Investigation of discrepant mismatch repair immunohistochemistry and microsatellite instability polymerase chain reaction test results for gynecologic cancers using next-generation sequencing

Testing for deficient mismatch repair and microsatellite instability : A focused update

Testing to detect mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) and high-grade microsatellite instability (MSI-H) has become an integral part of the routine diagnostic workup for colorectal cancer (CRC). While MSI was initially considered to be a possible indicator of a hereditary disposition to cancer (Lynch syndrome, LS), today the prediction of the therapy response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is in the foreground. Corresponding recommendations and testing algorithms are available for use in primary diagnosis (reviewed in: Rüschoff et al. 2021).Given the increasing importance for routine use and the expanding indication spectrum of ICI therapies for non-CRCs, such as endometrial, small intestinal, gastric, and biliary tract cancers, an updated review of dMMR/MSI testing is presented. The focus is on the challenges in the assessment of immunohistochemical stains and the value of PCR-based procedures, considering the expanded ICI indication spectrum. A practice-oriented flowchart for everyday diagnostic decision-making is provided that considers new data on the frequency and type of discordances between MMR-IHC and MSI-PCR findings, and the possible role of Next Generation Sequencing in clarifying them. Reference is made to the significance of systematic quality assurance measures (e.g., QuIP MSI portal and multicenter proficiency testing), including regular continued training and education.

A Highly Sensitive Pan-Cancer Test for Microsatellite Instability

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is an evolving biomarker for cancer detection and treatment. MSI was first used to identify patients with Lynch syndrome, a hereditary form of colorectal cancer (CRC), but has recently become indispensable in predicting patient response to immunotherapy. To address the need for pan-cancer MSI detection, a new multiplex assay was developed that uses novel long mononucleotide repeat (LMR) markers to improve sensitivity. A total of 469 tumor samples from 20 different cancer types, including 319 from patients with Lynch syndrome, were tested for MSI using the new LMR MSI Analysis System. Results were validated by using deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) status according to immunohistochemistry as the reference standard and compared versus the Promega pentaplex MSI panel. The sensitivity of the LMR panel for detection of dMMR status by immunohistochemistry was 99% for CRC and 96% for non-CRC. The overall percent agreement between the LMR and Promega pentaplex panels was 99% for CRC and 89% for non-CRC tumors. An increased number of unstable markers and the larger size shifts observed in dMMR tumors using the LMR panel increased confidence in MSI determinations. The LMR MSI Analysis System expands the spectrum of cancer types in which MSI can be accurately detected.

[Testing deficient mismatch repair and microsatellite instability : A focused update. German version]

Testing to detect mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) and high-grade microsatellite instability (MSI-H) has become an integral part of the routine diagnostic workup for colorectal cancer (CRC). While MSI was initially considered to be a possible indicator of a hereditary disposition to cancer (Lynch syndrome, LS), today the prediction of the therapy response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is in the foreground. Corresponding recommendations and testing algorithms are available for use in primary diagnosis (reviewed in: Rüschoff et al. 2021).Given the increasing importance for routine use and the expanding indication spectrum of ICI therapies for non-CRCs, such as endometrial, small intestinal, gastric, and biliary tract cancers, an updated review of dMMR/MSI testing is presented. The focus is on the challenges in the assessment of immunohistochemical stains and the value of PCR-based procedures, considering the expanded ICI indication spectrum. A practice-oriented flowchart for everyday diagnostic decision-making is provided that considers new data on the frequency and type of discordances between MMR-IHC and MSI-PCR findings, and the possible role of Next Generation Sequencing in clarifying them. Reference is made to the significance of systematic quality assurance measures (e.g., QuIP MSI portal and multicenter proficiency testing), including regular continued training and education.

A retrospective study of consistency between immunohistochemistry and polymerase chain reaction of microsatellite instability in endometrial cancer

Objectives

Identification of endometrial cancers (EC) with mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) or microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) is essential for Lynch syndrome screening and treatment stratification. We aimed to assess the utility of immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining for MMR protein expression and polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based MSI assays in EC and the correlation between MMR/MSI status and various clinicopathological parameters.

Methods

We reviewed the clinical and pathological information of 333 patients with EC. MMR protein expression was assessed as retained or lost to determine MMR status by IHC staining, and MSI status was identified by PCR capillary electrophoresis (PCR-CE) testing with a National Cancer Institute (NCI) panel. The correlation of MMR/MSI status with clinicopathological features was determined by statistical analysis. Discrepant results were further analyzed using an alternative PCR-CE MSI (Promega panel) method, MLH1 promoter methylation assays, and next-generation sequencing (NGS).

Results

Among the EC patients, the overall percentage of dMMR was 25.2%, and the overall percentage of MSI-H was 24%. Among the dMMR patients, 50 (59.5%) showed loss of MLH1 and PMS2 expression, 19 (22.6%) loss of MSH2 and MSH6 expression, and seven (8.3%) and eight (9.5%) loss of PMS2 and MSH6 expression, respectively. The dMMR subgroup was significantly younger than the pMMR subgroup, especially for <60-years-old patients (p = 0.038). In addition, we identified a strong correlation between MMR/MSI status and high-grade endometrioid or nonendometrioid components (p = 0.004 or p = 0.003). IHC staining and PCR-CE assay results showed a high level of overall concordance (98.8%, Cohen's κ = 0.98). Four patients were found to have dMRR/MSS in both examinations. We reanalyzed them with additional methods. One case showed MLH1 promotor methylation, and the other three cases harbored MSH6 germline pathogenic variations. One of the cases with MSH6 deficiency was reanalyzed as MSI-H by alternative PCR-CE assay or NGS testing.

Conclusions

This study indicates that the combined use of MMR-IHC and PCR-CE MSI analyses may effectively avoid misdiagnoses of EC patients with dMMR/MSI-H. However, use of PCR-CE alone to evaluate MMR/MSI status may lead to missed diagnosis, especially for EC patients with MSH6 deficiency and presenting MSS.

Heterogeneous expression of mismatch repair proteins and interpretation of immunohistochemical results in colorectal cancer and endometrial cancer

To investigate the heterogeneous expression patterns of four mismatch repair (MMR) proteins in colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer (EC), and their effects on the interpretation of immunohistochemical (IHC) results. A total of 1636 CRC and EC specimens were collected from two hospitals. Seventy-eight cases had heterogeneous expression of MMR proteins, including 49 CRC and 29 EC cases. Polymerase chain reaction-capillary electrophoresis (PCR-CE) was then performed to detect the microsatellite instability (MSI) status, and 44 cases were further verified by targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS). Heterogeneous expression of MMR proteins was observed in 66 cases (66/78, 84.6%) of proficient MMR (pMMR) and 12 cases (12/78, 15.4%) of deficient MMR (dMMR). The proportion of heterogeneous MMR protein expression in EC (12.0%) was higher than that in CRC (3.5%). The heterogeneous expression patterns were divided into focal clonal heterogeneity (6/78, 7.7%) and glandular mosaic heterogeneity (72/78, 92.3%). Surprisingly, three pMMR CRC cases showed isolated small focal clonal heterogeneity of mutS homologue 6 (MSH6), with < 15% positive tumour cells, which was validated as high MSI (MSI-H) with PCR-CE and NGS. However, the other three EC pMMR cases with > 50% focal clonal heterogeneity of MMR proteins were verified as microsatellite stable (MSS) or low MSI (MSI-L). Fifteen EC cases with glandular mosaic heterogeneous expression of MMR proteins included two MSI-H cases, which were validated using PCR-CE and NGS. Among the dMMR cases, only two EC cases with mutL homologue 1 (MLH1)/PMS1 homologue 2, mismatch repair system component (PMS2) loss and MSH2/MSH6 mosaic heterogeneous expression were confirmed as MSS using PCR-CE and NGS, which may be related to the mechanism of MLH1 promoter methylation. Thus, in CRC, only cases with small focal clonal heterogeneous expression of MSH6 have a high likelihood of MSI-H, and further PCR-CE or NGS testing is recommended. The possibility of MSI-H cannot be ruled out in EC cases with glandular mosaic heterogeneous expression of MMR proteins; PCR-CE or NGS detection is therefore necessary.

Discrepancy among microsatellite instability detection methodologies in non-colorectal cancer: Report of 3 cases

BACKGROUND

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a predictive biomarker for cancer immunotherapy. The tumor-agnostic nature of MSI makes it a denominator for immunotherapy in several solid tumors. It can be assessed using next-generation sequencing (NGS), fluorescent multiplex PCR, and immunohistochemistry (IHC).

CASE SUMMARY

Here, we report 3 cases with discordant MSI results detected using different methods. A cholangiocellular carcinoma case revealed proficient mismatch repair (MMR) by IHC but high MSI (MSI-H) by liquid NGS. A cervical cancer case revealed deficient MMR by IHC, microsatellite stable by PCR, and MSI-H by NGS. Lastly, an endometrial cancer case revealed proficient MMR by IHC but MSI-H by NGS.

CONCLUSION

IHC for MMR status is the first choice due to several advantages. However, in cases of indeterminate IHC results, molecular testing by MSI-PCR is preferred. Recently, NGS-based MSI assays are being widely used to detect MSI-H tumors. All three methods have high accuracy; however, the inconsistencies between them may lead to misdiagnosis.

Microsatellite instability profiles of gastrointestinal cancers: comparison between non-colorectal and colorectal origin

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a major carcinogenic pathway with prognostic and predictive implications. The validity of polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based MSI testing is well established in colorectal cancer; however, the data are limited in non-colorectal gastrointestinal cancers. The aim of this study is to clarify the detailed MSI profiles of non-colorectal gastrointestinal cancers and to investigate the differences from those of colorectal cancers. MSI testing was performed using paired tumour/normal tissues of 123 mismatch repair-deficient cancers detected by immunohistochemistry including 80 non-colorectal cancers (eight oesophagogastric junction (EGJ), 57 gastric and 15 small intestine) and 43 colorectal cancers. Fragment size analysis revealed that the mean nucleotide shifts of five markers (Promega panel) were the highest in the stomach (6.4), followed by colorectum (5.7), small intestine (5.0) and EGJ cancers (mean = 4.0; P = 0.015, versus stomach). All cases showed ≥ 1 nucleotide shift in ≥ 2 markers and were considered as MSI-high. However, when the cut-off was set to ≥ 3 nucleotide shifts in ≥ 2 markers, three EGJ (37.5%), two small intestine (13.3%) and two gastric (3.5%) cancers showed false-negative results. In addition, cases with isolated loss of MSH6 or PMS2 showed smaller nucleotide shifts than those in others. MSI testing is applicable to non-colorectal gastrointestinal cancers; however, a subset can yield false-negative results due to subtle nucleotide shift in multiple markers. Analysis of paired tumour/normal tissues and careful interpretation is necessary to avoid false-negative results and ensure appropriate treatment.

Immunologic Signatures across Molecular Subtypes and Potential Biomarkers for Sub-Stratification in Endometrial Cancer

Current molecular classification approaches for endometrial cancer (EC) often employ multiple testing platforms. Some subtypes still lack univocal prognostic significance, highlighting the need for risk sub-stratification. The tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) is associated with tumor progression and prognosis. We sought to investigate the feasibility of classifying EC via DNA sequencing and interrogate immunologic signatures and prognostic markers across and within subtypes, respectively. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedding (FFPE) samples from 50 EC patients underwent targeted DNA and RNA sequencing, and multiplex immunofluorescence assay for TIME. DNA sequencing classified 10%, 20%, 52%, and 18% of patients into the subtype of POLE-mutant, microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H), TP53-wt, and TP53-mutant. POLE-mutant tumors expressed the highest T-effector and IFN-γ signature and the lowest innate anti-PD-1 resistance signature among subtypes. TP53-wt revealed a converse enrichment trend for these immunologic signatures. Survival analyses using the Cancer Genome Atlas Uterine Corpus Endometrial Carcinoma (TCGA-UCEC) dataset identified associations of CCR5 (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.71, p = 0.035), TNFRSF14 (HR = 0.58, p = 0.028), and IL-10 (HR = 2.5, p = 0.012) with overall survival within MSI-H, TP53-mutant, and TP53-wt subtype, respectively. A TIME comparison between the sub-stratified subgroups of our cohort revealed upregulated tumor infiltration of immune cells in the low-risk subgroups. Our study demonstrates that targeted DNA sequencing is an effective one-stop strategy to classify EC. Immunomodulatory genes may serve as prognostic markers within subtypes.

Evaluation of immunotherapy efficacy in gynecologic cancer

Various immunotherapies have demonstrated remarkable success over the past few decades, and have been approved for the treatment of different cancer types. However, patient responses to immunotherapy are variable, and approximately 50% of cases are refractory to these agents. Tumor biomarker-based stratification of cases may therefore help identify subpopulations that are sensitive/resistant to immunotherapy; it may also improve prediction of response in various cancers including gynecologic cancer. These biomarkers include the tumor mutational burden, microsatellite instability, mismatch repair deficiency, T cell-inflamed gene expression profile, programmed cell death protein 1 ligand 1, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and numerous other genomic alterations. Future directions in the treatment of gynecologic cancer include the utilization of these biomarkers to select ideal candidates. This review focused on recent advances in the predictive ability of molecular biomarkers in patients with gynecologic cancer who undergo immunotherapy. The most recent developments in combined immunotherapy and targeted therapy strategies and novel immune interventions against gynecologic cancers have also been discussed.

Clinical Testing for Mismatch Repair in Neoplasms Using Multiple Laboratory Methods

Background: A deficiency in DNA mismatch repair function in neoplasms can be assessed by an immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis of the deficiency/loss of the mismatch repair proteins (dMMR) or by PCR-based methods to assess high microsatellite instability (MSI-H). In some cases, however, there is a discrepancy between the IHC and MSI analyses. Several studies have addressed the issue of discrepancy between IHC and MSI deficiency assessment, but there are limited studies that also incorporate genetic/epigenetic alterations. Methods: In this single-institution retrospective chart-review study, we reviewed 706 neoplasms assessed between 2015 and 2021. All eligible neoplasms were assessed by IHC testing, MSI analysis by PCR-based assay, and tumor-normal paired next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis. Eighty percent of neoplasms with MLH1 protein loss had a concurrent MLH1 promoter methylation analysis. Mutation data for MMR genes, IHC, MSI analysis, and tumor histology were correlated with each other. Results: Fifty-eight (8.2%) of 706 neoplasms had MSI-H by PCR and/or dMMR by IHC. Of the 706 analyzed neoplasms, 688 neoplasms (98%) had concordant results: MSI-H/dMMR (n = 44), microsatellite-stable (MSS)/proficient MMR (pMMR) (n = 625), and MSI-Low (L)/pMMR (n = 19). Of the remaining 18 neoplasms, 9 had a major discordance: MSS/loss of MSH2 and MSH6 (n = 3), MSS/loss of MSH6 (n = 2), MSS/Loss of MLH1 and PMS2 (n = 1), and MSI-High/pMMR (n = 3). In total, 57% of cases with dMMR and 61% of cases with MSI-H had a null mutation of an MMR gene mutation (or methylation of the MLH1 promoter), whereas this figure was 1% for neoplasms with a normal IHC or MSI pattern (p < 0.001). Among 9 cases with major discordance between MSI and IHC, only 3 cases (33%) had an underlying genetic/epigenetic etiology, whereas 37 (76%) of 49 cases with MSI-H and/or dMMR and without major discordance had an underlying genetic abnormality (p = 0.02). Discussion: For most neoplasms, IHC and PCR-based MSI testing results are concordant. In addition, an underlying genetic abnormality (a null mutation of an MMR gene or MLH1 promoter methylation) was attributable to dMMR and/or MSI-H findings. For neoplasms with major discordance in IHC and MSI testing, the addition and integration of NGS results and MLH1 promoter methylation analyses can be beneficial for resolving borderline cases, thereby facilitating patient management.