Familial cancer of unknown primary

Advancements in Diagnostics and Therapeutics for Cancer of Unknown Primary in the Era of Precision Medicine

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP), a set of histologically confirmed metastases that cannot be identified or traced back to its primary despite comprehensive investigations, accounts for 2-5% of all malignancies. CUP is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, with a median overall survival (OS) of 3-16 months. CUP has long been challenging to diagnose principally due to the occult properties of primary site. In the current era of molecular diagnostics, advancements in methodologies based on cytology, histology, gene expression profiling (GEP), and genomic and epigenomic analysis have greatly improved the diagnostic accuracy of CUP, surpassing 90%. Our center conducted the world's first phase III trial and demonstrated improved progression-free survival and favorable OS by GEP-guided site-specific treatment of CUP, setting the foundation of site-specific treatment in first-line management for CUP. In this review, we detailed the epidemiology, etiology, pathogenesis, as well as the histologic, genetic, and clinical characteristics of CUP. We also provided an overview of the advancements in the diagnostics and therapeutics of CUP over the past 50 years. Moving forward, we propose optimizing diagnostic modalities and exploring further-line treatment regimens as two focus areas for future studies on CUP.

Advances in Cancer Research: Current and Future Diagnostic and Therapeutic Strategies

Cancers of unknown primary (CUP) exhibit significant cellular heterogeneity and malignancy, which poses significant challenges for diagnosis and treatment. Recent years have seen deeper insights into the imaging, pathology, and genetic characteristics of CUP, driven by interdisciplinary collaboration and the evolution of diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. However, due to their insidious onset, lack of evidence-based medicine, and limited clinical understanding, diagnosing and treating CUP remain a significant challenge. To inspire more creative and fantastic research, herein, we report and highlight recent advances in the diagnosis and therapeutic strategies of CUP. Specifically, we discuss advanced diagnostic technologies, including 12-deoxy-2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-D-glucose integrated with computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) or 68Ga-FAPI (fibroblast activation protein inhibitor) PET/CT, liquid biopsy, molecular diagnostics, self-assembling nanotechnology, and artificial intelligence (AI). In particular, the discussion will extend to the effective treatment techniques currently available, such as targeted therapies, immunotherapies, and bio-nanotechnology-based therapeutics. Finally, a novel perspective on the challenges and directions for future CUP diagnostic and therapeutic strategies is discussed.

[Radiological imaging in CUP syndrome]

PROBLEM

If no obvious primary tumour is detectable in metastatic tumours (cancer of unknown primary, CUP), it should nevertheless be identified if possible, as specific therapy achieves better results than empirical, palliative treatment of CUP.

METHODOLOGY

The new guideline of the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) defines algorithms for the evaluation of CUP, in which radiological and nuclear imaging procedures play a central role. Important clues to a possible primary tumour are the size and morphology of foci and the presence of a dominant lesion, as well as the pattern of hematogeneous metastatic spread in affected organs, and the anatomical distribution of affected lymph nodes.

CONCLUSION

In patients with metastases, imaging plays an important role in identifying a possible primary tumour, but the diagnosis must be made with knowledge of the clinical and immunohistochemical results. In difficult cases, there should be interdisciplinary consultation between reference oncology, radiology, and pathology on the presence of CUP.

From Biology to Diagnosis and Treatment: The Ariadne’s Thread in Cancer of Unknown Primary

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) encloses a group of heterogeneous tumours, the primary sites for which cannot be identified at the time of diagnosis, despite extensive investigations. CUP has always posed major challenges both in its diagnosis and management, leading to the hypothesis that it is rather a distinct entity with specific genetic and phenotypic aberrations, considering the regression or dormancy of the primary tumour; the development of early, uncommon systemic metastases; and the resistance to therapy. Patients with CUP account for 1–3% of all human malignancies and can be categorised into two prognostic subsets according to their clinicopathologic characteristics at presentation. The diagnosis of CUP mainly depends on the standard evaluation comprising a thorough medical history; complete physical examination; histopathologic morphology and algorithmic immunohistochemistry assessment; and CT scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis. However, physicians and patients do not fare well with these criteria and often perform additional time-consuming evaluations to identify the primary tumour site to guide treatment decisions. The development of molecularly guided diagnostic strategies has emerged to complement traditional procedures but has been disappointing thus far. In this review, we present the latest data on CUP regarding the biology, molecular profiling, classification, diagnostic workup, and treatment.

Cancer of Unknown Primary: Challenges and Progress in Clinical Management

Distant metastases are the main cause of cancer-related deaths in patients with advanced tumors. A standard diagnostic workup usually contains the identification of the tissue-of-origin of metastatic tumors, although under certain circumstances, it remains elusive. This disease setting is defined as cancer of unknown primary (CUP). Accounting for approximately 3-5% of all cancer diagnoses, CUPs are characterized by an aggressive clinical behavior and represent a real therapeutic challenge. The lack of determination of a tissue of origin precludes CUP patients from specific evidence-based therapeutic options or access to clinical trial, which significantly impacts their life expectancy. In the era of precision medicine, it is essential to characterize CUP molecular features, including the expression profile of non-coding RNAs, to improve our understanding of CUP biology and identify novel therapeutic strategies. This review article sheds light on this enigmatic disease by summarizing the current knowledge on CUPs focusing on recent discoveries and emerging diagnostic strategies.

The diagnostic challenges of patients with carcinoma of unknown primary

INTRODUCTION

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a disease entity encompassing heterogeneous malignancies without a clinically-detectable anatomical primary. It is usually a poor prognosis malignancy with dismal prognosis where molecular and genetic testing were expected to be a major breakthrough.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we provide an overview of the advances in the understanding of the carcinogenesis, biology, diagnosis and treatment of patients with CUP. This review focuses on the advantages and inconveniences of immunohistochemistry and CUP classifiers in assessing the progress in the management of CUP.

EXPERT OPINION

CUP classifiers were expected to gradually replace the classical multistep approach in identifying the culprit tumors to guide site-specific therapy. Immunohistochemistry staining led to the prediction of a single tissue of origin in 10.8-51%. CUP classifiers identified the primary site in 61-89% of these cases and were concordant with immunohistochemistry in 57.1-100%. Immunohistochemistry is cheap, fast and broadly available whereas CUP classifiers are less widely available and have not been validated in randomized control trials. The diagnostic recommendations consist of a standard pathology evaluation based on morphology and algorithmic immunohistochemistry assessment. Physicians should weigh in the input of the CUP classifier to the clinical picture and pathology investigations before performing additional investigations.

What can we learn from cancer of unknown primary in canine oncology?

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) represents a heterogeneous group of metastatic tumors that lack an identifiable primary site despite an extensive diagnostic work-up. It is a well-recognized entity that is characterized by early dissemination, aggressive clinical course, unpredictable metastatic pattern, intrinsic treatment resistance, and a dismal prognosis. Despite the molecular diagnostic workup and personalized therapy, the expected improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of CUP have not been achieved. Comparative oncology has a promising role in the exchange of knowledge and practices between humans and canines. Therefore, we intended to review the literature reporting on CUP in dogs in order to identify some interesting parallels and unique results that could be transposed to in-human research.

Progress in refining the clinical management of cancer of unknown primary in the molecular era

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is an enigmatic disease entity encompassing heterogeneous malignancies without a detectable primary tumour, despite a thorough diagnostic workup. A minority of patients with CUP (15-20%) can be assigned a putative primary tissue of origin according to clinical and histopathological findings and typically have a more favourable prognosis with the use of corresponding tumour type-specific therapies. Thus, the majority of patients with CUP have disease that cannot be assigned to a culprit primary tumour, are treated with empirical chemotherapy and have a poor prognosis. In the molecular era, the use of (epi)genomic or transcriptomic CUP classifiers and DNA or RNA sequencing offers two, sometimes overlapping, therapeutic strategies: tumour type-specific therapy and biomarker-guided therapy. Published data reveal that the accuracy of site-of-origin predictions made using CUP classifiers ranges between 54% and 98% when compared with the assignment made according to the recommended clinicopathological criteria. These advances have led to promising results in non-randomized prospective studies evaluating the efficacy of tumour type-specific therapy; however, the favourable outcomes were not confirmed in randomized controlled studies comparing this approach with standard empirical chemotherapy. Currently, the evidence supporting the use of biomarker-guided therapies is limited to case reports and small case series. In this Review, we discuss the clinical management of CUP in the era of precision medicine. We focus on the advances in understanding the biology of CUP, the implications for the diagnosis and classification of CUP according to the tissue of origin and the shift away from empirical therapy towards tailored therapy.

Exploring the biological hallmarks of cancer of unknown primary: where do we stand today?

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) affects a small percentage of the general population. Nonetheless, a substantial number of these patients have a poor prognosis and consequently succumb to their illness within a year of diagnosis. The natural history of CUP is characterised by early metastasis from the unknown primary site, aggressive course and resistance to conventional chemotherapy. Unfortunately, the processes by which this orphan disease originates and progresses have not been fully elucidated and its biology remain unclear. Despite the conceptual progress in genetic and molecular profiling made over the past decade, recognition of the genetic and molecular abnormalities involved in CUP, as well as the identification of the tissue of origin remain unresolved issues. This review will outline the biology of CUP by exploring the hallmarks of cancer in order to rationalise the complexities of this enigmatic syndrome. This approach will help the reader to understand where research efforts currently stand and the pitfalls of this quest.

"Metastatic Cancer of Unknown Primary" or "Primary Metastatic Cancer"?

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is an umbrella term used to classify a heterogeneous group of metastatic cancers based on the absence of an identifiable primary tumor. Clinically, CUPs are characterized by a set of distinct features comprising early metastatic dissemination in an atypical pattern, an aggressive clinical course, poor response to empiric chemotherapy and, consequently, a short life expectancy. Two opposing strategies to change the dismal prognosis for the better are pursued. On the one hand, following the traditional tissue-gnostic approach, more and more sophisticated tissue-of-origin (TOO) classifier assays are employed to push identification of the putative primary to its limits with the clear intent of allowing tumor-site specific treatment. However, robust evidence supporting its routine clinical use is still lacking, notably with two recent randomized clinical trials failing to show a patient benefit of TOO-prediction based site-specific treatment over empiric chemotherapy in CUP. On the other hand, with regards to a tissue-agnostic strategy, precision medicine approaches targeting actionable genomic alterations have already transformed the treatment for many known tumor types. Yet, an unmet need remains for well-designed clinical trials to scrutinize its potential role in CUP beyond anecdotal case reports. In the absence of practice changing results, we believe that the emphasis on finding the presumed unknown primary tumor at all costs, implicit in the term CUP, has biased recent research in the field. Focusing on the distinct clinical features shared by all CUPs, we advocate adopting the term primary metastatic cancer (PMC) to denominate a distinct cancer entity instead. In our view, PMC should be considered the archetype of metastatic disease and as such, despite accounting for a mere 2–3% of malignancies, unraveling the mechanisms at play goes beyond improving the prognosis of patients with PMC and promises to greatly enhance our understanding of the metastatic process and carcinogenesis across all cancer types.

DNA Methylation Cancer Biomarkers: Translation to the Clinic

Carcinogenesis is accompanied by widespread DNA methylation changes within the cell. These changes are characterized by a globally hypomethylated genome with focal hypermethylation of numerous 5’-cytosine-phosphate-guanine-3’ (CpG) islands, often spanning gene promoters and first exons. Many of these epigenetic changes occur early in tumorigenesis and are highly pervasive across a tumor type. This allows DNA methylation cancer biomarkers to be suitable for early detection and also to have utility across a range of areas relevant to cancer detection and treatment. Such tests are also simple in construction, as only one or a few loci need to be targeted for good test coverage. These properties make cancer-associated DNA methylation changes very attractive for development of cancer biomarker tests with substantive clinical utility. Across the patient journey from initial detection, to treatment and then monitoring, there are several points where DNA methylation assays can inform clinical practice. Assays on surgically removed tumor tissue are useful to determine indicators of treatment resistance, prognostication of outcome, or to molecularly characterize, classify, and determine the tissue of origin of a tumor. Cancer-associated DNA methylation changes can also be detected with accuracy in the cell-free DNA present in blood, stool, urine, and other biosamples. Such tests hold great promise for the development of simple, economical, and highly specific cancer detection tests suitable for population-wide screening, with several successfully translated examples already. The ability of circulating tumor DNA liquid biopsy assays to monitor cancer in situ also allows for the ability to monitor response to therapy, to detect minimal residual disease and as an early biomarker for cancer recurrence. This review will summarize existing DNA methylation cancer biomarkers used in clinical practice across the application domains above, discuss what makes a suitable DNA methylation cancer biomarker, and identify barriers to translation. We discuss technical factors such as the analytical performance and product-market fit, factors that contribute to successful downstream investment, including geography, and how this impacts intellectual property, regulatory hurdles, and the future of the marketplace and healthcare system.