Predicting the future: a critical appraisal of cancer prognosis studies

Doug Altman: Driving critical appraisal and improvements in the quality of methodological and medical research

Doug Altman was a visionary leader and one of the most influential medical statisticians of the last 40 years. Based on a presentation in the "Invited session in memory of Doug Altman" at the 40th Annual Conference of the International Society for Clinical Biostatistics (ISCB) in Leuven, Belgium and our long-standing collaborations with Doug, we discuss his contributions to regression modeling, reporting, prognosis research, as well as some more general issues while acknowledging that we cannot cover the whole spectrum of Doug's considerable methodological output. His statement "To maximize the benefit to society, you need to not just do research but do it well" should be a driver for all researchers. To improve current and future research, we aim to summarize Doug's messages for these three topics.

More than meets the eye: the changing face of histopathology

This personal reflection on trends in histopathology over the past 50 years draws upon experience of professional training and practice in the specialty in the UK. Developments during this period often resulted from new therapies (and their adverse effects) necessitating greater precision in the histopathological classification of disease, for which morphology alone can be insufficient. Conversely, histopathology has contributed to advances in our understanding of disease, leading directly to novel and more effective treatments. New infections, some involving histopathology in their discovery, have also led to fresh diagnostic challenges. Increasingly, patients have benefited from fundamental changes in professionalism in pathology. Through audit, external quality assurance, continuing professional development, standardized reporting, and increasing specialization, the consistency and reliability of histopathological diagnoses have steadily improved. Regarding the specialty's future, some now see rivalry between the morphological and molecular approaches to diagnosis and classification, particularly for neoplastic disease. An integrated strategy led by the specialty is more likely to strengthen histopathology and ultimately to have the greatest benefit for patients.

A Bayesian Approach for the Cox Proportional Hazards Model with Covariates Subject to Detection Limit

The research on biomarkers has been limited in its effectiveness because biomarker levels can only be measured within the thresholds of assays and laboratory instruments, a challenge referred to as a detection limit (DL) problem. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian approach to the Cox proportional hazards model with explanatory variables subject to lower, upper, or interval DLs. We demonstrate that by formulating the time-to-event outcome using the Poisson density with counting process notation, implementing the proposed approach in the OpenBUGS and JAGS is straightforward. We have conducted extensive simulations to compare the proposed Bayesian approach to the other four commonly used methods and to evaluate its robustness with respect to the distribution assumption of the biomarkers. The proposed Bayesian approach and other methods were applied to an acute lung injury study, in which a panel of cytokine biomarkers was studied for the biomarkers’ association with ventilation-free survival.

Individual participant data meta-analysis for a binary outcome: one-stage or two-stage?

BACKGROUND

A fundamental aspect of epidemiological studies concerns the estimation of factor-outcome associations to identify risk factors, prognostic factors and potential causal factors. Because reliable estimates for these associations are important, there is a growing interest in methods for combining the results from multiple studies in individual participant data meta-analyses (IPD-MA). When there is substantial heterogeneity across studies, various random-effects meta-analysis models are possible that employ a one-stage or two-stage method. These are generally thought to produce similar results, but empirical comparisons are few.

OBJECTIVE

We describe and compare several one- and two-stage random-effects IPD-MA methods for estimating factor-outcome associations from multiple risk-factor or predictor finding studies with a binary outcome. One-stage methods use the IPD of each study and meta-analyse using the exact binomial distribution, whereas two-stage methods reduce evidence to the aggregated level (e.g. odds ratios) and then meta-analyse assuming approximate normality. We compare the methods in an empirical dataset for unadjusted and adjusted risk-factor estimates.

RESULTS

Though often similar, on occasion the one-stage and two-stage methods provide different parameter estimates and different conclusions. For example, the effect of erythema and its statistical significance was different for a one-stage (OR = 1.35, [Formula: see text]) and univariate two-stage (OR = 1.55, [Formula: see text]). Estimation issues can also arise: two-stage models suffer unstable estimates when zero cell counts occur and one-stage models do not always converge.

CONCLUSION

When planning an IPD-MA, the choice and implementation (e.g. univariate or multivariate) of a one-stage or two-stage method should be prespecified in the protocol as occasionally they lead to different conclusions about which factors are associated with outcome. Though both approaches can suffer from estimation challenges, we recommend employing the one-stage method, as it uses a more exact statistical approach and accounts for parameter correlation.

Publication and reporting conduct for pharmacodynamic analyses of tumor tissue in early-phase oncology trials

PURPOSE

In principle, nondiagnostic biopsies for pharmacodynamic (PD) studies are carried out to inform decision-making in drug development. Because such procedures have no therapeutic value, their ethical justification requires that results be published. We aimed to assess the frequency of nonpublication of PD data in early phase cancer trials and to identify factors that prevent full publication of data.

METHODS

We identified a sample of early-phase cancer trials containing invasive nondiagnostic tissue procurement for PD analysis from American Society of Clinical Oncology and American Association for Cancer Research meeting abstracts published between 1995 and 2005. These trials were followed to publication to determine frequency of nonpublication of PD data. Corresponding authors on early-phase cancer trials using invasive nondiagnostic research procedures were also surveyed to identify factors preventing full publication of PD data.

RESULTS

In a sample of 90 trials, 22.2% (20 trials) resulted in no trial publication. Of published trials expected to contain PD reports, 16 (17.8%) did not include any PD data, and 21 (23.3%) reported incomplete PD data. We surveyed 92 authors; nonpublication was regarded as a frequent occurrence, and the most commonly cited barrier to full publication of PD data was strategic considerations in publication (58.8% of responding authors).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest ways that investigators, study planners, and reviewers can improve the burden/knowledge value balance in PD studies.

Chapter 12: systematic review of prognostic tests

A number of new biological markers are being studied as predictors of disease or adverse medical events among those who already have a disease. Systematic reviews of this growing literature can help determine whether the available evidence supports use of a new biomarker as a prognostic test that can more accurately place patients into different prognostic groups to improve treatment decisions and the accuracy of outcome predictions. Exemplary reviews of prognostic tests are not widely available, and the methods used to review diagnostic tests do not necessarily address the most important questions about prognostic tests that are used to predict the time-dependent likelihood of future patient outcomes. We provide suggestions for those interested in conducting systematic reviews of a prognostic test. The proposed use of the prognostic test should serve as the framework for a systematic review and to help define the key questions. The outcome probabilities or level of risk and other characteristics of prognostic groups are the most salient statistics for review and perhaps meta-analysis. Reclassification tables can help determine how a prognostic test affects the classification of patients into different prognostic groups, hence their treatment. Review of studies of the association between a potential prognostic test and patient outcomes would have little impact other than to determine whether further development as a prognostic test might be warranted.

Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK): explanation and elaboration

BACKGROUND

The Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK) checklist consists of 20 items to report for published tumor marker prognostic studies. It was developed to address widespread deficiencies in the reporting of such studies. In this paper we expand on the REMARK checklist to enhance its use and effectiveness through better understanding of the intent of each item and why the information is important to report.

METHODS

REMARK recommends including a transparent and full description of research goals and hypotheses, subject selection, specimen and assay considerations, marker measurement methods, statistical design and analysis, and study results. Each checklist item is explained and accompanied by published examples of good reporting, and relevant empirical evidence of the quality of reporting. We give prominence to discussion of the 'REMARK profile', a suggested tabular format for summarizing key study details.

SUMMARY

The paper provides a comprehensive overview to educate on good reporting and provide a valuable reference for the many issues to consider when designing, conducting, and analyzing tumor marker studies and prognostic studies in medicine in general. To encourage dissemination of the Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK): Explanation and Elaboration, this article has also been published in PLoS Medicine.

Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK): explanation and elaboration

The REMARK (Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies) guideline includes a checklist which aims to improve the reporting of these types of studies. Here, we expand on the REMARK checklist to enhance its use and effectiveness through better understanding of the intent of each item and why the information is important to report. Each checklist item of the REMARK guideline is explained in detail and accompanied by published examples of good reporting. The paper provides a comprehensive overview to educate on good reporting and provide a valuable reference of issues to consider when designing, conducting, and analyzing tumor marker studies and prognostic studies in medicine in general.

Biomarkers and patient selection for PI3K/Akt/mTOR targeted therapies: current status and future directions

The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt/ mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway regulates a broad spectrum of physiologic and pathologic processes. In breast cancer mutation, amplification, deletion, methylation, and posttranslational modifications lead to significant dysregulation of this pathway leading to more aggressive and potentially drug-resistant disease. Multiple novel agents, targeting different nodes within the pathway are currently under development by both commercial and academic partners. The key to the successful validation of these markers is selection of the appropriate patient groups using biomarkers. This article reviews current progress in this area, highlighting the key molecular alterations described in genes within the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway that may have an effect on response to current and future therapeutic interventions. Herein, gaps in current knowledge are highlighted and suggestions for future research directions given that may facilitate biomarker development in partnership with current drug development.

Morphometric evaluation of NB84, synaptophysin and AgNOR is useful for the histological diagnosis and prognosis in peripheral neuroblastic tumors (pNTs)

OBJECTIVE

To study the importance of NB84, synaptophysin and AgNOR and explore the quantitative association of these factors with diagnosis and outcome as well as the association between NB84 and AgNOR and other tumor and stromal factors in twenty-eight peripheral neuroblastic tumors.

METHODS

We assessed AgNORs, NB84, synaptophysin and several other markers in tumor tissues from 28 patients with primary neuroblastic tumors. The treatment included: surgery for stage 1, chemotherapy and bone marrow transplantation for most of stages 3 and 4. Histochemistry, immunohistochemistry and morphometry were used to evaluate the amount of tumor staining for AgNOR, NB84 and synaptophysin; the outcome for our study was survival time until death due to recurrent neuroblastic tumors.

RESULTS

Only stage (p<0.01), AgNOR (p<0.01), NB84 (p<0.01) and synaptophysin (p=0.01) reached statistical significance as prognostic indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

Determination of NB84 and synaptophysin are useful tools for the diagnosis of peripheral neuroblastic tumors The association of the evaluation of AgNOR expression by the tumor cells may provide an important contribution to the prognostic evaluation and management approach of the patients.

Clinical relevance of molecular genetics to paediatric sarcomas

The application of cytogenetic and molecular genetic analyses to paediatric sarcomas has identified a number of characteristic changes associated with types and subtypes of sarcomas. This has led to increased understanding of the underlying molecular biology of some sarcomas and provided an important adjunct to standard morphological and immunohistochemical diagnoses. Characteristic genetic abnormalities, particularly specific chromosome translocations and associated fusion genes, have diagnostic and in some cases prognostic value. There is also the potential to detect micrometastastic disease. Fusion genes are most readily detected by fluorescence in situ hybridisation and reverse transcription-PCR technologies. The expression profiles of tumours with specific fusion genes are characteristically similar and the molecular signatures of sarcomas are also proving to be of diagnostic and prognostic value. Furthermore, fusion genes and other emerging molecular events associated with sarcomas represent potential targets for novel therapeutic approaches which are desperately required to improve the outcome of children with certain categories of sarcoma, including rhabdomyosarcomas and the Ewing's family of tumours. Increased understanding of the molecular biology of sarcomas is leading towards more effective treatments which may complement or be less toxic than conventional radiotherapy and cytotoxic chemotherapy. Here we review paediatric sarcomas that have associated molecular genetic changes which can increase diagnostic and prognostic accuracy and impact on clinical management.

REporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK)

Despite years of research and hundreds of reports on tumor markers in oncology, the number of markers that have emerged as clinically useful is pitifully small. Often initially reported studies of a marker show great promise, but subsequent studies on the same or related markers yield inconsistent conclusions or stand in direct contradiction to the promising results. It is imperative that we attempt to understand the reasons that multiple studies of the same marker lead to differing conclusions. A variety of methodologic problems have been cited to explain these discrepancies. Unfortunately, many tumor marker studies have not been reported in a rigorous fashion, and published articles often lack sufficient information to allow adequate assessment of the quality of the study or the generalizability of study results. The development of guidelines for the reporting of tumor marker studies was a major recommendation of the National Cancer Institute-European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (NCI-EORTC) First International Meeting on Cancer Diagnostics in 2000. As for the successful CONSORT initiative for randomized trials and for the STARD statement for diagnostic studies, we suggest guidelines to provide relevant information about the study design, pre-planned hypotheses, patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, and statistical analysis methods. In addition, the guidelines suggest helpful presentations of data and important elements to include in discussions. The goal of these guidelines is to encourage transparent and complete reporting so that the relevant information will be available to others to help them to judge the usefulness of the data and understand the context in which the conclusions apply.

Assessing p53 in clinical contexts: unlearned lessons and new perspectives

There is compelling evidence for the central role of the p53 pathway in human neoplasia but, despite an enormous literature, the clinical utility of assessing this pathway remains ambiguous. Even simple questions about the assessment of p53 status in clinical samples remain unanswered and the literature is confusing and often contradictory. The p53 pathway is certainly complicated and the biochemical mechanisms for regulating the function of p53 and its downstream consequences are rabbinical in complexity. This perspective considers this complexity and the reasons why establishing the true utility of clinical assessment of p53 has proven to be so difficult. Indeed, recent observations regarding the existence of alternate splice variants of p53, the complexity of p53 regulation, and the existence of allelic variants of p53 and its regulators with distinct functionality makes the situation even more complex. Problems with the available assays are considered and the need to consider an array of methodological issues is emphasized. Newer strategies including analysis of the expression of downstream targets of p53 and the use of threshold strategies to measure p53 protein may provide more robust measures of the p53 pathway in clinical settings, perhaps coupled with cheap sequencing-based approaches for mutation (and polymorphism) detection. However, progress will only be made if these methodological issues are resolved and robust assays are performed in the context of appropriately powered studies in clinical trial settings.

Estudios de precisión diagnóstica (STARD) y pronóstica (REMARK)

Deficiencies in how research studies are reported are both well-documented and widespread across all medical specialties and study designs. Although randomised trials have received the most attention in this regard, similar concerns have been expressed about reporting of other types of research including diagnostic and epidemiological studies. If a journal article describes in enough detail what was done at each stage of a study, readers will have enough information to allow them to decide on the merits of the results for themselves. From this simple idea comes the scientific rationale of developing guidelines on how to report research. Recommended processes to produce reporting guidelines have evolved over several years during the preparation of a sequence of reporting guidelines starting with CONSORT and QUOROM in the 1990s. We describe initiatives to develop reporting guidelines for diagnostic accuracy studies (STARD) and tumour marker prognostic studies (REMARK).

Primer: an evidence-based approach to prognostic markers

Prognostic markers can help to identify patients at different degrees of risk for specific outcomes, facilitate treatment choice, and aid patient counseling. Compared with other research designs, prognostic studies have been relatively neglected in the broad efforts to improve the quality of medical research, despite their ubiquity. Large protocol-driven, prospective studies are the ideal, with clear, unbiased reporting of the methods used and the results obtained. Unfortunately, published prognostic studies rarely meet such standards, and in this article we discuss their main problems and how they can be improved. In particular, an evidence-based approach to prognostic markers is required, as it is usually difficult to ascertain the benefit of a marker from single studies and a clear view is only likely to emerge from looking across multiple studies. Current systematic reviews and meta-analyses often fail to provide clear evidence-based answers, and rather only draw attention to the paucity of good-quality evidence. Prospectively planned pooled analyses of high-quality studies, along with general availability of individual patient data and adherence to reporting guidelines, would help alleviate many of these problems.

REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK)

Despite years of research and hundreds of reports on tumour markers in oncology, the number of markers that have emerged as clinically useful is pitifully small. Often initially reported studies of a marker show great promise, but subsequent studies on the same or related markers yield inconsistent conclusions or stand in direct contradiction to the promising results. It is imperative that we attempt to understand the reasons that multiple studies of the same marker lead to differing conclusions. A variety of methodologic problems have been cited to explain these discrepancies. Unfortunately, many tumour marker studies have not been reported in a rigorous fashion, and published articles often lack sufficient information to allow adequate assessment of the quality of the study or the generalisability of study results. The development of guidelines for the reporting of tumour marker studies was a major recommendation of the National Cancer Institute-European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (NCI-EORTC) First International Meeting on Cancer Diagnostics in 2000. As for the successful CONSORT initiative for randomised trials and for the STARD statement for diagnostic studies, we suggest guidelines to provide relevant information about the study design, pre-planned hypotheses, patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, and statistical analysis methods. In addition, the guidelines suggest helpful presentations of data and important elements to include in discussions. The goal of these guidelines is to encourage transparent and complete reporting so that the relevant information will be available to others to help them to judge the usefulness of the data and understand the context in which the conclusions apply.

REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK)

Despite years of research and hundreds of reports on tumour markers in oncology, the number of markers that have emerged as clinically useful is pitifully small. Often initially reported studies of a marker show great promise, but subsequent studies on the same or related markers yield inconsistent conclusions or stand in direct contradiction to the promising results. It is imperative that we attempt to understand the reasons that multiple studies of the same marker lead to differing conclusions. A variety of methodological problems have been cited to explain these discrepancies. Unfortunately, many tumour marker studies have not been reported in a rigorous fashion, and published articles often lack sufficient information to allow adequate assessment of the quality of the study or the generalisability of the study results. The development of guidelines for the reporting of tumour marker studies was a major recommendation of the US National Cancer Institute and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (NCI-EORTC) First International Meeting on Cancer Diagnostics in 2000. Similar to the successful CONSORT initiative for randomised trials and the STARD statement for diagnostic studies, we suggest guidelines to provide relevant information about the study design, preplanned hypotheses, patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, and statistical analysis methods. In addition, the guidelines suggest helpful presentations of data and important elements to include in discussions. The goal of these guidelines is to encourage transparent and complete reporting so that the relevant information will be available to others to help them to judge the usefulness of the data and understand the context in which the conclusions apply.

Tumour budding as prognostic factor in stage I/II colorectal carcinoma

AIMS

The term tumour 'budding' has been coined for the detachment of tumour cells from the neoplastic glands of adenocarcinomas and is presumed to be an early step in the metastatic process. A limited number of studies have shown budding to be an adverse prognostic factor.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All primary single, non-metachronous TNM stage I/II colorectal carcinomas without neoadjuvant treatment resected in the years 1994-1999 were included (n = 186). Tumour buds were counted in pan-cytokeratin immunostains in a 0.785-mm2 field of vision (250 x). During follow-up 21 patients had distant metastases and 12 patients died of their disease. Budding was determined at 14 and 20.46, median and mean, respectively (range 0-120). A cut-off of 25 was found to be sensitive (0.76) and specific (0.739). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed high budding to be a strong adverse prognosticator. By Cox regression, high budding together with venous angioinvasion were independent prognostic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the prognostic value of budding in a contemporary series of colorectal carcinomas that by TNM were low risk. Technically easy, rapid and robust to determine, budding quantified in pan-cytokeratin stains significantly aids in the identification of high-risk patients and is recommended for more general use in surgical pathology.

Prospective Multicenter Validation of the Independent Prognostic Value of the Mitotic Activity Index in Lymph Node–Negative Breast Cancer Patients Younger Than 55 Years

Purpose

To validate the independent strong prognostic value of mitotic activity index (MAI) in lymph node (LN) –negative invasive breast cancer patients younger than 55 years in a nationwide multicenter prospective study.

Patients and Methods

Analysis of routinely assessed MAI and other prognosticators in 516 patients (median follow-up, 118 months; range, 8 to 185 months), without systemic adjuvant therapy or previous malignancies.

Results

Distant metastases occurred in 127 patients (24.6%); 90 (17.4%) died as a result of metastases. MAI (< 10, ≥ 10) showed strong association with recurrence (hazard ratio [HR], 3.12; 95% CI, 2.17 to 4.50; P ≤ .0001) and mortality (HR, 4.42; 95% CI, 2.79 to 7.01; P < .0001). The absolute difference in 10-year Kaplan-Meier estimates of time to distant recurrence as well as survival was 22% between MAI less than 10 versus ≥ 10. This effect was independent of age, estrogen receptor (ER) status, and tumor diameter (which were significant prognosticators). In multivariate analysis with regard to patient age, tumor diameter, grade, ER status, and the St Gallen criterion, MAI proved to be an independent and the strongest prognosticator. Tubular formation (TF) and nuclear atypia (NA), as constituents of (expert revised) grade, had no (for TF) or limited (for NA, P = .048) additional prognostic value to the MAI. In the group with MAI less than 10, MAI less than 3 versus more than 3 had additional value but the classical threshold of 0 to 5 v 6 to 10 did not. With this additional subdivision of MAI as less than 3, 3 to 9, and more than 9, NA lost its additive prognostic value.

Conclusion

The MAI is the strongest, most widely available, easily assessable, inexpensive, well-reproducible prognosticator and is well suited to routinely differentiate between high- and low-risk LN-negative breast cancer patients younger than 55 years.

Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK)

Despite years of research and hundreds of reports on tumor markers in oncology, the number of markers that have emerged as clinically useful is pitifully small. Often, initially reported studies of a marker show great promise, but subsequent studies on the same or related markers yield inconsistent conclusions or stand in direct contradiction to the promising results. It is imperative that we attempt to understand the reasons that multiple studies of the same marker lead to differing conclusions. A variety of methodologic problems have been cited to explain these discrepancies. Unfortunately, many tumor marker studies have not been reported in a rigorous fashion, and published articles often lack sufficient information to allow adequate assessment of the quality of the study or the generalizability of study results. The development of guidelines for the reporting of tumor marker studies was a major recommendation of the National Cancer Institute-European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (NCI-EORTC) First International Meeting on Cancer Diagnostics in 2000. As for the successful CONSORT initiative for randomized trials and for the STARD statement for diagnostic studies, we suggest guidelines to provide relevant information about the study design, preplanned hypotheses, patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, and statistical analysis methods. In addition, the guidelines suggest helpful presentations of data and important elements to include in discussions. The goal of these guidelines is to encourage transparent and complete reporting so that the relevant information will be available to others to help them to judge the usefulness of the data and understand the context in which the conclusions apply.

Prognosis-related histomorphological and immunohistochemical markers in central nervous system tumors of childhood and adolescence

Brain tumors account for approximately 20% of all childhood cancers, and are the leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality among children. Although numerous demographic, clinical and therapeutic parameters have been identified over the past few years that have significant prognostic bearing for some pediatric brain tumors, predicting the clinical course and outcome among children with central nervous system tumors is still difficult. A survey of publications on prognosis-related histopathological and immunohistochemical features among pediatric brain tumors revealed 172 series, of which 91 presented statistically significant outcome-associated parameters as defined by a P value of less than 0.05. Most investigations revealing significant prognosis-related markers were performed on medulloblastomas (30 publications), ependymomas (25) and astrocytic tumors (18). In total, 16 cohorts consisted of more than 100 cases (5 on ependymomas, 3 each on medulloblastomas and astrocytic tumors). On the other hand, there were also 13 series with fewer than 20 cases (5 on medulloblastomas). Potentially prognostic histopathological markers vary among different entities and consist of assessment of necroses, mitoses, differentiation, vascular proliferation, and growth pattern, whereas immunohistochemical features include proliferation markers (Ki-67, MIB-1), expression of oncogenes/tumor suppressor genes and their proteins (TP53, c-erbB2), growth factor and hormonal receptors (VEGF, EGFR, HER2, HER4, ErbB-2), cell cycle genes (p27, p14ARF) and cell adhesion molecules, as well as factors potentially related to therapeutic resistance (DNA topoisomerase IIalpha, metallothionein, P-glycoprotein, tenascin). This review discusses the prognostic potential of histopathological and immunohistochemical markers that can be investigated by the practicing neuropathologist as part of the routine diagnostic workload, and scrutinizes their benefit for predicting therapy response and patient outcome among children with brain tumors.

Prognosis-Related Molecular Markers in Pediatric Central Nervous System Tumors

In the wake of recent progress in understanding the genetic pathways involved in the development of brain tumors, a major goal is to correlate molecular data with clinical outcome, survival, and response to treatment modalities. This is of particular importance among the pediatric population. Reliable prognostic factors could potentially permit a tailoring of therapy in that only patients with the most aggressive tumors would receive the most intense treatments. A survey of publications about prognosis-related molecular features among pediatric brain tumors revealed 74 series, of which 46 presented statistically significant outcome-associated parameters as defined by a p value <0.05. Most investigations revealing significant prognosis-related features were performed on medulloblastomas (34 publications), followed by astrocytic tumors (6 publications) and ependymomas (5 publications). Promising approaches and molecular markers include gene expression profiles, DNA ploidy, loss of heterozygosity and chromosomal aberrations as detected by CGH and FISH (1q, 17p, 17q), as well as oncogenes/ tumor suppressor genes and their proteins (TP53, PTEN, c-erbB2, N-myc, c-myc), growth factor and hormonal receptors (PDGFRA, VEGF, EGFR, HER2, HER4, ErbB-2, hTERT, TrkC), cell cycle genes (p27) and cell adhesion molecules, as well as factors potentially related to therapeutic resistance (multi-drug resistance, DNA topoisomerase IIalpha, metallothionein, P-glycoprotein, tenascin). This review discusses the predictive potential of molecular markers for clinical outcome and their influence on therapeutic decision-making among children with brain tumors.

A new prognostic staging system for rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the appropriateness of tumor "budding," a quantifiable histologic variable, as 1 parameter in the construction of a new prognostic grading system for rectal cancer.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Patient division according to an accurate prognostic prediction could enhance the effectiveness of postoperative adjuvant therapy and follow-up.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Tumor budding was defined as an isolated cancer cell or a cluster composed of fewer than 5 cells in the invasive frontal region, and was divided into 2 grades based on its number within a microscopic field of x250. We analyzed 2 discrete cohorts comprising 638 and 476 patients undergoing potentially curative surgery.

RESULTS

In the first cohort, high-grade budding (10 or more foci in a field) was observed in 30% of patients and was significantly associated with a lower 5-year survival rate (41%) than low-grade budding (84%). Similarly, in the second cohort, the 5-year survival rate was 43% in high-grade budding patients and 83% in low-grade budding patients. In both cohorts, multivariate analyses verified budding to be an independent prognosticator, together with nodal involvement and extramural spread. These 3 variables were given weighted scores, and the score range was divided to provide 5 prognostic groups (97%; 86%; 61%; 39%; 17% 5-year survival). The model was tested on the second cohort, and similar prognostic results were obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose that because of its relevance to prognosis and its reproducibility, budding is an excellent parameter for use in a grading system to provide a confident prediction of clinical outcome.

Interleukin-6, interleukin-10, and vascular endothelial growth factor in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: prognostic value of interleukin-6--from the Groupe Francais d'Immunotherapie

PURPOSE

Few clinical prognostic factors have been identified for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (MRCC), and no biomarker is known in this disease. Several endogenous cytokines have demonstrated interesting and significant correlations with survival in these patients. Our objective was to analyze the prognostic value of circulating vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), interleukin-10 (IL-10), and interleukin-6 (IL-6).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Serum levels of IL-6, IL-10, and VEGF were measured in patients with MRCC. Their prognostic value for response to treatment and progression-free and overall survival was evaluated. Pretreatment samples were obtained from 138 patients of a large randomized multicentric trial. Endogenous cytokine levels were determined using immunoassays. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the prognostic value of each factor further controlled by an internal validation test. Threshold values for serum IL-6 and VEGF were determined using the quartile method.

RESULTS

Serum IL-6 was detectable in 70% of the patients. IL-10 and VEGF were elevated in 8% and 71% of the patients, respectively. None of these circulating factors was correlated with response to treatment. IL-10 was not significantly correlated with progression-free or overall survival. Despite significant correlation with survival, VEGF was not an independent prognostic factor in the multivariate analysis. Finally, IL-6 was significantly correlated with progression-free survival and overall survival, and has prognostic value for overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Circulating IL-6 level appears to be an important independent prognostic factor in patients with MRCC; if confirmed in further studies, it could be considered for treatment decisions in these patients.

Expression of MUC1 in esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma and its relationship with prognosis of patients from Linzhou city, a high incidence area of northern China

AIM: To further characterize the possible relationship between the molecular changes and prognosis of ESC and to elucidate the possible mechanisms involved.

METHODS: 114 specimens of ESC were collected from Linzhou city, and all patients were followed up for more than 5 years after resection. Histopathological analysis and immunohistochemical staining (ABC) were employed to detect the alteration of MUC1.

RESULTS: The positive immunostaining rate for MUC1 was 79% (90/114), and the high-expression rate was 63% (72/114). The mean survival periods (months) of those with high- and low-expression rates of MUC1 were 41 (95%CI: 35, 47) and 52 (95%CI: 45, 59), respectively. Patients in the low-expression group obviously survived longer than those in high-expression group, and the difference was significant (P < 0.05). The expression of MUC1 protein in the esophageal carcinoma specimens with metastasis was stronger than those without metastasis, the difference was also significant (P < 0.05). The stepwise multivariate analysis showed that “differentiation”, “expression of MUC1” and “TNM staging” were the most important factors affecting the prognosis of esophageal carcinoma patients (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION: A good correlation between the alteration of MUC1 and the regional lymph node metastasis was observed. Furthermore, high-expression of MUC1 was associated with poor prognosis for esophageal cancer patients. These results indicated that MUC1 is a promising biomarker for predicting lymph node metastasis and prognosis in esophageal cancer.

Stages on the way to breast cancer

Pathways to breast cancer have been difficult to define using morphology alone. Although epithelial hyperplasia of usual type (HUT) is associated with moderately elevated breast cancer risk, molecular evidence placing it in a cancer precursor pathway is not clear-cut. Recent evidence suggests that small numbers of cytokeratin 5/6 positive cells are precursors of separate lineages which acquire either cytokeratin 8/18/19 or smooth muscle actin (SMA) and cytokeratin 14 on separate pathways to fully differentiated epithelial and myoepithelial phenotypes (and may ultimately lose cytokeratin 5/6 expression). Immunohistochemistry shows that most HUT have a mixed precursor phenotype resembling normal breast with co-expression of cytokeratin 5/6, 8/18/19 and SMA, in contrast to atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) and ductal carcinoma in situ which typically have a 'mature' luminal phenotype positive for cytokeratin 8/18/19 but lacking cytokeratin 5/6 expression. While this supports the idea of a biological discontinuity between HUT and ADH/DCIS, caution is called for in the diagnostic use of these reagents until greater experience has been accumulated, and other published data do show features of HUT intermediate between normal breast lobules and ADH.

The role of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and p53 status for angiogenesis in gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Angiogenesis is of crucial importance for tumor growth and development of metastases. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has a potent angiogenic activity and mutations of the p53 gene has been thought to upregulate VEGF. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the prognostic significance of these tumor biomarkers for angiogenesis relative to the information derived from established clinicopathological parameters in gastric cancer.

METHODS

In this study, we conducted an immunohistochemical investigation of VEGF and p53 expression in 145 tissue samples obtained from gastric cancer patients undergoing curative surgical treatment. To evaluate angiogenesis, microvessel density (MVD) was counted by staining endothelial cells immunohistochemically using anti-CD34 monoclonal antibody.

RESULTS

High MVD was significantly associated with depth of tumor invasion and distant metastasis (p = 0.004, 0.021, respectively). Moreover, overall survival for patients with high MVD were significantly lower than that of low MVD (p = 0.048). Positive expression of VEGF correlated significantly with lymph node and distant metastasis (p = 0.040, 0.048, respectively). However, no significant correlation was found between p53 expression and various clinicopathological parameters. VEGF positive tumors showed a higher MVD than VEGF negative tumors (p = 0.028). The expression of p53 did not correlate with VEGF expression. Also, the relationship between the status of p53 expression and MVD had not statistically significant differences. In the multivariate analysis, status of VEGF, p53 expression and MVD were not an independent prognostic factor.

CONCLUSION

VEGF seems to be an important, clinically relevant inducer of angiogenesis and angiogenesis assessed by the MVD may be a useful marker for predicting metastasis in gastric cancer. However, further studies are warranted to clarify the impact of p53 on the angiogenesis and the prognostic significance of angiogenesis in gastric cancer.

Classifying the medulloblastoma: insights from morphology and molecular genetics

Significant advances in the treatment of the medulloblastoma (MB) have been made in the last 30 years, reducing mortality by 2-fold. Further improvements in the cure rate require an increased understanding of the biology of MBs, and this will translate into refinements in their classification. Scrutiny of the cytological variation found among MBs has recently led to the concept of the anaplastic MB, which overlaps the large-cell variant and appears to share its poor prognosis. In contrast, the MB with extensive nodularity, a distinctive nodular/desmoplastic variant occurring in infants, has a better outcome than most MBs in these young patients. Building on cytogenetic studies that have drawn attention to abnormalities on chromosome 17 in over a third of MBs, research shows non-random losses on chromosomes 8, 9, 10, 11 and 16, and gains on chromosomes 1, 7 and 9. Overexpression of ErbB2 receptors and losses on chromosome 17p have been proposed as independent indicators of aggressive behaviour, while high TrkC receptor expression indicates a favourable outcome. There is a strong association between anaplastic/large-cell tumours and MYC amplification, which has previously been linked with aggressive disease, but associations between abnormalities on chromosome 17 and anaplastic/large-cell MBs and between abnormalities in the shh/PTCH pathway and the desmoplastic variant are more controversial. Classification of the MB histopathologically and according to profiles of molecular abnormalities will help both to rationalize approaches to therapy, increasing the cure rate and reducing long-term side-effects, and to suggest novel treatments.

Tumour 'budding' as an index to estimate the potential of aggressiveness in rectal cancer

AIMS

Although the characteristic of invasive pattern which contributes to Jass's classification is a sensitive prognostic marker in rectal cancer, reproducibility of its assessment has been shown to be problematic. As another histological parameter of invasive margin, we examined the prognostic significance of tumour 'budding' and attempted to establish its appropriate criteria.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 638 rectal cancer specimens was examined. We defined tumour 'budding' as an isolated single cancer cell or a cluster composed of fewer than five cancer cells. We divided these into two groups by their intensity, i.e. the number of 'budding' foci within a microscopic field of x 250. Rectal cancer with high-grade 'budding' (>or= 10 foci in a field) was observed in 30.1% of patients, and was associated with lower 5-year survival rates (40.7%) than patients with low-grade 'budding' (84.0%) (P < 0.0001). Based on multivariate analysis, tumour 'budding' was selected as the significant independent variable, together with the number of nodes involved, extramural spread, lymphocytic infiltration, apical nodal involvement and tumour differentiation. Kappa coefficient of two-graded tumour 'budding' in the intraobserver study was 0.84.

CONCLUSIONS

Because of its value as a prognostic indicator and its reproducibility, tumour 'budding' would be a good index to estimate the aggressiveness of rectal cancer.

Ki67 protein: the immaculate deception?

This article updates our previous review of Ki67 published in Histopathology 10 years ago. In this period the numbers of papers published featuring this antibody has increased 10-fold from 338 to 3489 indicating the considerable enthusiasm with which this antibody has been studied. This review attempts to provide an update on the characterization of the Ki67 protein, its function and its use as a prognostic or diagnostic tool.