PanCancer insights from The Cancer Genome Atlas: the pathologist's perspective

Journal of Pathology

Volumn 244, Issue 5, 2018, Pages 512-524

  Cooper, Lee AD ^a,b,c   Demicco, Elizabeth G ^d   Saltz, Joel H ^e   Powell, Reid T ^f   Rao, Arvind ^g   Lazar, Alexander J ^g  

^a EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b Emory University   (United States)

^c EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d University of Toronto   (Canada)

^e Stony Brook University   (United States)

^f TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

computational histology; digital pathology; genomics; image analysis; PanCancer; TCGA; The Cancer Genome Atlas

Indexed keywords

B RAF KINASE; TUMOR MARKER;

CANCER GRADING; CANCER MORPHOLOGY; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RESEARCH; CANCER SURVIVAL; COLORECTAL CARCINOMA; EPIGENETICS; GENE MUTATION; GENOME ANALYSIS; GENOMICS; GLIOBLASTOMA; GLIOMA; HUMAN; HYPOXIA; IMAGE ANALYSIS; NECROSIS; PATHOLOGIST; PHENOTYPE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; GENETIC DATABASE; GENETIC EPIGENESIS; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION; GENETICS; HUMAN GENOME; MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY; NEOPLASM; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES;

BIOMARKERS, TUMOR; DATABASES, GENETIC; EPIGENESIS, GENETIC; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; GENOME, HUMAN; GENOMICS; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; NEOPLASMS; PATHOLOGY, MOLECULAR; PHENOTYPE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS;

EID: 85042301756     PISSN: 00223417     EISSN: 10969896     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/path.5028     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. Weinstein JN, Collisson EA, Mills GB, et al. The Cancer Genome Atlas Pan-Cancer analysis project. Nat Genet 2013; 45: 1113–1120.
2. Ciriello G, Gatza ML, Beck AH, et al. Comprehensive molecular portraits of invasive lobular breast cancer. Cell 2015; 163: 506–519.
3. The Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2012; 490: 61–70.
4. Hoadley KA, Yau C, Wolf DM, et al. Multiplatform analysis of 12 cancer types reveals molecular classification within and across tissues of origin. Cell 2014; 158: 929–944.
5. Ciriello G, Miller ML, Aksoy BA, et al. Emerging landscape of oncogenic signatures across human cancers. Nat Genet 2013; 45: 1127–1133.
6. Cherniack AD, Shen H, Walter V, et al. Integrated molecular characterization of uterine carcinosarcoma. Cancer Cell 2017; 31: 411–423.
7. The Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive and integrated genomic characterization of adult soft tissue sarcoma. Cell 2017; 171: 950–965.
8. Zack TI, Schumacher SE, Carter SL, et al. Pan-cancer patterns of somatic copy number alteration. Nat Genet 2013; 45: 1134–1140.
9. St Pierre R, Kadoch C. Mammalian SWI/SNF complexes in cancer: emerging therapeutic opportunities. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2017; 42: 56–67.
10. The Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular characterization of urothelial bladder carcinoma. Nature 2014; 507: 315–322.
11. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Comprehensive molecular characterization of human colon and rectal cancer. Nature 2012; 487: 330–337.
12. Alexander J, Watanabe T, Wu TT, et al. Histopathological identification of colon cancer with microsatellite instability. Am J Pathol 2001; 158: 527–535.
13. Shia J, Schultz N, Kuk D, et al. Morphological characterization of colorectal cancers in The Cancer Genome Atlas reveals distinct morphology–molecular associations: clinical and biological implications. Mod Pathol 2017; 30: 599–609.
14. Davies H, Bignell GR, Cox C, et al. Mutations of the BRAF gene in human cancer. Nature 2002; 417: 949–954.
15. Yuen ST, Davies H, Chan TL, et al. Similarity of the phenotypic patterns associated with BRAF and KRAS mutations in colorectal neoplasia. Cancer Res 2002; 62: 6451–6455.
16. Kimura ET, Nikiforova MN, Zhu Z, et al. High prevalence of BRAF mutations in thyroid cancer: genetic evidence for constitutive activation of the RET/PTC-RAS-BRAF signaling pathway in papillary thyroid carcinoma. Cancer Res 2003; 63: 1454–1457.
17. The Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Integrated genomic characterization of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Cancer Cell 2017; 32: 185–203.
18. Chapman PB, Robert C, Larkin J, et al. Vemurafenib in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive metastatic melanoma: final overall survival results of the randomized BRIM-3 study. Ann Oncol 2017; 28: 2581–2587.
19. Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C, et al. Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 2507–2516.
20. Flaherty KT, Infante JR, Daud A, et al. Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition in melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 1694–1703.
21. Long GV, Eroglu Z, Infante J, et al. Long-term outcomes in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma who received dabrafenib combined with trametinib. J Clin Oncol 2017.
22. Brose MS, Cabanillas ME, Cohen EE, et al. Vemurafenib in patients with BRAF(V600E)-positive metastatic or unresectable papillary thyroid cancer refractory to radioactive iodine: a non-randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 1272–1282.
23. Clarke CN, Kopetz ES. BRAF mutant colorectal cancer as a distinct subset of colorectal cancer: clinical characteristics, clinical behavior, and response to targeted therapies. J Gastrointest Oncol 2015; 6: 660–667.
24. Kopetz S, Desai J, Chan E, et al. LX4032 in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with mutant BRAF tumors. ASCO Meeting Abstracts 2010; 28: 3534.
25. Prahallad A, Sun C, Huang S, et al. Unresponsiveness of colon cancer to BRAF(V600E) inhibition through feedback activation of EGFR. Nature 2012; 483: 100–103.
26. Ahronian LG, Sennott EM, Van Allen EM, et al. Clinical acquired resistance to RAF inhibitor combinations in BRAF-mutant colorectal cancer through MAPK pathway alterations. Cancer Discov 2015; 5: 358–367.
27. Corcoran RB, Ebi H, Turke AB, et al. EGFR-mediated re-activation of MAPK signaling contributes to insensitivity of BRAF mutant colorectal cancers to RAF inhibition with vemurafenib. Cancer Discov 2012; 2: 227–235.
28. Das Thakur M, Stuart DD. The evolution of melanoma resistance reveals therapeutic opportunities. Cancer Res 2013; 73: 6106–6110.
29. The Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Genomic classification of cutaneous melanoma. Cell 2015; 161: 1681–1696.
30. Robertson AG, Shih J, Yau C, et al. Integrative analysis identifies four molecular and clinical subsets in uveal melanoma. Cancer Cell 2017; 32: 204–220.
31. Bengtsson E, Malm P. Screening for cervical cancer using automated analysis of PAP-smears. Comput Math Methods Med 2014; 2014: 842037.
32. Farris AB, Cohen C, Rogers TE, et al. Whole slide imaging for analytical anatomic pathology and telepathology: practical applications today, promises, and perils. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2017; 141: 542–550.
33. Ventana. Ventana Medical Systems, Inc. receives FDA approval for the first fully automated diagnostic assay for HER2 gene status determination in breast cancer patients. [Accessed 31 October 2017]. Available from: http://www.ventana.com/wp-content/uploads/pr_2011-06-14_INFORM-HER2.pdf
34. Ventana. Roche receives FDA approval for complementary PD-L1 (SP263) biomarker test in urothelial carcinoma. 2017 [Accessed 31 October 2017]. Available from: http://www.ventana.com/roche-receives-fda-approval-complementary-pd-l1-sp263-biomarker-test-urothelial-carcinoma/
35. Administration UFaD. Susbstantial Equivalence Determination 510K K071128. [Accessed 31 October 2017]. Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/reviews/K071128.pdf
36. Thorstenson S, Molin J, Lundstrom C. Implementation of large-scale routine diagnostics using whole slide imaging in Sweden: digital pathology experiences 2006–2013. J Pathol Inform 2014; 5: 14.
37. Stathonikos N, Veta M, Huisman A, et al. Going fully digital: perspective of a Dutch academic pathology lab. J Pathol Inform 2013; 4: 15.
38. Gurcan MN, Kong J, Sertel O, et al. Computerized pathological image analysis for neuroblastoma prognosis. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2007; 304–308.
39. Fauzi MF, Pennell M, Sahiner B, et al. Classification of follicular lymphoma: the effect of computer aid on pathologists grading. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2015; 15: 115.
40. Sparks R, Madabhushi A. Statistical shape model for manifold regularization: Gleason grading of prostate histology. Comput Vis Image Underst 2013; 117: 1138–1146.
41. Ali S, Veltri R, Epstein JI, et al. Adaptive energy selective active contour with shape priors for nuclear segmentation and Gleason grading of prostate cancer. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2011; 14: 661–669.
42. Beck AH, Sangoi AR, Leung S, et al. Systematic analysis of breast cancer morphology uncovers stromal features associated with survival. Sci Transl Med 2011; 3: 108ra113.
43. Gutman DA, Cobb J, Somanna D, et al. Cancer Digital Slide Archive: an informatics resource to support integrated in silico analysis of TCGA pathology data. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013; 20: 1091–1098.
44. Petersen I, Kotb WF, Friedrich KH, et al. Core classification of lung cancer: correlating nuclear size and mitoses with ploidy and clinicopathological parameters. Lung Cancer 2009; 65: 312–318.
45. Diwakar N, Sperandio M, Sherriff M, et al. Heterogeneity, histological features and DNA ploidy in oral carcinoma by image-based analysis. Oral Oncol 2005; 41: 416–422.
46. Helliwell TR, Atkinson MW, Cooke TG, et al. Morphometric analysis, ploidy and response to chemotherapy in squamous carcinomas of the head and neck. Pathol Res Pract 1989; 185: 755–759.
47. Gustafsson U, Einarsson C, Eriksson LC, et al. DNA ploidy and S-phase fraction in carcinoma of the gallbladder related to histopathology, number of gallstones and survival. Anal Cell Pathol 2001; 23: 143–152.
48. Grignon DJ, Ayala AG, Ro JY, et al. Primary sarcomas of the kidney. A clinicopathologic and DNA flow cytometric study of 17 cases. Cancer 1990; 65: 1611–1618.
49. Wang C, Pecot T, Zynger DL, et al. Identifying survival associated morphological features of triple negative breast cancer using multiple datasets. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013; 20: 680–687.
50. Saltz J, Almeida J, Gao Y, et al. Towards generation, management, and exploration of combined radiomics and pathomics datasets for cancer research. AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc 2017; 2017: 85–94.
51. Saltz J, Sharma A, Iyer G, et al. A containerized software system for generation, management, and exploration of features from whole slide tissue images. Cancer Res 2017; 77: e79–e82.
52. Cooper LA, Gutman DA, Chisolm C, et al. The tumor microenvironment strongly impacts master transcriptional regulators and gene expression class of glioblastoma. Am J Pathol 2012; 180: 2108–2119.
53. Nalisnik M, Amgad M, Lee S, et al. Interactive phenotyping of large-scale histology imaging data with HistomicsML. Sci Rep 2017; 7: 14588.
54. Powell RT, Olar A, Narang S, et al. Identification of histological correlates of overall survival in lower grade gliomas using a bag-of-words paradigm: a preliminary analysis based on hematoxylin & eosin stained slides from the lower grade glioma cohort of The Cancer Genome Atlas. J Pathol Inform 2017; 8: 9.