Immunophenotypic Profiles and Prognosis for Colorectal Mucinous Adenocarcinomas are Dependent on Anatomic Location

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2010805/v1

Download PDF

Short Report

Immunophenotypic Profiles and Prognosis for Colorectal Mucinous Adenocarcinomas are Dependent on Anatomic Location

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2010805/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

The prognostic value of mucinous adenocarcinomas (MCAs, exhibiting >50% extracellular mucin) of the colorectum, in relation to their anatomic location is not well studied. Thus, we compared MCAs (n=175) with non-MCAs (NMCAs, n=1,015) were immunostained for Muc1, Muc2, Bcl-2, and p53 and the cancer-specific survival rates were compared, based on their anatomic site, by univariate Kaplan-Meyer and multivariate Cox methods. MCAs were more commonly found in the right colon, were of high-grade, and were more prevalent in younger patients (<40 years). They exhibited strong expression of Muc2 and Bcl-2 and showed less p53 nuclear staining. In contrast, most NMCAs were low-grade and positive for Muc1. MCAs of the rectum were associated with poorer outcomes relative to NMCAs ((HR 2.30, CI 95% 1.29-3.19), even though the distributions of advanced-stage tumors were similar. Late-stage disease and age were poor independent prognostic indicators of cancer-specific deaths across all tumor locations. In summary, rectal MCAs have a poor prognosis.

Colorectal cancer

Mucinous adenocarcinomas

Non-mucinous adenocarcinomas

Rectal Cancers

Tumor location

Prognostic Biomarker

Colorectal cancers (CRCs), which account for ~ 10% of new cases, are a leading cause of cancer-related morbidity, accounting for ~ 700,000 yearly deaths worldwide [1].

Mucinous colorectal adenocarcinomas (MCAs) are defined by the extracellular mucin that accounts for ≥ 50% of the tumor volume [2]. Of all CRCs, 10–15% are MCAs [2]. Currently, there is a debate regarding the prognosis for MCAs in comparison to non-mucinous colorectal adenocarcinomas (NMCAs). Patients with MCAs exhibit poorer overall survival relative to those with NMCAs (48.4 months vs. 60.2 months) [3]. However, the overall survival rates for patients with MCAs are not significantly different from those with NMCAs when controlled for tumor stage (5- and 8-year survival rates are 78.6% and 68.8% for MCAs and 72.3% and 63.8% for NMCAs) [4]. Findings on the prognostic importance of tumor location in the GI tract are inconsistent [5], and there is a scarcity of large studies examining site-specific differences in survival of these patients. In the present analysis, 175 MCAs were compared to 1,015 NMCAs for demographic and clinicopathologic features and for the phenotypic expression of Muc1, Muc2, p53, and Bcl-2. Cancer-specific survival was evaluated to assess the effect of mucin status based on the tumor anatomic site after adjusting for confounding factors.

Histopathological Analysis

Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) blocks and hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained slides of 175 MCAs and 1,015 NMCAs were collected from the Pathology Department of the University of Alabama at Birmingham and evaluated for mucin content. Slides and pathology reports from 1985 to 2005 were reviewed by three GI pathologists. This long study period was selected because patients with early-stage CRCs have longer survival. Tumors with > 50% of extracellular mucinous components were classified as MCAs. Consecutive tissue sections, 5-µM thick, were immunostained for Muc1, Muc2, Bcl-2, and p53, for available tissues, to demonstrate phenotypic expression patterns and status. Staining evaluations performed as described [6, 7]. Immunohistochemical markers dichotomized into positive and negative categories using median expression in normal tissue as the cut-point [6, 7].

Design and Patient Inclusion Criteria

We employed a retrospective cohort design with death from cancer as the primary outcome. Patients who lacked vital status at follow-up, died within 1 month of follow-up, or had previous or concurrent cancers, were excluded. Demographic variables were sex, age at the time of diagnosis, and self-reported race. Pathologic variables including AJCC-TNM stage, tumor location, differentiation/grade, and death due to cancer, were recorded. Follow-up data for patients were collected from 1985 through 2014. Time to CRC-related death was calculated from the date of surgery.

Statistical Analyses

The univariate analysis for MCA/NMCA groups was performed with chi-square testing for categorical variables and t-tests were performed for continuous variables. The statistical significance of p-values was 0.05. Additional univariate analyses of tumor location-stratified subsets (proximal colon, distal colon, and rectum) were performed. Kaplan-Meier plots and log-rank tests were used for determination of univariate survival. Analyses of adjusted survival in stratified MCA-only and NMCA-only groups were performed by Cox proportional hazard models.

Overall Differences by Mucin Status

MCAs were more commonly found in the right colon (86 of 173, 50%); were high-grade (26% MCAs vs. 17% NMCAs); were more prevalent in younger patients (< 40 years, MCAs 8% vs. NMCAs 4%); exhibited strong expression of Muc2 (76 of 77, 99%) and Bcl-2 (49 of 165, 30% vs. NMCAs 220 of 962, 23%); and had less nuclear p53 staining (MCAs 33 of 90, 37% vs. NMCAs 266 of 496, 54%). In contrast, most NMCAs were low-grade tumors and positive for Muc1 (NMCAs 148 of 290, 51%, vs. MCAs 29 of 80, 36%) (Table 1A). There were no differences in relation to gender, race, or older age (not shown). In tumor location-based analyses, Muc2 expression was higher in MCAs across all sites and p53 was lower only in distal MCAs (not shown).

Histologic types and immunostaining patterns are show in Fig. 1. Intratumoral mucin patterns are shown in Fig. 1A and 1B. NMCAs exhibited more nuclear p53 staining (Fig. 1D), relative to MCAs (Fig. 1C), and were more often positive for Muc1 (Fig. 1F) than MCAs (Fig. 1E). In contrast, MCAs had higher positive expression for Muc2 (Fig. 1G).

Univariate Survival by Mucin Status

In univariate analyses, there was no difference in cancer-specific survival between those with MCAs and those with NMCAs (P = 0.12) when all anatomic locations were grouped together (Fig. 2a). For proximal colon tumors, mucinous histology had no appreciable effect on cancer-specific survival (Fig. 2b); the distributions of advanced staged tumors were similar (x², P = 0.787). Furthermore, a similar, but marginally significant, finding of poor survival was evident for distal tumors (P = 0.057) (Fig. 2c), and MCAs in the rectum showed poor outcomes in comparison to NMCAs (log rank, P = 0.0017) (Fig. 2d).

Adjusted Survival Models Based on Tumor Location

An overall model of cancer-specific survival adjusted for age and stage showed an interaction between mucin status and tumor anatomic site; patients with MCAs and rectal tumors had a 2.1 times greater hazard of death from CRC (CI = 1.2–3.8), independent of age, stage, gender, and race (data not shown). This effect modification in the overall model justified tumor location-stratified analyses in subsets of data for proximal colon, distal colon, and rectal tumors. For rectal tumors, the adjusted hazard of death was 2.03 times greater for MCA tumors than for NMCAs (CI = 1.29–3.19). The mucin status of tumors of proximal and distal colon was not a predictor of cancer-specific survival as determined in age/race/gender/stage-adjusted models (Table 1B).

The colorectum is frequently considered a single organ in that the epithelium of the proximal and distal colon and the rectum appears similar. However, there are various biological and genetic differences [8]. Cancers in the colon and rectum differ clinically, as rectal cancers have a greater rate of local recurrence and are treated differently [9]. The present study demonstrated that MCAs located in the rectum exhibit a worse prognosis relative to NMACs.

Our finding of the importance of rectal location in relation to survival of patients with MCAs agrees with the results of an epidemiologic study of CRCs [10]. Additionally, a meta-analysis of 8 studies of rectal cancer found worse overall survival, a reduced rate of pathological complete response, less tumor down-staging after therapy, and higher rates of positive margins in MCA rectal tumors compared to NMCAs [11]. A Korean study found site-specific survival of patients with MCA as an independent prognostic factor only for colon cancers [12]. However, for their cohort of 6475 patients, this might be due to the higher frequency of MCAs in proximal (9%) versus rectal (2%) locations. Our observations of MCA frequency are consistent with prior observations of 10–15% overall [2], and 8–12% or 3–7% in the colon and rectum, respectively [5]. In contrast, a population-based European study of only colon cancer patients (> 120,000) found that MCAs do not affect survival [13].

For CRCs, tumor anatomic site, stage, and molecular profiles, specifically microsatellite instability (MSI), KRAS, BRAF, and PI3K, aid in designing treatments. However, histologic types (MCAs vs. NMACs) are relevant entities because they exhibit distinct molecular profiles. Patients with stage III or IV MCAs, compared with NMACs, exhibit higher expression of Muc2 and Muc5AC and mutations in genes of the Ras/Raf/MAPK and PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathways; those with high MSI are poor responders to chemotherapy [14]. However, the molecular determinants that contribute to the MCA phenotype and their prognostic implications are not understood.

In the present study, we found that Muc2 was overexpressed in almost all MCAs; its expression was seen in the epithelial cells that comprise the MCAs as compared to normal colon (Fig. 1f) regardless of tumor location. Our prior study of Muc1 and Muc2 in CRCs showed that Muc1 is an indicator of poor prognosis for Caucasian patients, but there is, for African American or Caucasian patients, no prognostic value for MUC2 when colon and rectal cancers along with MCAs and NMCAs are combined [7]. Other studies show that high expression of Muc2 in CRCs is associated with a favorable prognosis [15].

Although our findings were adequately powered, they have a limitation. Since data for immunohistochemical markers were incomplete, we did not adjust the expression status of the markers in the survival models.

In sum, the current finding that MCAs located in the rectum are associated with a poor prognosis is clinically relevant given their distinct genetic/molecular differences. Since the therapeutic efficacy and overall survival for late-stage patients with MCAs vs. NMCAs are controversial, the current results support the concept that patients with MCAs located in the rectum should be considered for rigorous treatment regimens. Additionally, as almost all MCAs exhibit strong Muc2 expression regardless of tumor location, studies are needed to determine the link between MCAs and the poor prognosis for patients with rectal cancers and the association between MCAs and elevated levels of Muc2.

Table 1

A. Comparison of pathological and demographic features of mucinous/non- mucinous tumors
	Mucin (N = 175)	Non-Mucinous (N = 1015)	P-value
Demographic
Age (years)	64.1 +/- 14.4	64.2 +/- 12.5	0.919
Age (0–40)	14 (8.1%)	39 (3.9%)	0.027
Race			0.862
Caucasian (CA)	107 (61%)	631 (62.2%)
African American (AA)	68 (38.9%)	384 (37.8%)
Gender			0.549
Female	84 (48.0%)	459 (45.2%)
Male	91 (52.0%)	556 (54.8%)
Pathology*
Tumor location			0.151
Proximal	86 (49.7%)	424 (41.8%)
Distal	50 (28.9%)	344 (33.9%)
Rectum	37 (21.4%)	246 (24.3%)
AJCC Stage*			0.428
I	27 (15.5%)	210 (20.9%)
II	66 (37.9%)	252 (35.0%)
III	57 (32.8%)	305 (30.3%)
IV	24 (13.8%)	140 (13.9)
Grade*			0.008
Low	126 (73.6%)	836 (83.1%)
High	45 (26.3%)	170 (16.9%)
MUC1*			0.027
Negative	51 (63.8%)	142 (49.0%)
Positive	29 (36.2%)	148 (51.0%)
MUC2*			< 0.000
Negative	1 (1.3%)	105 (42.5%)
Positive	76 (98.7%)	142 (57.5%)
p53*			0.004
Negative	57 (63.3%)	230 (46.4%)
Positive	33 (36.7%)	266 (53.6%)
Bcl-2*			0.072
Negative	116 (70.3%)	742 (77.1%)
Positive	49 (29.7%)	220 (22.9%)
Adjuvant therapy			0.748
Missing**	40 (22.9%)	258 (25.4%)
None	130 (74.3%)	732 (72.1%)
Yes	5 (2.9%)	25 (2.5%)
* Data are not available for all cases; ** Before 2000, adjuvant therapy was not common practice at UAB.

Table 1

B. Adjusted cancer-specific survival models stratified by tumor location
		Proximal Tumors (n = 614)			Distal Tumors (n = 454)				Rectal Tumors (n = 316)
Variable	Comparison	HR	95% CI	P-value	HR	95% CI	P-value		HR	95% CI		P-value
Age	Continuous by year	1.01	1.00-1.02	0.03	1.01	1.00-1.02		0.058	1.02		1.00-1.03		0.02
Race	Caucasian vs. African American	0.93	0.72–1.21	0.60	1.02	0.76–1.37		0.91	1.10		0.71–1.71		0.66
Gender	Male vs. Female	0.98	0.75–1.25	0.80	0.89	0.66–1.19		0.41	1.25		0.86–1.82		0.23
Stage	Late (III&IV) vs. Early (I&II)	4.02	3.04–5.32	< 0.001	3.23	2.36–4.39		< 0.001	3.25		2.26–4.69		< 0.001
Mucin	Mucin vs. Non-Mucin	0.88	0.61–1.25	0.46	1.36	0.91–2.03		0.13	2.03		1.29–3.19		0.002

CRC: Colorectal cancer; MCAs: Mucinous adenocarcinomas: NMACs: Non-mucinous adenocarcinomas

Ethical Approval Statement: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), Birmingham, AL. The title of the approval is, “Prognostic Molecular Markers of Colorectal Cancer” (Approval # IRB-020830005), for utilizing remnants of diagnostic CRC tissues.

Consent for Publication: All authors have read and agreed to the final version of the manuscript.

Availability of Data Materials: Original data is presented in this article and any questions can be directed to the corresponding author.

Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Funding: These studies were partly supported by institutional impact funds (Department of Pathology and School of Medicine of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, UAB) and from the National Institutes of Health (NIH)-National Cancer Institute (NCI) (U.S.) award, 5U54CA118948 to UM and NIH-NCI R21 CA216789-01A1 to NSB.

Author Contributions: The following contributions are made by authors for the studies presented in this article. Conceptualization, C.P., M. B., C.S., and U.M.; Methodology, C.P., M. B., S.A., D. D., G. L., C.S., W.E.G., and U.M.; Image acquisition, C.P., and S.A.; Staining evaluation/validation, C.P., D.D., G.L., N.S.B., S.A., C.S., W.E.G., and U.M.; Data analysis, C.P., M. B., C.S., and U.M; Lab investigations, C.P., C.S., and U.M.; Resources, U.M.; Writing—original draft preparation and reviewing, C.P., M. B., S.A., D. D., G. L., C.S., W.E.G., and U.M.; Supervision, M.B. and U.M.; project administration, M.B, and U.M.; funding acquisition, M.B. and U.M.

Acknowledgements: We thank the staff of the UAB O’Neal Comprehensive Cancer’s Tissue Procurement Shared Facility (P30 CA013148) and Dr. Donald Hill for his help in editing the manuscript.

Haggar FA, Boushey RP. Colorectal cancer epidemiology: incidence, mortality, survival, and risk factors. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2009;22(4):191–7.
Hugen N, Brown G, Glynne-Jones R, de Wilt JH, Nagtegaal ID. Advances in the care of patients with mucinous colorectal cancer. Nature reviews Clinical oncology. 2016;13(6):361–9.
Ott C, Gerken M, Hirsch D, Fest P, Fichtner-Feigl S, Munker S, et al. Advanced Mucinous Colorectal Cancer: Epidemiology, Prognosis and Efficacy of Chemotherapeutic Treatment. Digestion. 2018;98(3):143–52.
Catalano V, Loupakis F, Graziano F, Bisonni R, Torresi U, Vincenzi B, et al. Prognosis of mucinous histology for patients with radically resected stage II and III colon cancer. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(1):135–41.
Zong Z, Luo Y, Ying H, Wang A, Li H, Yi C. Trends of incidence and survival in patients with gastrointestinal mucinous adenocarcinoma. Oncol Lett. 2018;16(5):5791–8.
Manne U, Myers RB, Moron C, Poczatek RB, Dillard S, Weiss H, et al. Prognostic significance of Bcl-2 expression and p53 nuclear accumulation in colorectal adenocarcinoma. Int J Cancer. 1997;74(3):346–58.
Manne U, Weiss HL, Grizzle WE. Racial differences in the prognostic usefulness of MUC1 and MUC2 in colorectal adenocarcinomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2000;6(10):4017–25.
Grizzle WE, Shibata D, Manne U, Myers RB, Frost AR. Molecular and histopathologic changes in the development of colorectal neoplasia. In: Srivastava S, Henson DE, Gazdar A, editors. Molecular Pathology of Early Cancer. Amsterdam: IOS Press; Chap. 10; 1999. p. 135–70,.
Hong TS, Clark JW, Haigis KM. Cancers of the Colon and Rectum: Identical or Fraternal Twins? Cancer Discovery. 2012;2(2):117–21.
Benesch MGK, Mathieson A. Epidemiology of Mucinous Adenocarcinomas. Cancers. 2020;12(11):3193.
McCawley N, Clancy C, O'Neill BD, Deasy J, McNamara DA, Burke JP. Mucinous Rectal Adenocarcinoma Is Associated with a Poor Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Diseases of the colon and rectum. 2016;59(12):1200–8.
Park JS, Huh JW, Park YA, Cho YB, Yun SH, Kim HC, et al. Prognostic comparison between mucinous and nonmucinous adenocarcinoma in colorectal cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94(15):e658.
Warschkow R, Tarantino I, Huttner FJ, Schmied BM, Guller U, Diener MK, et al. Predictive value of mucinous histology in colon cancer: a population-based, propensity score matched analysis. Br J Cancer. 2016;114(9):1027–32.
Luo C, Cen S, Ding G, Wu W. Mucinous colorectal adenocarcinoma: clinical pathology and treatment options. Cancer Commun (Lond). 2019;39(1):13-.
Li C, Zuo D, Yin L, Lin Y, Li C, Liu T, et al. Prognostic Value of MUC2 Expression in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Gastroenterology Research and Practice. 2018;2018:6986870.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Immunophenotypic Profiles and Prognosis for Colorectal Mucinous Adenocarcinomas are Dependent on Anatomic Location

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Materials And Methods

Results

Discussion

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1