MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W166239273 · doi:10.1182/blood.v122.21.73.73

Determining Cell-Of-Origin Subtypes In Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Using Gene Expression Profiling On Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Tissue – An L.L.M.P.P. Project

2013· article· en· W166239273 sur OpenAlexaffabout
David W. Scott, George W. Wright, Mickey Williams, Jason Lih, William D. Walsh, Elaine S. Jaffe, Andreas Rosenwald, Elı́as Campo, Wing C. Chan, Joseph M. Connors, Erlend B. Smeland, Anja Mottok, Rita M. Braziel, German Ott, Jan Delabie, Raymond R. Tubbs, James R. Cook, Dennis D. Weisenburger, Timothy C. Greiner, Betty Glinsmann‐Gibson, Kai Fu, Louis M. Staudt, Randy D. Gascoyne, Lisa M. Rimsza

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaTissue microarrayGene expression profilingImmunohistochemistryCancer researchGerminal centerCancerLymphomaMedicinePathologyBiologyOncologyGene expressionB cellInternal medicineGeneImmunologyGeneticsAntibody

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract The diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) cell-of-origin (COO) distinction into germinal center B cell (GCB) and activated B cell (ABC) subtypes, as molecularly described by our group, has profound biological, prognostic, and potential therapeutic implications. New therapeutic agents with selective activity in ABC and GCB DLBCL are under development. An accurate diagnostic assay is urgently needed to qualify patients for clinical trials using targeted agents and as a predictive biomarker. Although the subtypes were originally defined using gene expression profiling on snap-frozen tissues (frozen-GEP), it has become common practice to use less precise but relatively inexpensive and broadly applicable immunohistochemical (IHC) methods in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue (FFPET). We sought to create a robust, highly accurate molecular assay for COO distinction using new GEP techniques applicable to FFPET. Studies were performed on centrally reviewed DLBCL FFPET biopsies using cases that had “gold standard” COO assigned by frozen-GEP using Affymetrix U133 plus 2.0 microarrays. The training cohort consisted of 51 cases comprising 20 GCB, 19 ABC and 12 Unclassifiable (U) cases. An independent validation cohort, consisting of 68 cases (28 GCB, 30 ABC, 10 U) drawn from the validation cohort of Lenz et al (NEJM 2008) had the typical proportions of COO subtypes seen in DLBCL populations. Nucleic acids were extracted from 10um FFPET scrolls. Digital gene expression was performed on 200ng of RNA using NanoString technology (Seattle, WA). All FFPET GEP studies were performed in parallel at two independent sites (BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, and NCI, Frederick, MD) using different FFPET scrolls to determine inter-site concordance and assess the robustness and portability of the assay. To assign COO by IHC, tissue microarrays were made using 0.6mm duplicate cores from 60/68 validation cohort cases, and stained for CD10, BCL6, MUM1, FOXP1, GCET1 and LMO2. Two hematopathologists independently assessed the proportion of tumor cells stained, with consensus on discordant cases reached with a third hematopathologist. For the validation studies, those producing and analyzing the GEP and IHC data were blinded to the “gold standard” COO. All 119 FFPET biopsies yielded sufficient RNA. A pilot study using the training cohort identified 20 genes (15 genes of interest and 5 house keeping genes) whose expression, measured using NanoString, would allow accurate replication of the COO assignment model of Lenz et al (NEJM 2008). NanoString was then used to quantitate these 20 genes in the training cohort, allowing the COO model to be optimized. Despite the age of the FFPET blocks (6-32 years old), 95% (49/51) of the training samples gave gene expression data of sufficient quality. The model, including coefficients, thresholds and QC parameters was then “locked” and applied to the independent validation cohort. Ninety-nine percent (67/68) of the samples from the validation cohort (5-12 years old) provided gene expression of adequate quality. Three cases did not give interpretable IHC results. When considering the “gold standard” ABC and GCB cases, the COO assignments by the NanoString assay at the NCI site were 93% concordant, with 5% labeled U and 1 ABC misclassified as GCB (see table). This 2% rate of misclassification of ABC and GCB cases compares favorably with the 9%, 6% and 17% rates for the interpretable cases from the Hans, Tally and Choi algorithms, respectively. Furthermore, the 98% concordance of COO assignment (95% if “gold standard” U cases are also included) between the NCI and BC Cancer Agency sites indicates that, in contrast to the IHC algorithms, the assay is reproducible.TableNanoString GEP assay - NCIHans algorithmTally algorithmChoi algorithmGCBUABCGCBNon-GCBGCBABCGCBABCFrozen GEPGCB2800210183192U721552864ABC1325422026620 In summary, 119 well-characterized DLBCL cases from the LLMPP, previously subtyped by our published disease-defining algorithm using frozen-GEP, were used to develop a highly accurate and robust NanoString 20 gene assay, applicable to RNA from FFPET that is routinely obtained for diagnosis. This new assay shows excellent performance in archival FFPET, and the rapid turn-around time (<36 hours from FFPET block to result) will allow prospective implementation in future therapeutic trials and, ultimately, clinical practice. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,001
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,004

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,016
Tête enseignante GPT0,290
Écart entre enseignants0,274 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetMolecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsTravaux en français237 207