Molecular Features of Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma in a Large Tissue Microarray
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background The pathogenesis of primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) remains poorly understood. The objective of this study was to evaluate the distribution and prognostic impact of a broad range of molecular attributes in a large tissue microarray (TMA) from immunocompetent patients with PCNSL. Methods Patients with PCNSL diagnosed during 1998 - 2010 were identified using the BC Cancer Lymphoid Cancer clinical and pathology databases. Archival formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded diagnostic biopsy tissue was retrieved, and TMAs were constructed. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for CD10, BCL6, MUM-1, GCET1, FOXP1, and LMO2 protein expression was used to assign cell of origin (COO) by three different algorithms. IHC for MYC, BCL2, PDL-1, and HLA class II protein expression was also performed. In situ hybridization for Epstein-Barr virus-encoded RNA (EBER) was performed. Fluorescent in-situ hybridization (FISH) was performed for MYC, BCL2, BCL6, PDL1/2 (9p24.1), and CIITA (16p13) rearrangements. Results A total of 115 patients with PCNSL with DLBCL histology were included in the final analysis: 59% male, 70% age >60 years, 77% performance status >1. Primary treatment modalities included high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) based regimens in 52 (45%) patients, whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) alone in 40 (35%) patients, and best supportive care in 23 (20%) patients. Among the 52 HDMTX-treated patients, 18 also received WBRT (pre-planned combined modality therapy or inability to tolerate HDMTX), and 11 also received rituximab. Failure of IHC/FISH occurred in 0-21% of individual assays, largely due to insufficient tissue material. The majority of patients had a non-GCB COO phenotype as determined by the Hans (76%), Choi (86%), and Tally (99%) algorithms. MYC protein expression was positive (≥40%) in 37/93 (40%) patients, BCL2 (≥50%) in 68/91 (75%) [124 antibody] and 87/111 (78%) [E17 antibody] patients, and dual MYC/BCL2 in 30/88 (35%) [124 antibody] and 32/92 (35%) [E17 antibody] patients. PDL-1 protein expression was positive (≥1%) in 31/107 (29%) patients. HLA class II antigen expression was positive (≥10%) in 75/112 (67%) patients, with staining restricted to cytoplasm (70%) or cell membrane (30%). EBER was positive (any staining) in 8/108 (7%) patients. Chromosomal rearrangements by FISH were very uncommon for MYC 1/93 (1%), BCL2 1/110 (1%), PDL1/2 1/101 (1%), and CIITA 3/105 (3%). There were no dual rearrangements involving MYC and BCL2, although the only patient with a MYC rearrangement also had a concurrent BCL6 rearrangement. In contrast, BCL6 rearrangements were present in 33/108 (31%) patients, while BCL6 protein expression was positive in 86/111 (77%) patients. With a median follow-up of 8 years (range 8 months - 16 years) in living patients, the 5-year PFS and OS estimates were 11% and 24%, respectively. In univariate analysis, elevated LDH, treatment with WBRT alone or supportive care, and the presence of BCL6 rearrangements (HR 1.73 [95% CI 1.12, 2.66], p=0.011) were significantly associated with worse PFS. Age >60, poor performance status, and treatment with WBRT alone or supportive care were significantly associated with worse OS, and a trend observed with the presence of BCL6 rearrangements (HR 1.46 [95% CI 0.95, 2.27], p=0.085). All other clinical and pathologic variables were not associated with PFS or OS. In the 52 patients treated with HDMTX-based regimens, the presence of a BCL6 rearrangement was the only variable associated with a worse PFS (HR 2.50 [95% CI 1.25 - 5.01], p=0.007), and no variables were associated with OS. Discussion and Conclusions This large TMA study shows that prominent molecular features of PCNSL are different from those of systemic DLBCL. There was a high TMA failure rate reflecting the limitations of brain biopsies, which are often stereotactic needle biopsies, small surgical samples, or obtained after a course of corticosteroids. Consistent with other reports, the majority of cases had a non-GCB phenotype by IHC algorithms, but cell of origin did not impact PFS or OS. MYC, BCL2, and PDL-1 protein expression were common but their corresponding gene rearrangements were extremely uncommon suggesting alternate mechanisms driving expression. BCL6 rearrangements were frequent and were the only factor associated with a poor prognosis in the overall cohort and in the subgroup of patients treated with HDTMX-based regimens. Disclosures Connors: Janssen: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; NanoString Technologies: Patents & Royalties: Named Inventor on a patent licensed to NanoString Technologies, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Bayer Healthcare: Research Funding; F Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Roche Canada: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Sehn:TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria. Scott:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; NanoString: Patents & Royalties: Named Inventor on a patent licensed to NanoString Technologies, Research Funding. Steidl:Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Tioma: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Nanostring: Patents & Royalties: patent holding; Roche: Consultancy. Gascoyne:NanoString: Patents & Royalties: Named Inventor on a patent licensed to NanoString Technologies.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».