A Novel MYC–non‐IG Fusion in Refractory Diffuse Large B‐cell Lymphoma
Cheng Wang,Pamela A. Althof,Chengfeng Bi,Weiwei Zhang,Alyssa C. Bouska,Tian,Xuan Zhang,Nanxi Jiang,Guohua Yu,Hongxia Cheng,Javeed Iqbal,Julie M. Vose,Jennifer N. Sanmann,Kai Fu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.17255
2021-01-01
British Journal of Haematology
Abstract:In diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), MYC rearrangement was identified in about 12% of the cases, and approximately half of these aberrations involved the non-immunoglobulin (non-IG) partners.1 However, the MYC–non-IG rearrangement was barely described in detail. Herein, we present a case with the rearrangement between MYC and activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AICDA), resulting in MYC overexpression. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a DLBCL case with AICDA–MYC rearrangement. To determine the incidence, we performed fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) screening in a large cohort of DLBCL cases. Although no other case was identified, we found AICDA aberration is a frequent genetic event in DLBCL. Strikingly, in this case, the fusion clone substantially expanded during treatment, providing clues to the dynamic genome landscape change for refractory DLBCL. The patient was a 57-year-old female presenting with diffuse lymphadenopathy and splenomegaly. Her right axillary lymph node pathology showed an Epstein–Barr virus (EBV)-induced lymphoproliferative disorder and focal DLBCL [non-germinal centre B-cell-like (non-GCB)]. Cytogenetics studies identified two abnormal clones (Figure S1A, B). Her bone marrow exhibited involvement by lymphoma, normal cytogenetics, and was negative for abnormalities of loci associated with chronic lymphoid leukaemia (CLL)/non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL)/ marginal zone lymphoma (MZL). The patient had an International Prognostic Index (IPI) score at 3 and Ann Arbor stage IVB. After six cycles of rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) therapy, the patient showed poor response while the positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET-CT) and re-biopsies of the left axillary lymph node indicated the persistence of disease. Cytogenetic studies revealed the presence of a hypotetraploid stemline and its sideline (Figure S1C-D). The cytogenetics and FISH profile of bone marrow remained the same as the initial biopsy. The patient was later enrolled in a phase III clinical trial using STAT3 inhibitor, to which a poor response was shown, and the patient died after 11 doses. Retrospective RNA-seq identified an in-frame fusion of AICDA intron 1 to MYC exon 2 in the resistant sample. This fusion was validated by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) followed by Sanger sequencing on both diagnostic and resistant biopsies. Notably, the resistant sample showed a much stronger signal than the diagnostic sample (Fig 1), suggesting this rearrangement was de novo and expanded during treatment. The presence of AICDA promotor and exon 1 were also verified by RT-PCR followed by Sanger sequencing (Fig. S2). To better illustrate the clonal evolution, we first examined the MYC rearrangement with the conventional MYC break-apart probe, which was positive in the resistant sample (Fig 2B), but negative in the diagnostic sample (Fig 2A). Next, we examined the AICDA rearrangement and AICDA–MYC fusion by two self-designed probes, both of which were positive in the resistant sample but negative in the diagnostic sample (Fig 2A, B). The findings, consistent with the RT-PCR result, suggested evolution of a clone occurred during the treatment. Of note, RT-PCR has a higher sensitivity than FISH, and thus, the fusion clone might be detected at very small numbers in the diagnostic sample by RT-PCR but not by FISH.2 Because this rearrangement positioned MYC to the downstream of the highly active AICDA promoter, we speculate it may result in MYC overexpression. To prove that, immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining was performed in both diagnostic and resistant samples. As expected, the percentage of MYC-positive cells in the resistant sample was substantially higher than that in the diagnostic specimen (50·320% vs 4·438%) (Fig 2C). Additionally, a significant increase in Ki67-positive cells was observed in the resistant sample (40% to 70%), consistent with the aggressive behaviour of lymphoma cells upon MYC overexpression. To address the recurrence of this rearrangement in DLBCL, we performed the FISH screening in 164 diagnostic and nine resistant/refractory DLBCL samples. None of these cases exhibited an AICDA–MYC fusion, indicating the AICDA–MYC fusion is likely a rare and isolated event, further manifesting the high diversity of MYC–non-IG rearrangements in DLBCL. MYC and AICDA rearrangements were identified in five and two cases, respectively, with one case concurrently carrying both. The two cases exhibiting AICDA rearrangement have unknown destinations of translocation. Additionally, copy number variation of MYC and AICDA was identified in 50 and 60 cases, respectively, with 40 cases concomitantly carrying both. These findings suggest that AICDA abnormality is a frequent event in DLBCL. MYC not only directly promotes cell proliferation, but also protects cancer cells from DNA damage.3 In DLBCL, MYC serves as an independent prognostic biomarker, on both genetic and protein expression levels.4 Interestingly, a previous study has demonstrated only MYC–immunoglobulin (–IG), but not MYC–non-IG rearrangement is a prognostic marker for shorter survival in DLBCL patients.5 This is likely because MYC–non-IG rearrangement is highly versatile and barely studied in specific, especially in association with the MYC expression level. The fact that the genetic alterations of MYC are not well correlated with the protein level further highlights the necessity of multi-dimensional investigations in specific cases.6 The case presented herein exhibited a remarkable selection of the AICDA–MYC fusion clone during treatment. Accordingly, IHC confirmed the overexpression of MYC. Notably, this patient had an extraordinarily short progression-free survival (0·25 year) and overall survival (0·92 year). Although it is hard to establish the significance of AICDA–MYC fusion in a single case, the clone selection, at least, suggests its potential role in R-CHOP resistance and prognosis prediction. MYC needs a second-hit mutation in tumorigenesis.3, 7 Interestingly, AICDA plays an essential role in immunoglobulin gene class switch recombination and the somatic hypermutation of B cells.8 AICDA also promotes double-strand breaks, and therefore introduces gene translocations.9, 10 Being highly active in non-GCB subtype, AICDA potentially contributes to the inferior outcomes and greater epigenetic heterogeneity of this subtype.11, 12 The genetic aberration of AICDA, however, has not been reported yet. In our FISH screening, we identified two cases with AICDA rearrangement besides the AICDA–MYC fusion case. The simultaneous expression of MYC with AICDA may cause alterations in guardian genes, such as those in DNA repair, and thus help the tumour surpass the checkpoint and promote lymphoma cell proliferation like a second-hit mutation. Potentially, the high level of both AICDA and MYC facilitated the accumulation of resistant mutations and increased the aggressive index of the clone. In summary, our results suggest MYC–non-IG rearrangement in DLBCL is worth further investigation, especially in the setting of refractory and relapsed mechanisms. The authors would like to thank the Pathology Media Service of the University of Nebraska Medical Center. CW, CB, JI, JMV, JNS and KF designed and conceived the study; CW, GY, HC, and PAA collected the data from the in vitro experiments; CW, WZ, ACB, CB, PAA, NJ, XZ, TT, JNS and KF analysed and interpreted the data; CW, CB, PAA, JNS and KF drafted the manuscript; WZ and ACB performed the bioinformatic and statistical analyses; CW and KF collected the clinical data; and CB, JMV and KF obtained funding and supervised the study. No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.