Dr Sarah J Johnson Consultant Cyto/histopathologist Newcastle upon Tyne MOLECULAR TESTING OF THYROID NODULES This talk Overview of molecular abnormalities in thyroid lesions Potential value Our own work Overview of molecular abnormalities (NikiforovYE, Modern Pathology 2011;24:S34-43; BhaijeeF& NikiforovYE.EndocrPathol2011;22:126-133. NikiforovaMN & NikiforovYE. Thyroid2009;9:13511361. Recent dramatic increase in understanding of molecular biology of thyroid cancer Main four BRAF and RAS point mutations RET/PTC and PAX8/PPARγ gene rearrangements Others PI3K/AKT signalling pathway - PDC TP53 and CTNNB1 mutations – PDC, ATC TRK rearrangement – PTC but rare Prevalence of mutations Tumour type Mutation Prevalence % Papillary carcinoma (PTC) BRAF 40-45 RET/PTC 10-20 RAS 10-20 (usually FVPTC) RAS 40-50 PAX8/PPARγ 30-35 Familial – germline RET >95 Sporadic – somatic RET 40-50 Follicular carcinoma (FC) Medullary carcinoma (MTC) Nikiforov Arch Pathol Lab Med 2011;135:569-77 Bhaijee & Nikiforov Endocr Pathol 2011;22:126-33 Nikiforova & Nikiforov Thyroid 2009;19(12)1351-61 Rivera et al, Modern Pathology 2010;23:1191-21200 Follicular variant of PTC (FVPTC) encapsulated infiltrative BRAF 0 26 RAS 36 10 RET/PTC 0 10 PAX8/PPARγ 3.5 0 Like FA / FC Like classical PTC BRAF point mutations Intracellular effector of MAPK signalling cascade Most V600E → activate BRAF kinase, stimulate MAPK pathway → tumourigenic for thyroid cells 1-2% - other mutations eg K601E BRAF V600E mutation quite specific for PTC and related tumour types 60% classical PTC 80% tall cell variant PTC 10% FVPTC 10-15% PDC 20-30% ATC NOT in FC, MTC or benign nodules early in pathway BRAF - clinical and prognostic value Melcket al The Oncologist2010;15:1285-93;Yipet al.Surgery2009;146:1215-23;Xinget al J ClinOncol2009;27:2977-2982. Associated with aggressive tumour characteristics (V600E only) ETE, multicentricity, advanced stage, LN+, distant metastases, recurrence, persistence, re-operations, tall cell morphology, lymphovascular invasion, suspicious USS features especially >65 yrs Independent predictor of treatment failure, tumour recurrence, tumour-related death Even in microPTC – associated with poorer clinicopathological features (eg ETE, LN+) – exciting because management debated May relate to tendency to de-differentiate reduced ability to trap radio-iodine less responsive to TSH suppression BRAF – diagnostic value in cytology Adeniranet al Thyroid2011;21(7):717-23.Bentzet al OtolaryngolHead and Neck Surgery 2009;140:709-14 BRAF mutation strongly correlates with PTC, independent of cytology Improves accuracy, specificity and PPV for PTC Specificity and PPV for PTC with BRAF-positivity = virtually 100% Mixed results for sensitivity & NPV, can be low Helpful in identifying PTC in “indeterminate” cytology samples Could use to change management decision Indeterminate cytology positive Total thyroidectomy +/ level VI LNs negative Diagnostic hemithyroidectomy BRAF test BRAF –accuracy in cytology 6 false positives for malignancy with BRAF analysis 1 case in Korea – indeterminate cytology, BRAF-positive → histology of “atypical nodular hyperplasia” 5 when ultrasensitive testing used, not positive on repeat testing Recent meta-analysis – BRAF testing in 2766 samples 581 BRAF-positive → 580 were PTC (some with benign cytology) rate of malignancy for BRAF-positivity = 99.8% frequency of indeterminate cytology in BRAF-positive samples = 15-39% Various techniques possible but need to avoid ultrasensitive detection and methods that are not well validated → may risk false positives BRAF detection in cytology also predicts aggressiveness BRAF-negativity with indeterminate cytology does not eliminate need for diagnostic hemithyroidectomy BRAF –therapeutic value Predicts aggressiveness →maybe consider more aggressive treatment, more frequent follow-up, but maybe not enough to act on yet Therapeutic target - BRAF inhibitors eg sorafenib RAS - point mutations Family includes HRAS, NRAS, KRAS Propagate signals along MAPK and other signalling cascades Most frequent mutations in thyroid NRAS codon 61 HRAS codon 61 Found in 10-20% PTC – mostly FVPTC 40-50% FC 20-40% FA – but ?precursors for FC some hyperplastic nodules but clonal so ?neoplasm less in oncocytic tumours RAS - point mutations Prognosis some association with dedifferentiation and worse outlook but also associated with eFVPTC – indolent behaviour Finding RAS mutation in thyroid nodule strong evidence for neoplasia but does not establish diagnosis of malignancy RAS mutation in cytology PPV for malignancy 74-88% helpful when cytology difficult such as FVPTC RET/PTC gene rearrangements RET highly expressed in C cells, not follicular cells But activated by RET/PTC rearrangement 11 types, RET fusion to different genes Commonest in thyroid cancer - RET/PTC1 & RET/PTC3 All fusions activate MAPK signalling pathway Variation in expression – needs to be “clonal”, ie majority Clonal RET/PTC - reasonably specific for PTC 10-20% PTC in adults 50-80% PTC after radiation exposure (RET/PTC1 – classical PTC, RET/PTC3 – solid type PTC) 40-70% PTC in children and young adults Non-clonal RET/PTC – no diagnostic implications RET/PTC- prognosis and diagnosis PTC with RET/PTC - younger age, classical PTC histology, high rate LN metastases But varied views on overall prognostic value Detection of clonal RET/PTC = strong indication PTC Histology – not useful because classical so diagnosis clear In FNA – can improve pre-operative diagnosis PTC but can have false positives PAX8/PPARγ gene rearrangement Fusion between PAX8 gene and perioxisome proliferator activated receptor (PPARγ) gene Causes over-expression of PPARγ protein Found in 30-40% conventional FC less often in oncocytic carcinomas 5-38% FVPTC 2-13% FA – often thick capsule, ?pre-FC or misdiagnosed Often - younger age, smaller tumour, more frequent vascular invasion Detection in histology not diagnostic of malignancy but should prompt exhaustive search for capsular or vascular invasion Detection in FNA – typically malignant but numbers low Gene expression profiles Borupet al Endocr-RelatedCancer2010;17:691-708.Maenhautet al ClinOncol2011;23:282-288.Ferrazet al ClinEndocrinolMetab2011;96(7):2016-2026 mRNA no ideal marker of PTC lack of markers to distinguish FC from FA slight difference between radiation-induced PTC and not ?can measure different background susceptibilities to radiation microRNAs easier to extract from FNA than mRNA possible future diagnostic potential PTC & FC have different profile to normal thyroid Review of 20 studies of genetic testing Ferraz et al ClinEndocrinolMetab2011;96(7):2016-2026 Highest sensitivity with panel of markers BUT more FP with panel than with single marker Best if done on same material as used for cytology, not extra Suggest Indeterminate cytology Panel of markers Negative group Malignancy risk down from 20% to 8-10% miRNA Cohort with 3% malignancy risk ?follow up with USS + repeat FNA Commercially available kits – USA Sample in special preservative solution → panel of 7 molecular markers Commercially available kits – USA Sample → cytopathology → inadequate, benign or malignant report indeterminates → gene expression Our own work in Newcastle Initial project Current BRAF pilot Initial project – BSCC presentation 2011 S. Hardy, U.K. Mallick, P. Perros, S.J. Johnson, A. Curtis and D Bourn Aim: to set up and validate assays for detection of molecular markers in thyroid samples Retrospective – archival histology then cytology Panel of markers: • BRAF codon 600 • HRAS codon 61 on extracted DNA • KRAS codons 12/13 (melt curve analysis) • NRAS codon 61 • RET/PTC rearrangements on extracted RNA • PAX8/PPARγ rearrangements (RT-PCR-based assays) Example data – NRAS codon 61 WT CONTROL CODON 61 (Q61K) CONTROL WT Q61K WT WT Q61K Results – point mutations on thyroid histology cases 32 cases (patients), 36 blocks 6 non-neoplastic nodules 0/6 0% 5 follicular thyroid adenoma (FA) 0/6 0% 5 follicular thyroid carcinoma (FC) 1/5 20% (NRAS codon 61) 7 papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) 1/6 17% 4 “aggressive” PTC (aPTC) 4/4 100% (BRAF v600E) 3 poorly differentiated carcinoma (PDC) 1/3 33% (NRAS codon 61) 1 SCC 1/1 100% (NRAS codon 61) 1 metastatic struma ovarii 1/1 100% (NRAS codon 61) • ie. pattern as expected • Concordance between different blocks from same tumour (BRAF v600E) Results – point mutations on cytology slides Cases with molecular result available on histology: NNN 2 cases, 4 slides 1/3 50% cases (NRAS codon 61) FA 1 case, 1 slide 0/1 0% FC 4 cases, 7 slides 2/6 50% cases (1 NRAS, 1 HRAS) PTC 2 cases, 6 slides 1/3 17% (NRAS codon 61) aPTC 3 cases, 9 slides 4 tumour 3/3 100% (2 BRAF V600E, 1 HRAS codon 61) 5 LN/bed 1/3 50% cases (HRAS but in neg LN) 0/2 0% PDC 1 case, 2 slides Cases with no molecular result available on histology: Thy4 (histol = FA) 0/1 0% Thy3 (histol = FC) 0/1 0% Thy3f (histol = FC), 4 slides 2/2 100% (NRAS,HRAS) Results as cancer patients 23 cancer cases 21 molecular results on histology 9/21 mutations 5 of 9 had molecular tests on cytology: 2 fails, 3 positive matches 2 no molecular result on histology 1/2 mutation on cytology ie. cytology found mutations in 57% (4/7) Results as mutations 13 cases with mutations (on cytology and/or histology) 12 malignant outcome 1 benign outcome 9 histology cases with mutations – all malignant outcomes 11 cytology slides with 12 mutations - 7 patients - 6 malignant outcomes mutation No of mutations outcome malignant benign BRAF V600E 2 2 aPTC (2 pts) 0 NRAS codon 61 5 3 FC (2 pts) 1 PTC 1 (NNN) HRAS codon 61 5 2 FC (2 pts) 0 2 aPTC (1 tumour, 1 neg LN) KRAS codon 0 0 0 Results as cytology slides 37 cytology slides 29 thyroid, 4 LN, 4 recurrences Most were DQ slides Failure rate 9 of 37 = 24% 1 LBC slide (SurePath) - paired DQ worked 2 cyst fluid only (LN met) – failed (same case histology worked) 2 unsatisfactory slides (1 thyroid, 1 bed) – a paired US worked 1 with lots blood & colloid – paired slide worked 2 Thy3f 1 Thy5 Results as cytology slides 37 cytology slides 24 slides with histology mutation result available 9 in agreement for no mutation 4 in agreement for presence of mutation 5 discordances – mutations in cytol not histol, 4 malignant outcomes 11 cytology pairs (2 slides from same specimen) 4 matches – 1 fail, 1 NRAS, 2 no mutation 7 mismatches – 3 with one fail, 2 NRAS v fail, 1 NRAS v no mutation, 1 BRAF V600E v HRAS codon 61 1 of 4 slides from same specimen 2 fail, 1 NRAS & HRAS, 1 HRAS only Conclusions from initial study • Molecular testing for DNA point mutations is feasible in stained thyroid cytology samples • PPV 92% for malignant outcome • BUT • not always successful result • not always match of cytology with cytology, or cytology with histology • can have multiple mutations in one sample and/or tumour • can have mutations in negative LN cytology sample from cancer case • can have mutations in non-neoplastic nodules • Next step – prospective BRAF testing for 12 months • Molecular testing also feasible in histology of thyroid cancers – possible future role for individualised treatment and prognostication Current BRAF Pilot Prospective 12 months BRAF testing on cytology reported as Thy3a, Thy3f, Thy4 and Thy5 PTC No result to clinician, no action on result Will then correlate with surgical and histological outcome assess whether BRAF result would have influenced management decision BRAF Pilot – results so far Tested 14 cytology slides from 13 patients Slide types 12 DQ – all worked, even with heavy bloodstaining 1 ICC for Tg on destained DQ – worked 1 SurePath LBC – failed Outcomes 2 BRAF V600E mutations LN5 met PTC (histol = classical & follicular variant, pT3 pN1b) Thyroid Thy5 PTC (histol = classical multifocal, pT1b pN1b) 11 wild type 7 Thy3a - 1 with histol = FA 3 Thyf - 1 with histol = dominant nodule with contralat PTC 1 Thy5 ATC vs MM – histol = ATC Summary points for whole talk Molecular testing of thyroid cytology and histology specimens is feasible in routine labs Diagnostic aims single stage theraeutic surgery for cancers avoiding diagnostic hemithyroidectomies for benigns BRAF mutation shows most promise diagnostically, prognostically & therapeutically Other mutations and rearrangements diagnostically & prognostically – less predictive Also likely future role for microRNA studies Thankyou for listening