Bo Hwa Sohn

Abstract Purpose: The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project recently uncovered four molecular subtypes of gastric cancer: Epstein–Barr virus (EBV), microsatellite instability (MSI), genomically stable (GS), and chromosomal instability (CIN). However, their clinical significances are currently unknown. We aimed to investigate the relationship between subtypes and prognosis of patients with gastric cancer. Experimental Design: Gene expression data from a TCGA cohort (n = 262) were used to develop a subtype prediction model, and the association of each subtype with survival and benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy was tested in 2 other cohorts (n = 267 and 432). An integrated risk assessment model (TCGA risk score) was also developed. Results: EBV subtype was associated with the best prognosis, and GS subtype was associated with the worst prognosis. Patients with MSI and CIN subtypes had poorer overall survival than those with EBV subtype but better overall survival than those with GS subtype (P = 0.004 and 0.03 in two cohorts, respectively). In multivariate Cox regression analyses, TCGA risk score was an independent prognostic factor [HR, 1.5; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2–1.9; P = 0.001]. Patients with the CIN subtype experienced the greatest benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16–0.94; P = 0.03) and those with the GS subtype had the least benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.36–1.89; P = 0.65). Conclusions: Our prediction model successfully stratified patients by survival and adjuvant chemotherapy outcomes. Further development of the prediction model is warranted. Clin Cancer Res; 23(15); 4441–9. ©2017 AACR.

Gastric cancer is a heterogeneous cancer, making treatment responses difficult to predict. Here we show that we identify two distinct molecular subtypes, mesenchymal phenotype (MP) and epithelial phenotype (EP), by analyzing genomic and proteomic data. Molecularly, MP subtype tumors show high genomic integrity characterized by low mutation rates and microsatellite stability, whereas EP subtype tumors show low genomic integrity. Clinically, the MP subtype is associated with markedly poor survival and resistance to standard chemotherapy, whereas the EP subtype is associated with better survival rates and sensitivity to chemotherapy. Integrative analysis shows that signaling pathways driving epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1)/IGF1 receptor (IGF1R) pathway are highly activated in MP subtype tumors. Importantly, MP subtype cancer cells are more sensitive to inhibition of IGF1/IGF1R pathway than EP subtype. Detailed characterization of these two subtypes could identify novel therapeutic targets and useful biomarkers for prognosis and therapy response.

PURPOSE: Activation of YAP1, a novel oncogene in the Hippo pathway, has been observed in many cancers, including colorectal cancer. We investigated whether activation of YAP1 is significantly associated with prognosis or treatment outcomes in colorectal cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A gene expression signature reflecting YAP1 activation was identified in colorectal cancer cells, and patients with colorectal cancer were stratified into two groups according to this signature: activated YAP1 colorectal cancer (AYCC) or inactivated YAP1 colorectal cancer (IYCC). Stratified patients in five test cohorts were evaluated to determine the effect of the signature on colorectal cancer prognosis and response to cetuximab treatment. RESULTS: The activated YAP1 signature was associated with poor prognosis for colorectal cancer in four independent patient cohorts with stage I-III disease (total n = 1,028). In a multivariate analysis, the impact of the YAP1 signature on disease-free survival was independent of other clinical variables [hazard ratio (HR), 1.63; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.25-2.13; P < 0.001]. In patients with stage IV colorectal cancer and wild-type KRAS, IYCC patients had a better disease control rate and progression-free survival (PFS) after cetuximab monotherapy than did AYCC patients; however, in patients with KRAS mutations, PFS duration after cetuximab monotherapy was not different between IYCC and AYCC patients. In multivariate analysis, the effect of YAP1 activation on PFS was independent of KRAS mutation status and other clinical variables (HR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.05-3.16; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Activation of YAP1 is highly associated with poor prognosis for colorectal cancer and may be useful in identifying patients with metastatic colorectal cancer resistant to cetuximab.

UNLABELLED: Metabolic activation is a common feature of many cancer cells and is frequently associated with the clinical outcomes of various cancers, including hepatocellular carcinoma. Thus, aberrantly activated metabolic pathways in cancer cells are attractive targets for cancer therapy. Yes-associated protein 1 (YAP1) and transcriptional coactivator with PDZ-binding motif (TAZ) are oncogenic downstream effectors of the Hippo tumor suppressor pathway, which is frequently inactivated in many cancers. Our study revealed that YAP1/TAZ regulates amino acid metabolism by up-regulating expression of the amino acid transporters solute carrier family 38 member 1 (SLC38A1) and solute carrier family 7 member 5 (SLC7A5). Subsequently, increased uptake of amino acids by the transporters (SLC38A1 and SLC7A5) activates mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1), a master regulator of cell growth, and stimulates cell proliferation. We also show that high expression of SLC38A1 and SLC7A5 is significantly associated with shorter survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. Furthermore, inhibition of the transporters and mTORC1 significantly blocks YAP1/TAZ-mediated tumorigenesis in the liver. These findings elucidate regulatory networks connecting the Hippo pathway to mTORC1 through amino acid metabolism and the mechanism's potential clinical implications for treating hepatocellular carcinoma. CONCLUSION: YAP1 and TAZ regulate cancer metabolism and mTORC1 through regulation of amino acid transportation, and two amino acid transporters, SLC38A1 and SLC7A5, might be important therapeutic targets.