Genomic predictors of good outcome, recurrence, or progression in high-grade T1 non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer

High-grade T1 (HGT1) bladder cancer is the highest risk subtype of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer with unpredictable outcome and poorly understood risk factors. Here, we examined the association of somatic mutation profiles with nonrecurrent disease (GO, good outcome), recurrence (R), or progression (PD) in a cohort of HGT1 patients. Exome sequencing was performed on 62 HGT1 and 15 matched normal tissue samples. Both tumor only (TO) and paired analyses were performed, focusing on 95 genes known to be mutated in bladder cancer. Somatic mutations, copy-number alterations, mutation load, and mutation signatures were studied. Thirty-three GO, 10 R, 18 PD, and 1 unknown outcome patients were analyzed. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was similar to muscle-invasive disease and was highest in GO, intermediate in PD, and lowest in R patients (P = 0.017). DNA damage response gene mutations were associated with higher TMB (P < 0.0001) and GO (P = 0.003). ERCC2 and BRCA2 mutations were associated with GO. TP53, ATM, ARID1A, AHR, and SMARCB1 mutations were more frequent in PD. Focal copy-number gain in CCNE1 and CDKN2A deletion was enriched in PD or R (P = 0.047; P = 0.06). APOBEC (46%) and COSMIC5 (34%) signatures were most frequent. APOBEC-A and ERCC2 mutant tumors (COSMIC5) were associated with GO (P = 0.047; P = 0.0002). pT1b microstaging was associated with a genomic cluster (P = 0.05) with focal amplifications of E2F3/SOX4, PVRL4, CCNE1, and TP53 mutations. Findings were validated using external public datasets. These findings require confirmation but suggest that management of HGT1 bladder cancer may be improved via molecular characterization to predict outcome. SIGNIFICANCE: Detailed genetic analyses of HGT1 bladder tumors identify features that correlate with outcome, e.g., high mutational burden, ERCC2 mutations, and high APOBEC-A/ERCC2 mutation signatures were associated with good outcome

Non-muscle-invasive micropapillary bladder cancer has a distinct lncRNA profile associated with unfavorable prognosis

Background: molecular subtyping of bladder cancer has revealed luminal tumors generally have a more favourable prognosis. However, some aggressive forms of variant histology, including micropapillary, are often classified luminal. In previous work, we found long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) expression profiles could identify a subgroup of luminal bladder tumors with less aggressive biology and better outcomes. Objective: in the present study, we aimed to investigate whether lncRNA expression profiles could identify high-grade T1 micropapillary bladder cancer with differential outcome. Design, setting, and participants: LncRNAs were quantified from RNA-seq data from a HGT1 bladder cancer cohort that was enriched for primary micropapillary cases (15/84). Unsupervised consensus clustering of variant lncRNAs identified a three-cluster solution, which was further characterised using a panel of micropapillary-associated biomarkers, molecular subtypes, gene signatures, and survival analysis. A single-sample genomic signature was trained using lasso-penalized logistic regression to classify micropapillary-like gene-expression, as characterised by lncRNA clustering. The genomic classifier (GC) was tested on luminal tumors derived from the TCGA cohort (N = 202). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: patient and tumor characteristics were compared between subgroups by using X2 tests and two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Primary endpoints were overall, progression-free and high-grade recurrence-free survival, calculated as the date of high-grade T1 disease at TURBT till date of death from any cause, progression, or recurrence, respectively. Survival rates were estimated using weighted Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves. Results and limitations: primary micropapillary HGT1 showed decreased FGFR3, SHH, and p53 pathway activity relative to tumors with conventional urothelial carcinoma. Many bladder cancer-associated lncRNAs were downregulated in micropapillary tumors, including UCA1, LINC00152, and MALAT1. Unsupervised consensus clustering resulted in a lncRNA cluster 1 (LC1) with worse prognosis that was enriched for primary micropapillary histology and the Luminal Unstable (LumU) molecular subtype. Interestingly, LC1 appeared to better identify aggressive HGT1 disease, compared to stratifying outcomes using primary histologic characteristics. A signature trained to identify LC1 cases showed good performance in the testing cohort, identifying seven cases with significantly worse survival (p < 0.001). Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study and the lack of a validation cohort. Conclusions: using the lncRNA transcriptome we identified a subgroup of aggressive HGT1 bladder cancer that was enriched with micropapillary histology. These data suggest that lncRNAs can facilitate the identification of aggressive micropapillary-like tumors, potentially improving patient management

Targeting FGFR3 alterations with adjuvant infigratinib in invasive urothelial carcinoma: the phase III PROOF 302 trial

PROOF 302 is an ongoing randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, adjuvant phase III trial (NCT04197986) in approximately 218 patients from 120 centers worldwide. Eligibility criteria include post-surgical high-risk muscle-invasive upper tract urothelial cancer (85% of patients) or urothelial bladder cancer (15%), susceptible FGFR3 alterations (activating mutations, gene fusions or rearrangements), ≤120 days following radical surgery and ineligible for/or refusing cisplatin-based (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients receive either oral infigratinib 125 mg or placebo daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle for up to 52 weeks or until recurrence, unacceptable toxicity or death. Primary end point: centrally determined disease-free survival (DFS); secondary end points: investigator-assessed DFS, metastasis-free survival, overall survival and safety/tolerability; exploratory end points: correlative biomarker analysis, quality-of-life and infigratinib pharmacokinetics