Microarray amplification bias: loss of 30% differentially expressed genes due to long probe – poly(A)-tail distances

BACKGROUND: Laser microdissection microscopy has become a rising tool to assess gene expression profiles of pure cell populations. Given the low yield of RNA, a second round of amplification is usually mandatory to yield sufficient amplified-RNA for microarray approaches. Since amplification induces truncation of RNA molecules, we studied the impact of a second round of amplification on identification of differentially expressed genes in relation to the probe - poly(A)-tail distances. RESULTS: Disagreement was observed between gene expression profiles acquired after a second round of amplification compared to a single round. Thirty percent of the differentially expressed genes identified after one round of amplification were not detected after two rounds. These inconsistent genes have a significant longer probe - poly(A)-tail distance. qRT-PCR on unamplified RNA confirmed differential expression of genes with a probe - poly(A)-tail distance >500 nucleotides appearing only after one round of amplification. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate a marked loss of 30% of truly differentially expressed genes after a second round of amplification. Therefore, we strongly recommend improvement of amplification procedures and importance of microarray probe design to allow detection of all differentially expressed genes in case of limited amounts of RNA

CD26-negative and CD26-positive tissue-resident fibroblasts contribute to functionally distinct CAF subpopulations in breast cancer

The origin of cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) in cancer remains to be identified. Here, single-cell transcriptomics, in vivo and in vitro studies suggest that CD26+ and CD26- normal fibroblasts transform into distinct CAF subpopulations in mouse models of breast cancer

Multicenter Comparison of Molecular Tumor Boards in The Netherlands:Definition, Composition, Methods, and Targeted Therapy Recommendations

Background Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) provide rational, genomics-driven, patient-tailored treatment recommendations. Worldwide, MTBs differ in terms of scope, composition, methods, and recommendations. This study aimed to assess differences in methods and agreement in treatment recommendations among MTBs from tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands. Materials and Methods MTBs from all tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands were invited to participate. A survey assessing scope, value, logistics, composition, decision-making method, reporting, and registration of the MTBs was completed through on-site interviews with members from each MTB. Targeted therapy recommendations were compared using 10 anonymized cases. Participating MTBs were asked to provide a treatment recommendation in accordance with their own methods. Agreement was based on which molecular alteration(s) was considered actionable with the next line of targeted therapy. Results Interviews with 24 members of eight MTBs revealed that all participating MTBs focused on rare or complex mutational cancer profiles, operated independently of cancer type-specific multidisciplinary teams, and consisted of at least (thoracic and/or medical) oncologists, pathologists, and clinical scientists in molecular pathology. Differences were the types of cancer discussed and the methods used to achieve a recommendation. Nevertheless, agreement among MTB recommendations, based on identified actionable molecular alteration(s), was high for the 10 evaluated cases (86%). Conclusion MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational cancer profiles. We propose a "Dutch MTB model" for an optimal, collaborative, and nationally aligned MTB workflow. Implications for Practice Interpretation of genomic analyses for optimal choice of target therapy for patients with cancer is becoming increasingly complex. A molecular tumor board (MTB) supports oncologists in rationalizing therapy options. However, there is no consensus on the most optimal setup for an MTB, which can affect the quality of recommendations. This study reveals that the eight MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational profiles. The Dutch MTB model is based on a collaborative and nationally aligned workflow with interinstitutional collaboration and data sharing

Multicenter Comparison of Molecular Tumor Boards in The Netherlands: Definition, Composition, Methods, and Targeted Therapy Recommendations

Background: Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) provide rational, genomics-driven, patient-tailored treatment recommendations. Worldwide, MTBs differ in terms of scope, composition, methods, and recommendations. This study aimed to assess differences in methods and agreement in treatment recommendations among MTBs from tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands. Materials and Methods: MTBs from all tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands were invited to participate. A survey assessing scope, value, logistics, composition, decision-making method, reporting, and registration of the MTBs was completed through on-site interviews with members from each MTB. Targeted therapy recommendations were compared using 10 anonymized cases. Participating MTBs were asked to provide a treatment recommendation in accordance with their own methods. Agreement was based on which molecular alteration(s) was considered actionable with the next line of targeted therapy. Results: Interviews with 24 members of eight MTBs revealed that all participating MTBs focused on rare or complex mutational cancer profiles, operated independently of cancer type–specific multidisciplinary teams, and consisted of at least (thoracic and/or medical) oncologists, pathologists, and clinical scientists in molecular pathology. Differences were the types of cancer discussed and the methods used to achieve a recommendation. Nevertheless, agreement among MTB recommendations, based on identified actionable molecular alteration(s), was high for the 10 evaluated cases (86%). Conclusion: MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational cancer profiles. We propose a “Dutch MTB model” for an optimal, collaborative, and nationally aligned MTB workflow. Implications for Practice: Interpretation of genomic analyses for optimal choice of target therapy for patients with cancer is becoming increasingly complex. A molecular tumor board (MTB) supports oncologists in rationalizing therapy options. However, there is no consensus on the most optimal setup for an MTB, which can affect the quality of recommendations. This study reveals that the eight MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational profiles. The Dutch MTB model is based on a collaborative and nationally aligned workflow with interinstitutional collaboration and data sharing

Abstract 1505: Stroma-mediated DNA damage resistance of human breast cancer

Abstract Chemotherapy and radiation are often employed to decrease breast cancer deaths. However, patients with metastatic disease invariably manifest resistance to chemotherapy and/or radiation, ultimately causing breast cancer deaths due to ineffective treatment. We have defined a gene expression signature, the interferon-related DNA damage resistance signature (IRDS), that is highly associated with radiation and chemotherapy resistance of breast cancer in both cell lines and patients. Interestingly, IRDS-mediated resistance in experimental models appears to be much greater in vivo than in vitro, suggesting a potential contribution of the tumor microenvironment. To address the question of whether the tumor microenvironment plays a role in IRDS-mediated radioresistance, we investigated the influence of heterotypic interactions between breast cancer and stromal cells on IRDS expression. We found that breast cancer cell lines primarily of the basal subtype increase IRDS expression after tumor-stroma interaction, resulting in enhanced resistance to radiation and chemotherapy. This increase in IRDS and DNA damage resistance depends on STAT1, a member and transcriptional regulator of the IRDS. Tumor-stroma interaction also leads to induction of a population of breast cancer cells with properties of breast cancer stem-like cells (BCSC). Evaluation of a tumor-stroma extracellular interactome revealed that a stroma-directed NOTCH signaling pathway can cooperate with STAT1 signaling to regulate common target genes. STAT1 and NOTCH signaling direct the expansion and/or survival of BCSC, an inherently DNA damage resistant population. Using available primary breast cancer data sets, a similar activation of NOTCH signaling is observed, as well as transcriptomic activation of the NOTCH pathway in breast cancer. Importantly, a marker for NOTCH signaling cooperates with the IRDS to identify breast cancer patients likely to fail adjuvant chemotherapy. The ability of gamma secretase inhibitors to inhibit both stroma-mediated expansion of BCSC and DNA damage resistance highlights the therapeutic potential of this class of targeted agents for breast cancers that express the IRDS. In conclusion, our data suggests that stroma can regulate DNA damage resistant BCSC populations in a subset of basal breast cancers through STAT1 and NOTCH signaling. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 103rd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2012 Mar 31-Apr 4; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2012;72(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 1505. doi:1538-7445.AM2012-1505</jats:p