Loss of SRY-box2 (SOX2) expression and its impact on survival of patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) is a highly aggressive malignancy with poor survival, which is highly variable amongst patients with comparable conventional prognosticators. Therefore molecular biomarkers are urgently needed to improve the prediction of survival in these patients. SRY (sex determining region Y)-box 2, also known as SOX2, is a transcription factor involved in embryonal development of the gastrointestinal tract as well as in carcinogenesis. The purpose of this study was to see whether SOX2 expression is associated with survival in patients with OAC. METHODS: SOX2 was studied by immunohistochemistry in patients who had undergone potentially curative oesophagectomy for adenocarcinoma. Protein expression of SOX2 was evaluated using tissue microarrays from resection specimens, and results were analysed in relation to the clinical data by Cox regression analysis. SOX2 was evaluated in two independent OAC cohorts (Rotterdam cohort and a multicentre UK cohort). RESULTS: Loss of SOX2 expression was independently predictive of adverse overall survival in the multivariable analysis, adjusted for known factors influencing survival, in both cohorts (Rotterdam cohort: hazard ratio (HR) 1·42, 95 per cent c.i. 1·07 to 1·89, P = 0·016; UK cohort: HR 1·54, 1·08 to 2·19, P = 0·017). When combined with clinicopathological staging, loss of SOX2 showed an increased effect in patients with pT1-2 tumours (P = 0·010) and node-negative OAC (P = 0·038), with an incrementally adverse effect on overall survival for stage I OAC with SOX2 loss (HR 3·18, 1·18 to 8·56; P = 0·022). CONCLUSION: SOX2 is an independent prognostic factor for long-term survival in OAC, especially in patients with stage I OAC

Multicentre cohort study to define and validate pathological assessment of response to neoadjuvant therapy in oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND: This multicentre cohort study sought to define a robust pathological indicator of clinically meaningful response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to 11 UK upper gastrointestinal cancer centres to determine the use of assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Records of consecutive patients undergoing oesophagogastric resection at seven centres between January 2000 and December 2013 were reviewed. Pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy was assessed using the Mandard Tumour Regression Grade (TRG) and lymph node downstaging. RESULTS: TRG (8 of 11 centres) was the most widely used system to assess response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, but there was discordance on how it was used in practice. Of 1392 patients, 1293 had TRG assessment; data were available for clinical and pathological nodal status (cN and pN) in 981 patients, and TRG, cN and pN in 885. There was a significant difference in survival between responders (TRG 1–2; median overall survival (OS) not reached) and non-responders (TRG 3–5; median OS 2·22 (95 per cent c.i. 1·94 to 2·51) years; P < 0·001); the hazard ratio was 2·46 (95 per cent c.i. 1·22 to 4·95; P = 0·012). Among local non-responders, the presence of lymph node downstaging was associated with significantly improved OS compared with that of patients without lymph node downstaging (median OS not reached versus 1·92 (1·68 to 2·16) years; P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: A clinically meaningful local response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy was restricted to the small minority of patients (14·8 per cent) with TRG 1–2. Among local non-responders, a subset of patients (21·3 per cent) derived benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy by lymph node downstaging and their survival mirrored that of local responders

Identification of prognostic phenotypes of esophageal adenocarcinoma in two independent cohorts.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Most patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) present de novo. Although this may be due to inadequate screening strategies, the precise reason for this observation is not clear.. We compared survival of patients with prevalent EAC with and without synchronous BE/intestinal metaplasia of the esophagus (IM) at the time of EAC diagnosis. METHODS: Clinical data were studied using Cox Proportional Hazards regression to evaluate the effect of synchronous BE/IM on EAC survival independent of age, sex, TNM stage and tumor location. Two cohorts from the Mayo Clinic and a U.K. multicenter prospective cohort were included. RESULTS: The Mayo cohort had 411 EAC patients with 49.3% with BE/IM demonstrating a survival benefit as compared to those without (hazard ratio (HR), 0.44; 95% CI: 0.34 - 0.57, P<0.001). In a multivariable analysis BE/IM was associated with better survival independent of age, sex, stage and tumor location and length (adjusted HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.5-0.88, P=0.005). The UK cohort contained 1417 patients, 45% with BE/IM demonstrating a survival benefit as compared with non-BE/IM patients (HR 0.59, 95% CI: 0.5-0.69, P<0.001) with continued significance in multivariable analysis that included age, sex, stage, and tumor location (adjusted HR 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.93, P=0.006). CONCLUSION: Two types of esophageal adenocarcinoma can be characterized based on the presence or absence of Barrett's epithelium. These findings have implications for understanding the etiology of EAC and determining prognosis as well as for development of optimal clinical strategies to identify patients at risk

Systematic review and validation of clinical models predicting survival after oesophagectomy for adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND: Oesophageal adenocarcinoma poses a significant global health burden, yet the staging used to predict survival has limited ability to stratify patients by outcome. This study aimed to identify published clinical models that predict survival in oesophageal adenocarcinoma and to evaluate them using an independent international multicentre dataset. METHODS: A systematic literature search (title and abstract) using the Ovid Embase and MEDLINE databases (from 1947 to 11 July 2020) was performed. Inclusion criteria were studies that developed or validated a clinical prognostication model to predict either overall or disease-specific survival in patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma undergoing surgical treatment with curative intent. Published models were validated using an independent dataset of 2450 patients who underwent oesophagectomy for oesophageal adenocarcinoma with curative intent. RESULTS: Seventeen articles were eligible for inclusion in the study. Eleven models were suitable for testing in the independent validation dataset and nine of these were able to stratify patients successfully into groups with significantly different survival outcomes. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for individual survival prediction models ranged from 0.658 to 0.705, suggesting poor-to-fair accuracy. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the need to concentrate on robust methodologies and improved, independent, validation, to increase the likelihood of clinical adoption of survival predictions models

Mutational signatures in esophageal adenocarcinoma define etiologically distinct subgroups with therapeutic relevance

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has a poor outcome, and targeted therapy trials have thus far been disappointing owing to a lack of robust stratification methods. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) analysis of 129 cases demonstrated that this is a heterogeneous cancer dominated by copy number alterations with frequent large-scale rearrangements. Co-amplification of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) and/or downstream mitogenic activation is almost ubiquitous; thus tailored combination RTK inhibitor (RTKi) therapy might be required, as we demonstrate in vitro. However, mutational signatures showed three distinct molecular subtypes with potential therapeutic relevance, which we verified in an independent cohort (n = 87): (i) enrichment for BRCA signature with prevalent defects in the homologous recombination pathway; (ii) dominant T>G mutational pattern associated with a high mutational load and neoantigen burden; and (iii) C>A/T mutational pattern with evidence of an aging imprint. These subtypes could be ascertained using a clinically applicable sequencing strategy (low coverage) as a basis for therapy selection

Genomic Analysis of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

Neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery is the standard of care for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Unfortunately, response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is poor (20-37%), as is the overall survival benefit at five years (9%). The EAC genome is complex and heterogeneous between patients, and it is not yet understood whether specific mutational patterns may result in chemotherapy sensitivity or resistance. To identify associations between genomic events and response to NAC in EAC, a comparative genomic analysis was performed in 65 patients with extensive clinical and pathological annotation using whole-genome sequencing (WGS). We defined response using Mandard Tumor Regression Grade (TRG), with responders classified as TRG1-2 (n = 27) and non-responders classified as TRG4-5 (n =38). We report a higher non-synonymous mutation burden in responders (median 2.08/Mb vs. 1.70/Mb, p = 0.036) and elevated copy number variation in non-responders (282 vs. 136/patient, p < 0.001). We identified copy number variants unique to each group in our cohort, with cell cycle (CDKN2A, CCND1), c-Myc (MYC), RTK/PIK3 (KRAS, EGFR) and gastrointestinal differentiation (GATA6) pathway genes being specifically altered in non-responders. Of note, NAV3 mutations were exclusively present in the non-responder group with a frequency of 22%. Thus, lower mutation burden, higher chromosomal instability and specific copy number alterations are associated with resistance to NAC

Multicentre cohort study to define and validate pathological assessment of response to neoadjuvant therapy in oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This multicentre cohort study sought to define a robust pathological indicator of clinically meaningful response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to 11 UK upper gastrointestinal cancer centres to determine the use of assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Records of consecutive patients undergoing oesophagogastric resection at seven centres between January 2000 and December 2013 were reviewed. Pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy was assessed using the Mandard Tumour Regression Grade (TRG) and lymph node downstaging. RESULTS: TRG (8 of 11 centres) was the most widely used system to assess response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, but there was discordance on how it was used in practice. Of 1392 patients, 1293 had TRG assessment; data were available for clinical and pathological nodal status (cN and pN) in 981 patients, and TRG, cN and pN in 885. There was a significant difference in survival between responders (TRG 1-2; median overall survival (OS) not reached) and non-responders (TRG 3-5; median OS 2·22 (95 per cent c.i. 1·94 to 2·51) years; P < 0·001); the hazard ratio was 2·46 (95 per cent c.i. 1·22 to 4·95; P = 0·012). Among local non-responders, the presence of lymph node downstaging was associated with significantly improved OS compared with that of patients without lymph node downstaging (median OS not reached versus 1·92 (1·68 to 2·16) years; P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: A clinically meaningful local response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy was restricted to the small minority of patients (14·8 per cent) with TRG 1-2. Among local non-responders, a subset of patients (21·3 per cent) derived benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy by lymph node downstaging and their survival mirrored that of local responders