Evaluation of DNA-ploidy heterogeneity in gastric cancers.

Scale 1:24,000. North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). Projection and 1,000-meter grid: Universal Transverse Mercator, zone 4. 10,000-foot ticks: Hawaiian Coordinate System of 1983 (zone 4)

Elevated hepatocyte paraffin 1 and neprilysin expression in hepatocellular carcinoma are correlated with longer survival.

Hepatocyte paraffin 1 (Hep Par 1) and neprilysin (CD10) are well-known markers of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). To assess their potential prognostic role, we conducted a retrospective analysis of 97 formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded HCC from patients treated by surgery with curative intent, using standard immunohistochemical procedures and semiquantitative analysis. Strong Hep Par 1 expression and canalicular CD10 staining pattern were significantly correlated with smaller tumor size (p=0.007 and 0.04, respectively). On univariate analysis, longer overall survival was observed in patients with strong Hep Par 1 expression (p=0.0005) and in patients with a CD10can staining pattern (p=0.02). On multivariate analysis, the combined immunohistochemical score (CIS) obtained by addition of Hep Par 1 and CD10can scores and subtraction of cytoplasmic CD10 score was retained as the single most important prognostic factor (p=0.001). Patients with a CIS <4 had a 3.5-fold increased risk of death, as compared to those with a CIS >or=4. In conclusion, strong Hep Par 1 expression, presence of CD10can labeling, and absence of CD10cyt staining are favorable prognostic factors in HCC, which can be easily combined into a single immunohistochemical score for routine clinical use

Context-dependent interpretation of the prognostic value of BRAF and KRAS mutations in colorectal cancer.

The mutation status of the BRAF and KRAS genes has been proposed as prognostic biomarker in colorectal cancer. Of them, only the BRAF V600E mutation has been validated independently as prognostic for overall survival and survival after relapse, while the prognostic value of KRAS mutation is still unclear. We investigated the prognostic value of BRAF and KRAS mutations in various contexts defined by stratifications of the patient population. We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of patients with stage II and III colorectal cancer from the PETACC-3 clinical trial (N = 1,423), by assessing the prognostic value of the BRAF and KRAS mutations in subpopulations defined by all possible combinations of the following clinico-pathological variables: T stage, N stage, tumor site, tumor grade and microsatellite instability status. In each such subpopulation, the prognostic value was assessed by log rank test for three endpoints: overall survival, relapse-free survival, and survival after relapse. The significance level was set to 0.01 for Bonferroni-adjusted p-values, and a second threshold for a trend towards statistical significance was set at 0.05 for unadjusted p-values. The significance of the interactions was tested by Wald test, with significance level of 0.05. In stage II-III colorectal cancer, BRAF mutation was confirmed a marker of poor survival only in subpopulations involving microsatellite stable and left-sided tumors, with higher effects than in the whole population. There was no evidence for prognostic value in microsatellite instable or right-sided tumor groups. We found that BRAF was also prognostic for relapse-free survival in some subpopulations. We found no evidence that KRAS mutations had prognostic value, although a trend was observed in some stratifications. We also show evidence of heterogeneity in survival of patients with BRAF V600E mutation. The BRAF mutation represents an additional risk factor only in some subpopulations of colorectal cancers, in others having limited prognostic value. However, in the subpopulations where it is prognostic, it represents a marker of much higher risk than previously considered. KRAS mutation status does not seem to represent a strong prognostic variable

Prognosis of stage II and III colon cancer treated with adjuvant 5-fluorouracil or FOLFIRI in relation to microsatellite status: results of the PETACC-3 trial?.

BACKGROUND: Although colon cancer (CC) with microsatellite instability (MSI) has a more favorable prognosis than microsatellite stable (MSS) CC, the impact varies according to clinicopathological parameters. We studied how MSI status affects prognosis in a trial-based cohort of stage II and III CC patients treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin or FOLFIRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Tissue specimens of 1254 patients were tested for 10 different loci and were classified as MSI-high (MSI-H) when three or more loci were unstable and MSS otherwise. Study end points were overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: In stage II, RFS and OS were better for patients with MSI-H than with MSS CC [hazard ratio (HR) 0.26, 95% CI 0.10-0.65, P = 0.004 and 0.16, 95% CI 0.04-0.64, P = 0.01). In stage III, RFS was slightly better for patients with MSI-H CC (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.99, P = 0.04), but the difference was not statistically significant for OS (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.44-1.09, P = 0.11). Outcomes for patients with MSI-H CC were not different between the two treatment arms. RFS was better for patients with MSI-H than with MSS CC in the right and left colon, whereas for OS this was significant only in the right colon. For patients with KRAS- and BRAF-mutated CC, but not for double wild-type patients, RFS and OS were significantly better when the tumors were also MSI-H. An interaction test was statistically significant for KRAS and MSI status (P = 0.005), but not for BRAF status (P = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that for patients with stage II CC but less so for those with stage III MSI-H is strongly prognostic for RFS and OS. In the presence of 5-FU treatment, stage II patients with MSI-H tumors maintain their survival advantage in comparison with MSS patients and adding irinotecan has no added benefit. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00026273

Test of four colon cancer risk-scores in formalin fixed paraffin embedded microarray gene expression data.

BACKGROUND: Prognosis prediction for resected primary colon cancer is based on the T-stage Node Metastasis (TNM) staging system. We investigated if four well-documented gene expression risk scores can improve patient stratification. METHODS: Microarray-based versions of risk-scores were applied to a large independent cohort of 688 stage II/III tumors from the PETACC-3 trial. Prognostic value for relapse-free survival (RFS), survival after relapse (SAR), and overall survival (OS) was assessed by regression analysis. To assess improvement over a reference, prognostic model was assessed with the area under curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. All statistical tests were two-sided, except the AUC increase. RESULTS: All four risk scores (RSs) showed a statistically significant association (single-test, P < .0167) with OS or RFS in univariate models, but with HRs below 1.38 per interquartile range. Three scores were predictors of shorter RFS, one of shorter SAR. Each RS could only marginally improve an RFS or OS model with the known factors T-stage, N-stage, and microsatellite instability (MSI) status (AUC gains < 0.025 units). The pairwise interscore discordance was never high (maximal Spearman correlation = 0.563) A combined score showed a trend to higher prognostic value and higher AUC increase for OS (HR = 1.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.44 to 2.10, P < .001, AUC from 0.6918 to 0.7321) and RFS (HR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.33 to 1.84, P < .001, AUC from 0.6723 to 0.6945) than any single score. CONCLUSIONS: The four tested gene expression-based risk scores provide prognostic information but contribute only marginally to improving models based on established risk factors. A combination of the risk scores might provide more robust information. Predictors of RFS and SAR might need to be different