Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
World Journal of Urology
Published in: World Journal of Urology 9/2019

01-09-2019 | Topic Paper

Genomic classification and risk stratification of bladder cancer

Authors: Damiano Fantini, Joshua J. Meeks

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 9/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in men and fifth most common overall. The use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) approaches is crucial to precisely characterize the molecular defects of tumors, and this information could be combined with other clinical data, such as tumor histology and TNM staging, with the goal of precise tumor classification. In many settings, targeted NGS is evaluated in patients with first- and second-line metastatic cancer. Yet, in the decade to come we anticipate increased application of precision oncology at all stages of bladder cancer with the aim of customizing cancer treatment. Here, we review the genomic and transcriptomic features associated with risk stratification in bladder cancer and summarize the current efforts for precision oncology in localized urothelial carcinomas.
Literature
1.
Howlader NNA, Krapcho M, Garshell J, Miller D, Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Yu M, Ruhl J, Tatalovich Z, Mariotto A, Lewis DR, Chen HS, Feuer EJ, Cronin KA. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD
2.
Chang SS, Boorjian SA, Chou R et al (2016) Diagnosis and treatment of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: AUA/SUO guideline. J Urol 196:1021–1029CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
Glaser AP, Fantini D, Shilatifard A et al (2017) The evolving genomic landscape of urothelial carcinoma. Nat Rev Urol 14:215–229CrossRefPubMed
5.
Babjuk M, Bohle A, Burger M et al (2017) EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: update 2016. Eur Urol 71:447–461CrossRefPubMed
6.
Kirkali Z, Chan T, Manoharan M et al (2005) Bladder cancer: epidemiology, staging and grading, and diagnosis. Urology 66:4–34CrossRefPubMed
7.
Sylvester RJ, van der Meijden AP, Oosterlinck W et al (2006) Predicting recurrence and progression in individual patients with stage Ta T1 bladder cancer using EORTC risk tables: a combined analysis of 2596 patients from seven EORTC trials. Eur Urol 49:466–477 (discussion 475–467) CrossRefPubMed
8.
Hurst CD, Alder O, Platt FM et al (2017) Genomic subtypes of non-invasive bladder cancer with distinct metabolic profile and female gender bias in KDM6A mutation frequency. Cancer Cell 32:701–715.e707CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Meeks JJ, Lerner SP (2017) Molecular landscape of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Cancer Cell 32:550–551CrossRefPubMed
10.
Pal SK, Rosenberg JE, Hoffman-Censits JH et al (2018) Efficacy of BGJ398, a fibroblast growth factor receptor 1–3 inhibitor, in patients with previously treated advanced urothelial carcinoma with FGFR3 alterations. Cancer Discov 8:812–821CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Hahn NM, Bivalacqua TJ, Ross AE et al (2016) A phase II trial of dovitinib in BCG-unresponsive urothelial carcinoma with FGFR3 mutations or overexpression: Hoosier Cancer Research Network Trial HCRN 12-157. Clin Cancer Res 23(12):3003–3011CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Hedegaard J, Lamy P, Nordentoft I et al (2016) Comprehensive transcriptional analysis of early-stage urothelial carcinoma. Cancer Cell 30:27–42CrossRefPubMed
13.
Sjodahl G, Lauss M, Lovgren K et al (2012) A molecular taxonomy for urothelial carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 18:3377–3386CrossRefPubMed
14.
15.
Patschan O, Sjodahl G, Chebil G et al (2015) A molecular pathologic framework for risk stratification of stage T1 urothelial carcinoma. Eur Urol 68:824–832 (discussion 835–826) CrossRefPubMed
16.
Kim YJ, Ha YS, Kim SK et al (2010) Gene signatures for the prediction of response to Bacillus Calmette-Guerin immunotherapy in primary pT1 bladder cancers. Clin Cancer Res 16:2131–2137CrossRefPubMed
17.
Warrick JI, Hovelson DH, Amin A et al (2015) Tumor evolution and progression in multifocal and paired non-invasive/invasive urothelial carcinoma. Virchows Arch 466:297–311CrossRefPubMed
18.
Riaz N, Havel JJ, Makarov V et al (2017) Tumor and microenvironment evolution during immunotherapy with nivolumab. Cell 171(934–949):e915
19.
20.
Cancer Genome Atlas Research N (2014) Comprehensive molecular characterization of urothelial bladder carcinoma. Nature 507:315–322CrossRef
21.
22.
mutSignatures: Decipher Mutational Signatures from Somatic Mutational Catalogs
23.
Fantini D, Seiler R, Meeks JJ (2018) Molecular footprints of muscle-invasive bladder cancer in smoking and non-smoking patients. Urol Oncol
24.
Glaser AP, Fantini D, Rimar KJ et al (2017) APOBEC-Mediated Mutagenesis In Urothelial Carcinoma Is Associated With Improved Survival, Mutations In DNA Damage Response Genes, And Immune Response. bioRxiv
25.
Fantini D, Glaser AP, Rimar KJ et al (2018) A Carcinogen-induced mouse model recapitulates the molecular alterations of human muscle invasive bladder cancer. Oncogene 37:1911–1925CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Wang L, Zhao Z, Ozark PA et al (2018) Resetting the epigenetic balance of Polycomb and COMPASS function at enhancers for cancer therapy. Nat Med 24:758–769CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Rimar KJ, Tran PT, Matulewicz RS et al (2017) The emerging role of homologous recombination repair and PARP inhibitors in genitourinary malignancies. Cancer 123:1912–1924CrossRefPubMed
28.
Van Allen EM, Mouw KW, Kim P et al (2014) Somatic ERCC2 mutations correlate with cisplatin sensitivity in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. Cancer Discov 4:1140–1153CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Plimack ER, Dunbrack RL, Brennan TA et al (2015) Defects in DNA repair genes predict response to neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Eur Urol 68:959–967CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Liu D, Plimack ER, Hoffman-Censits J et al (2016) Clinical validation of chemotherapy response biomarker ERCC2 in muscle-invasive urothelial bladder carcinoma. JAMA Oncol 2:1094–1096CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Felsenstein KM, Theodorescu D (2018) Precision medicine for urothelial bladder cancer: update on tumour genomics and immunotherapy. Nat Rev Urol 15:92–111CrossRefPubMed
32.
Teo MY, Seier K, Ostrovnaya I et al (2018) Alterations in DNA damage response and repair genes as potential marker of clinical benefit from PD-1/PD-l1 blockade in advanced urothelial cancers. J Clin Oncol 36:1685–1694CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Damrauer JS, Hoadley KA, Chism DD et al (2014) Intrinsic subtypes of high-grade bladder cancer reflect the hallmarks of breast cancer biology. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:3110–3115CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
35.
Sjodahl G, Eriksson P, Lovgren K et al (2018) Discordant molecular subtype classification in the basal-squamous subtype of bladder tumors and matched lymph-node metastases. Modern Pathol
36.
Sjodahl G, Eriksson P, Liedberg F et al (2017) Molecular classification of urothelial carcinoma: global mRNA classification versus tumour-cell phenotype classification. J Pathol 242:113–125CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Marzouka NA, Eriksson P, Rovira C et al (2018) A validation and extended description of the Lund taxonomy for urothelial carcinoma using the TCGA cohort. Sci Rep 8:3737CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Mariathasan S, Turley SJ, Nickles D et al (2018) TGFbeta attenuates tumour response to PD-L1 blockade by contributing to exclusion of T cells. Nature 554:544–548CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Seiler R, Ashab HAD, Erho N et al (2017) Impact of molecular subtypes in muscle-invasive bladder cancer on predicting response and survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur Urol 72:544–554CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Genomic classification and risk stratification of bladder cancer
Authors
Damiano Fantini
Joshua J. Meeks
Publication date
01-09-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
World Journal of Urology / Issue 9/2019
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2558-2

Other articles of this Issue 9/2019

World Journal of Urology 9/2019 Go to the issue

Topic Paper

Can urinary biomarkers replace cystoscopy?

Original Article

Lower urinary tract symptoms treatment constraints assessment (LUTS-TCA): a new tool for a global evaluation of neurogenic bladder treatments

Original Article

Surgical treatment of large volume prostates: a matched pair analysis comparing the open, endoscopic (ThuVEP) and robotic approach

Letter to Editor

Towards the future of upper tract urothelial carcinoma surveillance: lessons learnt from bladder cancer urinary biomarkers

Original Article

The prognostic role of preoperative circulating neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio in primary bladder cancer patients undergoing radical cystectomy: a meta-analysis

Original Article

The effect of platelet-rich plasma injection on post-internal urethrotomy stricture recurrence