Common genetic variation associated with increased susceptibility to prostate cancer does not increase risk of radiotherapy toxicity.

BACKGROUND: Numerous germline single-nucleotide polymorphisms increase susceptibility to prostate cancer, some lying near genes involved in cellular radiation response. This study investigated whether prostate cancer patients with a high genetic risk have increased toxicity following radiotherapy. METHODS: The study included 1560 prostate cancer patients from four radiotherapy cohorts: RAPPER (n=533), RADIOGEN (n=597), GenePARE (n=290) and CCI (n=150). Data from genome-wide association studies were imputed with the 1000 Genomes reference panel. Individuals were genetically similar with a European ancestry based on principal component analysis. Genetic risks were quantified using polygenic risk scores. Regression models tested associations between risk scores and 2-year toxicity (overall, urinary frequency, decreased stream, rectal bleeding). Results were combined across studies using standard inverse-variance fixed effects meta-analysis methods. RESULTS: A total of 75 variants were genotyped/imputed successfully. Neither non-weighted nor weighted polygenic risk scores were associated with late radiation toxicity in individual studies (P>0.11) or after meta-analysis (P>0.24). No individual variant was associated with 2-year toxicity. CONCLUSION: Patients with a high polygenic susceptibility for prostate cancer have no increased risk for developing late radiotherapy toxicity. These findings suggest that patients with a genetic predisposition for prostate cancer, inferred by common variants, can be safely treated using current standard radiotherapy regimens.This work was supported by Cancer Research UK (C1094/A11728 to CMLW and NGB for the RAPPER study, C26900/A8740 to GCB, C5047A17528 to RE), the Royal College of Radiologists (GCB), Prostate Cancer UK (P2012148 to RE), The ELLIPSE Consortium on behalf of the GAME-ON Network, The National Institute for Health Research (GCB), Addenbrooke’s Charitable Trust (GCB), NIHR support to the Biomedical Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, The National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (NGB), UK Medical Research Council (LD), the Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (CMLW), the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust (DPD), the United States National Institutes of Health (1R01CA134444 to BSR), the American Cancer Society (RSGT-05-200-01-CCE to BSR), the United States Department of Defense (PC074201 to BSR), Mount Sinai Tisch Cancer Institute Developmental Fund Award (BSR), the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (FIS PI10/00164 and PI13/02030 to AV), Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER 2007-2013 to AV), Xunta de Galicia and the European Social Fund (POS-A/2013/034 to LF), and the Alberta Cancer Board Research Initiative Program (103.0393.71760001404 to MP). Laboratory infrastructure for the RAPPER study was funded by Cancer Research UK [C8197/A10123]. DD acknowledges support from the National Institute for Health Research RM/ICR Biomedical Research Centre and all the researchers at the Royal Marsden Hospital and the Institute of Cancer Research. The RAPPER cohort comprises patients and data recruited into the RT01 and CHHiP UK radiotherapy trials. The RT01 trial was supported by the UK Medical Research Council. The CHHiP trial (CRUK/06/016) was supported by the Department of Health and Cancer Research UK (C8262/A7253); trial recruitment was facilitated within centers by the National Institute for Health Research Cancer Research Network.This is the author accepted manuscript. It is currently under an indefinite embargo pending publication by Nature Publishing Group

Sequencing of prostate cancers identifies new cancer genes, routes of progression and drug targets

Prostate cancer represents a substantial clinical challenge because it is difficult to predict outcome and advanced disease is often fatal. We sequenced the whole genomes of 112 primary and metastatic prostate cancer samples. From joint analysis of these cancers with those from previous studies (930 cancers in total), we found evidence for 22 previously unidentified putative driver genes harboring coding mutations, as well as evidence for NEAT1 and FOXA1 acting as drivers through noncoding mutations. Through the temporal dissection of aberrations, we identified driver mutations specifically associated with steps in the progression of prostate cancer, establishing, for example, loss of CHD1 and BRCA2 as early events in cancer development of ETS fusion-negative cancers. Computational chemogenomic (canSAR) analysis of prostate cancer mutations identified 11 targets of approved drugs, 7 targets of investigational drugs, and 62 targets of compounds that may be active and should be considered candidates for future clinical trials

Fine-mapping of prostate cancer susceptibility loci in a large meta-analysis identifies candidate causal variants

Prostate cancer is a polygenic disease with a large heritable component. A number of common, low-penetrance prostate cancer risk loci have been identified through GWAS. Here we apply the Bayesian multivariate variable selection algorithm JAM to fine-map 84 prostate cancer susceptibility loci, using summary data from a large European ancestry meta-analysis. We observe evidence for multiple independent signals at 12 regions and 99 risk signals overall. Only 15 original GWAS tag SNPs remain among the catalogue of candidate variants identified; the remainder are replaced by more likely candidates. Biological annotation of our credible set of variants indicates significant enrichment within promoter and enhancer elements, and transcription factor-binding sites, including AR, ERG and FOXA1. In 40 regions at least one variant is colocalised with an eQTL in prostate cancer tissue. The refined set of candidate variants substantially increase the proportion of familial relative risk explained by these known susceptibility regions, which highlights the importance of fine-mapping studies and has implications for clinical risk profiling. © 2018 The Author(s).Prostate cancer is a polygenic disease with a large heritable component. A number of common, low-penetrance prostate cancer risk loci have been identified through GWAS. Here we apply the Bayesian multivariate variable selection algorithm JAM to fine-map 84 prostate cancer susceptibility loci, using summary data from a large European ancestry meta-analysis. We observe evidence for multiple independent signals at 12 regions and 99 risk signals overall. Only 15 original GWAS tag SNPs remain among the catalogue of candidate variants identified; the remainder are replaced by more likely candidates. Biological annotation of our credible set of variants indicates significant enrichment within promoter and enhancer elements, and transcription factor-binding sites, including AR, ERG and FOXA1. In 40 regions at least one variant is colocalised with an eQTL in prostate cancer tissue. The refined set of candidate variants substantially increase the proportion of familial relative risk explained by these known susceptibility regions, which highlights the importance of fine-mapping studies and has implications for clinical risk profiling. © 2018 The Author(s).Peer reviewe

Continuous 14 Day Infusional Ifosfamide for Management of Soft-Tissue and Bone Sarcoma: A Single Centre Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Ifosfamide is used to treat soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) and bone sarcoma (BS), with improved efficacy at doses above 9 g/m2/cycle. To mitigate treatment-associated toxicity with higher doses, continuous infusional ifosfamide is increasingly used. However, clinical outcome data remain limited. Single-centre retrospective analysis of patients treated with four-weekly infusional ifosfamide (14 g/m2/14d) between August 2012 and February 2019 was conducted. Radiological response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity were evaluated. Eighty patients were treated—46 with STS and 34 with BS. Patients received a median of three cycles of infusional ifosfamide (1–24). Overall disease control rate (DCR) in STS was 50% (23 of 46 patients), with a median PFS of 3.8 months, and median OS of 13.0 months. In synovial sarcoma (SS), DCR was 80% (12/15), median PFS 8.1 months and median OS 20.9 months. Overall DCR in BS (34 patients) was 30%, with a median PFS of 2.5 months and median OS of 6.2 months. Five patients (6%) stopped treatment due to toxicity alone within the first two cycles. A further 10 patients stopped treatment due to toxicity during later treatment cycles (12%) and 18 patients (23%) required dose modification. Forty-five patients (56%) experienced grade (G) 3/4 haematological toxicity, with 12 episodes of febrile neutropenia and one treatment-related death. Twenty-seven patients (34%) experienced G3/4 non-haematological toxicity, most commonly nausea and vomiting (10, 13%). In summary, infusional ifosfamide has efficacy in STS, most notable in SS. Benefit appears limited in BS. Treatment is associated with toxicity that requires specialist supportive care

Multidisciplinary management of phyllodes tumours and breast sarcoma : a cross-sectional survey of clinical practice across the United Kingdom and Ireland

Aims Phyllodes tumours and breast sarcomas are uncommon tumours and their rarity poses significant challenges in diagnosis and management. This cross-sectional study was conducted to evaluate the multidisciplinary clinical practice for these tumours across the UK and Ireland, with the aim of identifying gaps in knowledge and providing direction for establishing national guidelines. Materials and methods An international survey was adapted and circulated to breast and/or sarcoma surgeons and oncologists in the UK and Ireland through national organisations. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) responses were analysed anonymously. Results Twenty-eight MDTs participated in this study, predominately from high-volume units (85.5%). Although only 43% of the surveyed units were part of a trust that holds a sarcoma MDT, 68% of units managed malignant phyllodes and angiosarcoma, whereas 64.5% managed soft-tissue sarcoma of the breast. Across all subtypes, axillary surgery was recommended by 14–21% of the MDTs and the most recommended resection margins for breast surgery were ‘no tumour on ink’ in benign phyllodes (39%) and 10 mm in the remaining subtypes (25–29%). Immediate breast reconstruction was supported by 11–18% of MDTs for breast sarcoma subtypes, whereas 36% and 32% advocated this approach in benign and borderline phyllodes tumours, respectively. Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy were recommended by up to 29% and 11% of the MDTs, respectively. Conclusion The results of this study demonstrate a wide variation in clinical practice across the surveyed MDTs. As only 28 MDTs participated in our study, with under-representation from low-volume units, our results might be an underestimation of the variability in practice across the UK and Ireland. This multi-institutional study sheds light on controversial aspects in the management of phyllodes tumours and breast sarcoma, identifies the need for national guidelines to inform best practice, and calls for the centralisation of the management of breast sarcoma within specialist centres

Current clinical practice in the management of phyllodes tumors of the breast : an international cross-sectional study among surgeons and oncologists

PurposePhyllodes tumors of the breast are rare fibroepithelial lesions that are classified as benign, borderline or malignant. There is little consensus on best practice for the work-up, management, and follow-up of patients with phyllodes tumors of the breast, and evidence-based guidelines are lacking.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of surgeons and oncologists with the aim to describe current clinical practice in the management of phyllodes tumors. The survey was constructed in REDCap and distributed between July 2021 and February 2022 through international collaborators in sixteen countries across four continents.ResultsA total of 419 responses were collected and analyzed. The majority of respondents were experienced and worked in a university hospital. Most agreed to recommend a tumor-free excision margin for benign tumors, increasing margins for borderline and malignant tumors. The multidisciplinary team meeting plays a major role in the treatment plan and follow-up. The vast majority did not consider axillary surgery. There were mixed opinions on adjuvant treatment, with a trend towards more liberal regiments in patients with locally advanced tumors. Most respondents preferred a five-year follow-up period for all phyllodes tumor types.ConclusionsThis study shows considerable variation in clinical practice managing phyllodes tumors. This suggests the potential for overtreatment of many patients and the need for education and further research targeting appropriate surgical margins, follow-up time and a multidisciplinary approach. There is a need to develop guidelines that recognize the heterogeneity of phyllodes tumors.Peer reviewe