Genomic and Transcriptomic Characteristics of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

Simple Summary Cancer of the esophagus is a deadly disease. There are two main subtypes, adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus (EAC) being more common in Western countries. Barrett's esophagus (BE) describes a change in the esophageal surface near the stomach in response to reflux of gastric acid into the esophagus. BE increases the risk of developing EAC, and the incidence of EAC has risen dramatically over recent decades. One likely reason for the poor prognosis of EAC is based on the fact that each tumor has many genes affected by mutations, and most of these genes differ across patients, hampering the efficacy of therapies that target specific cancer driver proteins. In this review, we provide an overview of the gene mutations and gene activity changes in EAC and how these features can be used to divide patients into groups that might have different clinical characteristics. Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is a deadly disease with limited options for targeted therapy. With the help of next-generation sequencing studies over the last decade, we gained an understanding of the genomic architecture of EAC. The tumor suppressor gene TP53 is mutated in 70 to 80% of tumors followed by genomic alterations in CDKN2A, KRAS, ERBB2, ARID1A, SMAD4 and a long tail of less frequently mutated genes. EAC is characterized by a high burden of point mutations and genomic rearrangements, resulting in amplifications and deletions of genomic regions. The genomic complexity is likely hampering the efficacy of targeted therapies. Barrett's esophagus (BE), a metaplastic response of the esophagus to gastro-esophageal reflux disease, is the main risk factor for the development of EAC. Almost all EACs are derived from BE. The sequence from BE to EAC provides an opportunity to study the genomic evolution towards EAC. While the overlap of point mutations between BE and EAC within the same patient is, at times, surprisingly low, there is a correlation between the complexity of the genomic copy number profile and the development of EAC. Transcriptomic analyses separated EAC into a basal and a classical subtype, with the basal subtype showing a higher level of resistance to chemotherapy. In this review, we provide an overview of the current knowledge of the genomic and transcriptomic characteristics of EAC and their relevance for the development of the disease and patient care

Treatment outcome of atypical EGFR mutations in the German National Network Genomic Medicine Lung Cancer (nNGM)

Background: Atypical EGFR mutations occur in 10%-30% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with EGFR mutations and their sensitivity to classical epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) is highly heterogeneous. Patients harboring one group of uncommon, recurrent EGFR mutations (G719X, S768I, L861Q) respond to EGFR-TKI. Exon 20 insertions are mostly insensitive to EGFR-TKI but display sensitivity to exon 20 inhibitors. Clinical outcome data of patients with very rare point and compound mutations upon systemic treatments are still sparse to date. Patients and methods: In this retrospective, multicenter study of the national Network Genomic Medicine (nNGM) in Germany, 856 NSCLC cases with atypical EGFR mutations including co-occurring mutations were reported from 12 centers. Clinical follow-up data after treatment with different EGFR-TKIs, chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors were available from 260 patients. Response to treatment was analyzed in three major groups: (i) uncommon mutations (G719X, S7681, L861Q and combinations), (ii) exon 20 insertions and (iii) very rare EGFR mutations (very rare single point mutations, compound mutations, exon 18 deletions, exon 19 insertions). Results: Our study comprises the largest thus far reported real-world cohort of very rare EGFR single point and compound mutations treated with different systemic treatments. We validated higher efficacy of EGFR-TKI in comparison to chemotherapy in group 1 (uncommon), while most exon 20 insertions (group 2) were not EGFR-TKI responsive. In addition, we found TKI sensitivity of very rare point mutations (group 3) and of complex EGFR mutations containing exon 19 deletions or L858R mutations independent of the combination partner. Notably, treatment responses in group 3 (very rare) were highly heterogeneous. Co-occurring TP53 mutations exerted a non-significant trend for a detrimental effect on outcome in EGFR-TKI-treated patients in groups 2 and 3 but not in group 1. Conclusions: Based on our findings, we propose a novel nNGM classification of atypical EGFR mutations