Gene-Pair Test Distinguishes GIST From Leiomyosarcoma

Publication
Article
Oncology NEWS InternationalOncology NEWS International Vol 16 No 4
Volume 16
Issue 4

Researchers have developed a two-gene test that can accurately distinguish between two common forms of gastrointestinal cancers.

HOUSTON—Researchers have developed a two-gene test that can accurately distinguish between two common forms of gastrointestinal cancers. The two cancers, gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) and leiomyosarcoma (LMS), are almost phenotypically identical but respond quite differently to chemotherapy. The new test holds promise for improving the outcomes of patients with the two types of tumors, and as a prototype for tests aimed at more individualized diagnoses and determining how other cancers may respond to treatment.

"This simple and accurate test has the potential to be relatively quickly implemented in the clinic to benefit patients by guiding appropriate treatment," said senior author Wei Zhang, PhD, professor of pathology at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center.

For years, GIST was considered a subtype of LMS because both tumors develop in the smooth muscle cells of the GI tract; thus, differentiating between them was not regarded as clinically relevant. In recent years, however, it has become obvious that GIST responds far better to the molecularly targeted drug imatinib (Gleevec) than to traditional chemotherapy, and that LMS responds to chemotherapy but not imatinib.

"Thus, there is a clear clinical importance in distinguishing between these two entities to guide the most effective therapy," wrote first author Nathan D. Price, PhD, a research scientist at the Institute for Systems Biology (ISB) in Seattle, and colleagues from ISB and M.D. Anderson. They reported their work in the February 27 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (104:3414-3419, 2007).

Currently, the most accurate test to differentiate GIST from LMS is Kit immunostaining, which is subjective and variable due to cellular heterogeneity that may result in false-negative diagnoses. Kit staining has a reported accuracy of 87%, considerably less than that obtained with the new test.

The team first measured gene expression in 68 well-characterized GIST or LMS tumor samples using whole genome microarrays. Then, instead of trying to identify multiple genes whose expression distinguished the two GI tumors from one another, the researchers analyzed the expressions of all possible gene pairs.

This technique, called Top Score Pairing analysis, pinpointed two genes—OBSCN and C9orf65—whose expression ratio best distinguished the two cancers from each other. When the OBSCN gene expressed more RNA than the C9orf65 gene, that difference identified the cancer as GIST. If the C9orf65 gene produced the greater amount of RNA, this ratio pinpointed the tumor as LMS.

Of the 68 microarrayed tumors, the test accurately identified 67. The one exception proved to be a tumor in which the two genes had an expression ratio of almost 1:1. Further testing, including an additional 19 tumor samples not included in the original 68 samples, yielded an accuracy of 99.3% on the microarray samples and an estimated accuracy of 97.8% on future cases.

Top Score Pairing analysis appears highly accurate for two reasons, the authors said. Its simplicity reduces the problem of overfitting data, and the use of gene pairs eliminates normalization issues. "It is possible that, in the future, this approach may be used not only to differentiate ambiguous histologies and to assess prognosis but also to determine who will benefit from chemotherapy, which type of chemotherapy to use, and which patients are at risk for local or distant relapse," the researchers said.

Newsletter

Stay up to date on recent advances in the multidisciplinary approach to cancer.

Recent Videos
Treatment with KRAS inhibitors may help mitigate a common driver of genetic alteration across a majority of pancreatic cancers.
Various methods of communication ensure that members from radiation oncology, pathology, and other departments are on the same page regarding treatment.
Updated results from the BREAKWATER study seemed to be most impactful to the CRC space, according to Michael J. Pishvaian, MD, PhD.
Providing easier access to ancillary services for patients with PDAC who live farther away from the treatment center may help them complete the treatment regimen.
Future research will aim to assess the efficacy of PIPAC-MMC plus systemic therapy vs systemic therapy alone in patients with peritoneal tumors.
Although small incision surgery may serve as a conduit to deliver PIPAC-MMC, it may confer benefits in the staging and treatment of peritoneal tumors.
Related Content