Virus-positive Merkel Cell Carcinoma Is an Independent Prognostic Group with Distinct Predictive Biomarkers

Kelly L. Harms(University of Michigan), Lili Zhao(University of Michigan), Bryan Johnson(Michigan Medicine), Xiaoming Wang(University of Michigan), Shannon Carskadon(Henry Ford Health System), Nallasivam Palanisamy(Henry Ford Health System), Daniel R. Rhodes(Michigan Medicine), Rahul Mannan(University of Michigan), Josh N. Vo(University of Michigan), Jae Eun Choi(University of Michigan), May P. Chan(University of Michigan), Douglas R. Fullen(University of Michigan), Rajiv M. Patel(University of Michigan), Javed Siddiqui(University of Michigan), T. Vincent(University of Michigan), Steven Hrycaj(University of Michigan), Scott A. McLean(University of Michigan), Tasha M. Hughes(University of Michigan), Christopher K. Bichakjian(University of Michigan), Scott A. Tomlins(University of Michigan), Paul W. Harms(University of Michigan)
Clinical Cancer Research
February 5, 2021
Cited by 88Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

Abstract Purpose: Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is an aggressive cutaneous neuroendocrine carcinoma that can be divided into two classes: virus-positive (VP) MCC, associated with oncogenic Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCPyV); and virus-negative (VN) MCC, associated with photodamage. Experimental Design: We classified 346 MCC tumors from 300 patients for MCPyV using a combination of IHC, ISH, and qPCR assays. In a subset of tumors, we profiled mutation status and expression of cancer-relevant genes. MCPyV and molecular profiling results were correlated with disease-specific outcomes. Potential prognostic biomarkers were further validated by IHC. Results: A total of 177 tumors were classified as VP-MCC, 151 tumors were VN-MCC, and 17 tumors were indeterminate. MCPyV positivity in primary tumors was associated with longer disease-specific and recurrence-free survival in univariate analysis, and in multivariate analysis incorporating age, sex, immune status, and stage at presentation. Prioritized oncogene or tumor suppressor mutations were frequent in VN-MCC but rare in VP-MCC. TP53 mutation developed with recurrence in one VP-MCC case. Importantly, for the first time we find that VP-MCC and VN-MCC display distinct sets of prognostic molecular biomarkers. For VP-MCC, shorter survival was associated with decreased expression of immune markers including granzyme and IDO1. For VN-MCC, shorter survival correlated with high expression of several genes including UBE2C. Conclusions: MCPyV status is an independent prognostic factor for MCC. Features of the tumor genome, transcriptome, and microenvironment may modify prognosis in a manner specific to viral status. MCPyV status has clinicopathologic significance and allows for identification of additional prognostic subgroups.


Related Papers