CDX2: Linking Cell and Patient Fates in Colon Cancer

CDX2 and Muc2 immunohistochemistry as prognostic markers in stage II colon cancer

The treatment for colorectal cancer is largely surgical followed by adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk cases. In patients with stage II cancer, there is no clear benefit for chemotherapy, and the current tools for assessment of risk are inadequate. A recent study identified that colorectal cancer with a gene signature similar to undifferentiated colonic stem cells was associated with a worse outcome. It was later shown that loss of CDX2 detected by immunohistochemistry (IHC) alone resulted in a worse prognosis and that this could be used to predict patients who would benefit from chemotherapy. Having observed that CDX2 expression can be patchy, we elected to validate these prior results for clinical practice using whole-slide IHC. The pathology of all cases was reviewed, and 3 blocks were selected for CDX2 IHC. We also expanded the panel beyond CDX2 to assess whether other markers in the gene signature including CDX1, Muc2, GPX2, and villin could better predict outcome. Among 210 cases, CDX2 expression was diffusely lost in 11% and focally lost in 23% of cases. There was no difference in survival based on CDX2 expression, but Muc2 loss was associated with reduced survival (hazard ratio, 3.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.20 to 9.20). No significant differences in outcome were identified based on CDX1, GPX2, or villin expression. In keeping with this, assessment of The Cancer Genome Atlas gene expression data demonstrated that decreased Muc2 expression was associated with reduced overall survival. Our results with whole-slide IHC are different from the previous studies and caution against the use of CDX2 in isolation as a prognostic marker in clinical practice. We have identified that loss of Muc2 is associated with reduced survival. This supports the use of the colonic differentiation gene expression signature to identify high-risk patients but cautions against the use of any one IHC-based marker in isolation.

Incorporation of CEA Improves Risk Stratification in Stage II Colon Cancer

High-risk features are used to direct adjuvant therapy for stage II colon cancer. Currently, high-risk features are identified postoperatively, limiting preoperative risk stratification. We hypothesized carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) can improve preoperative risk stratification for stage II colon cancer. The National Cancer Database (NCDB 2004-2009) was reviewed for stage II colon adenocarcinoma patients undergoing curative intent resection. A novel risk stratification including both traditional high-risk features (T4 lesion, <12 lymph nodes sampled, and poor differentiation) and elevated CEA was developed. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier and adjusted Cox proportional hazards analyzed overall survival. Concordance Probability Estimates (CPE) assessed discrimination. Seventy-four thousand nine hundred forty-five patients were identified; 40,844 (54.5%) had CEA levels reported and were included. Chemotherapy administration was similar between normal and elevated CEA groups (23.8 vs. 25.1%, p = 0.003). Compared to patients with CEA elevation, 5-year overall survival in patients with normal CEA was improved (74.5 vs. 63.4%, p < 0.001). Restratification incorporating CEA resulted in reclassification of 6912 patients (16.9%) from average to high risk. CPE increased for novel risk stratification (0.634 vs. 0.612, SE = 0.005). The routinely available CEA test improved risk stratification for stage II colon cancer. CEA not only may improve staging of colon cancer but may also help guide additional therapy.

Construction and analysis of tissue microarrays in the era of digital pathology: a pilot study targeting CDX1 and CDX2 in a colon cancer cohort of 612 patients

CDX1 and CDX2 are possibly predictive biomarkers in colorectal cancer. We combined digitally‐guided (next generation) TMA construction (ngTMA) and the utility of digital image analysis (DIA) to assess accuracy, tumour heterogeneity and the selective impact of different combined intensity‐percentage levels on prognosis.CDX1 and CDX2 immunohistochemistry was performed on ngTMAs covering normal tissue, tumour centre and invasive front. The percentages of all epithelial cells per staining intensity per core were analysed digitally. Beyond classical prognosis analysis following REMARK guidelines, we investigated pre‐analytical conditions, three different types of heterogeneity (mosaic‐like, targeted and haphazard) and influences on cohort segregation and patient selection. The ngTMA‐DIA approach produced robust biomarker data with infrequent core loss and excellent on‐target punching. The detailed assessment of tumour heterogeneity could – except for a certain diffuse mosaic‐like heterogeneity – exclude differences between the invasive front and tumour centre, as well as detect haphazard clonal heterogeneous elements. Moreover, lower CDX1 and CDX2 counts correlated with mucinous histology, higher TNM stage, higher tumour grade and worse survival (p < 0.01, all). Different protein expression intensity levels shared comparable prognostic power and a great overlap in patient selection. The combination of ngTMA with DIA enhances accuracy and controls for biomarker analysis. Beyond the confirmation of CDX1 and CDX2 as prognostically relevant markers in CRC, this study highlights the greater robustness of CDX2 in comparison to CDX1. For the assessment of CDX2 protein loss, cut‐points as percentage data of complete protein loss can be deduced as a recommendation.