or unusual, depending on IHC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The MSI-high incidence was 12.1% overall and similar in the CRC subcohort. Interestingly, the dMMR incidence was higher in the total cohort (20.3%) and similar in the CRC subcohort. The incidences of proficient MMR (pMMR) and microsatellite stability (MSS) were similar in the total cohort and in the CRC subcohort. A 19.3% discrepancy was found between MMR IHC and MSI PCR for the entire cohort, independent of tumor types. In the case of pMMR, the discrepancy rate for MSS/MSI-low was low (2.0%; entire cohort and the CRC subcohort). However, the discrepancy between dMMR and MSI-high was high within the entire cohort (60.9%) and in the CRC (58.6%) and non-CRC subcohorts (68%). This high discrepancy was not due to tumors with a low T/N ratio. Regarding dMMR phenotypes, classical dMMR had a ~ 60% correlation with MSI-high status, while non-classical dMMR had a much lower and unusual dMMR a very low (< 10%) correlation with MSI-high in the entire cohort and in the CRC subcohort. Overall, the MSI PCR sensitivity for MMR IHC status was very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>dMMR and MSI-high likely result in an increased rate of structurally altered proteins, i.e., neoantigens, and the efficacy of cancer immunotherapies is thus expected to be higher. We compared MMR IHC to MSI PCR in a large cohort of cancer patients to study how PCR test results correlate to MMR IHC. Our data imply that preanalytical factors strongly influence the results of MMR IHC and MSI PCR and may question the current dogma that dMMR phenotype and genetic MSI status are equivalent predictive markers for immunotherapies.</p>","PeriodicalId":74402,"journal":{"name":"Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany)","volume":" ","pages":"63-66"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00292-024-01397-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) with microsatellite instability (MSI) is frequent in cancer, particularly in gastrointestinal and endometrial malignancies. The increased tumor mutational burden renders dMMR/MSI tumors suitable targets for immune checkpoint inhibitors-provided the regulatory genetic defect can be detected. dMMR and MSI are considered equally effective predictors of the efficacy of ICIs; however, while dMMR testing is based on detection of missing MMR proteins in immunohistochemistry (IHC), MSI polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing focuses on the consequences of dMMR at the genomic level.

Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis was carried out in a large cancer cohort (n = 1306). dMMR was tested by four IHC reactions (MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, MSH6), and MSI was assessed by pentaplex PCR (BAT-25, BAT-26, MONO-27, NR-21, NR-24) in 703 cases. In 64 cases (5%), technical failures (mostly poor preanalytical fixation) prevented dMMR/MSI testing. Tumors were colorectal (CRC; n: 978), cancer of unknown primary (n: 126), endometrial (n: 39), pancreatic (n: 36), and gastric (n: 33). dMMR was diagnosed as classical, nonclassical, or unusual, depending on IHC.

Results: The MSI-high incidence was 12.1% overall and similar in the CRC subcohort. Interestingly, the dMMR incidence was higher in the total cohort (20.3%) and similar in the CRC subcohort. The incidences of proficient MMR (pMMR) and microsatellite stability (MSS) were similar in the total cohort and in the CRC subcohort. A 19.3% discrepancy was found between MMR IHC and MSI PCR for the entire cohort, independent of tumor types. In the case of pMMR, the discrepancy rate for MSS/MSI-low was low (2.0%; entire cohort and the CRC subcohort). However, the discrepancy between dMMR and MSI-high was high within the entire cohort (60.9%) and in the CRC (58.6%) and non-CRC subcohorts (68%). This high discrepancy was not due to tumors with a low T/N ratio. Regarding dMMR phenotypes, classical dMMR had a ~ 60% correlation with MSI-high status, while non-classical dMMR had a much lower and unusual dMMR a very low (< 10%) correlation with MSI-high in the entire cohort and in the CRC subcohort. Overall, the MSI PCR sensitivity for MMR IHC status was very low.

Conclusion: dMMR and MSI-high likely result in an increased rate of structurally altered proteins, i.e., neoantigens, and the efficacy of cancer immunotherapies is thus expected to be higher. We compared MMR IHC to MSI PCR in a large cohort of cancer patients to study how PCR test results correlate to MMR IHC. Our data imply that preanalytical factors strongly influence the results of MMR IHC and MSI PCR and may question the current dogma that dMMR phenotype and genetic MSI status are equivalent predictive markers for immunotherapies.

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
微卫星不稳定性和标准错配修复蛋白缺乏试验在大型癌症队列中的比较分析综述。
背景:错配修复缺陷(dMMR)伴微卫星不稳定性(MSI)在癌症中很常见,特别是在胃肠道和子宫内膜恶性肿瘤中。肿瘤突变负担的增加使得dMMR/MSI肿瘤成为免疫检查点抑制剂的合适靶点——前提是可以检测到调节遗传缺陷。dMMR和MSI被认为是同样有效的ici疗效预测指标;然而,dMMR检测是基于免疫组织化学(IHC)中缺失MMR蛋白的检测,而MSI聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测侧重于dMMR在基因组水平上的后果。材料和方法:在一个大型癌症队列中进行回顾性分析(n = 1306)。703例患者采用4种免疫组化反应(MLH1、PMS2、MSH2、MSH6)检测dMMR,采用五联PCR (BAT-25、BAT-26、MONO-27、NR-21、NR-24)检测MSI。在64例(5%)中,技术故障(主要是分析前固定不良)阻止了dMMR/MSI检测。肿瘤为结直肠(CRC;N: 978),未知原发癌(N: 126),子宫内膜癌(N: 39),胰腺癌(N: 36)和胃癌(N: 33)。dMMR诊断为典型、非典型或不寻常,取决于免疫组化。结果:msi高发生率总体为12.1%,在CRC亚队列中相似。有趣的是,dMMR发病率在整个队列中较高(20.3%),在CRC亚队列中相似。在整个队列和CRC亚队列中,熟练MMR (pMMR)和微卫星稳定性(MSS)的发生率相似。在整个队列中,MMR IHC和MSI PCR之间存在19.3%的差异,与肿瘤类型无关。在pMMR病例中,MSS/MSI-low的差异率很低(2.0%;整个队列和CRC亚队列)。然而,dMMR和MSI-high之间的差异在整个队列(60.9%)以及CRC(58.6%)和非CRC亚队列(68%)中都很高。这种高差异不是由于低T/N比的肿瘤。在dMMR表型方面,经典dMMR与MSI-high状态的相关性约为60%,而非经典dMMR的相关性要低得多,异常dMMR的相关性非常低(结论:dMMR和MSI-high可能导致结构改变蛋白(即新抗原)的增加,因此预计癌症免疫治疗的效果会更高。我们在大量癌症患者中比较了MMR免疫组化和MSI PCR,以研究PCR检测结果与MMR免疫组化的相关性。我们的数据表明,分析前因素强烈影响MMR IHC和MSI PCR的结果,并可能质疑目前dMMR表型和遗传MSI状态是免疫治疗等效预测标记的学说。
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
[Neuroendocrine tumors]. [Exanthematic drug eruption]. Erratum zu: Können wir trotz des rasanten Fortschritts in der Medizin und der wachsenden diagnostischen Anforderungen Generalist*innen bleiben? [Incidental diagnosis of lymphangioleiomyomatosis in gynecological surgery-a case series]. Erratum zu: Biomarker MET in der Tumorpathologie.
×
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