Abstract GS2-05: Microscaled Proteogenomic Methods for Precision Oncology
Shankha Satpathy,Eric Jaehnig,Krug Karsten,Beom-Jun Kim,Alexander Saltzman,Doug Chan,Kimberly Holloway,Meenakshi Anurag,Chen Huang,Purba Singh,Ari Gao,Noel Namai,Yongchao Dou,Bo Wen,Suhas Vasaikar,David Mutch,Mark Watson,Cynthia Ma,Foluso Ademuyiwa,Mothaffar Rimawi,Jeremy Hoog,Samuel Jacobs,Anna Malovannaya,Terry Hyslop,D.R Mani,Charles Perou,George Miles,Bing Zhang,Michael Gillette,Steven Carr,Matthew Ellis
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs19-gs2-05
IF: 11.2
2020-01-01
Cancer Research
Abstract:Abstract Cancer proteogenomics combines genomics, transcriptomics and mass spectrometry-based proteomics to gain insights into cancer biology and treatment responsiveness. While proteogenomics analyses have already shown great potential to deepen our understanding of cancer tissue complexity and signaling, how a patient’s tumor changes upon treatment has largely been the province of genomics. This is due to technical difficulties associated with doing proteogenomic analysis on clinic-derived core-needle biopsies. To address this critical need, we have developed a “microscaled” proteogenomics approach for tumor-rich OCT-embedded core needle biopsies. Tissue-sparing specimen processing (“Biopsy Trifecta EXTraction”, BioTExt) and microscaled proteomics (MiProt) methodologies allowed generation of deep-scale proteogenomics datasets, with copy number and transcript information for >20,000 genes and mass spectrometry-based identification and quantification of nearly all expressed proteins in a tumor (>10,000 proteins) and more than >20,000 phosphosites starting with just 25 micrograms of protein per sample. In order to understand the capabilities and limitations our our approach relative to more conventional deepscale proteomics requiring >10X more starting material, we compared preclinical patient derived xenograft (PDX) models at conventional scale with data obtained by core-needle biopsy of the same tissues. Comparable depth and biological insights were obtained from the cores relative to surgically resected tumors. As a proof-of-concept for implementation in clinical trials, we applied microscaled proteogenomic methods to a small-scale clinical study where biopsies were accrued from patients with ERBB2+ locally advanced breast cancer before and 48 to 72 hours after the first dose of neoadjuvant Trastuzumab-based chemotherapy. Multi-omics comparisons were conducted between samples associated with residual disease versus samples associated with complete pathological response. Integrative, microscaled proteogenomic analyses efficiently diagnosed the molecular bases of diverse candidate treatment resistance mechanisms including: 1) absence of ERBB2 amplification (false-ERBB2+); 2) insufficient ERBB2 activity for therapeutic sensitivity despite ERBB2 amplification (pseudo-ERBB2+); 3) resistance features in true-ERBB2+ cases including androgen receptor signaling, mucin expression and an inactive immune microenvironment; 4) lack of acute phospho-ERBB2 down-regulation in non-pCR cases. In summary, we have developed a robust proteogenomics pipeline well suited for large-scale cancer clinical studies to identify potential resistance mechanism in patients. We conclude that microscaled cancer proteogenomics could improve diagnostic precision in the clinical setting. Citation Format: Shankha Satpathy, Eric Jaehnig, Krug Karsten, Beom-Jun Kim, Alexander Saltzman, Doug Chan, Kimberly Holloway, Meenakshi Anurag, Chen Huang, Purba Singh, Ari Gao, Noel Namai, Yongchao Dou, Bo Wen, Suhas Vasaikar, David Mutch, Mark Watson, Cynthia Ma, Foluso Ademuyiwa, Mothaffar Rimawi, Jeremy Hoog, Samuel Jacobs, Anna Malovannaya, Terry Hyslop, D.R Mani, Charles Perou, George Miles, Bing Zhang, Michael Gillette, Steven Carr, Matthew Ellis. Microscaled proteogenomic methods for precision oncology [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS2-05.