Difference of genomic signatures and opportunities for targeted and immunotherapies in castrate resistant TMPRSS2:ERG fusion positive and TMPRSS2:ERG wild type refractory acinar (CRPC) and neuroendocrine prostate cancer (CRNEPC).

Abstract

348 Background: We performed comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) to learn whether sub-categorization of TMPRSS2 fusion status would impact therapy opportunities in patients with refractory CRPC and CRNEPC. Methods: DNA was extracted from 40 µm of FFPE sections of 2,424CRPC and 143 CRNEPC. CGP was performed on hybridization-captured, adaptor ligation-based libraries for up to 315 cancer-related genes. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was determined on 1.1 Mbp of sequenced DNA and microsatellite instability (MSI) was determined on 114 loci. Results: The median ages for all 4 groups was similar (Table). TMPRSS2+( TMP+) CRPC features significantly greater TP53 and PTEN GA and TMPRSS2-( TMP-) CRPC featured higher MYC and ATM GA. Differences in BRCA2 and RB1 GA were not significant in the CRPC group. RB1 GA were more frequent in CRNEPC than CRPC. TP53 GA were higher in TMP+ CRNEPC than in TMP+ CRPC whereas GA in PTEN and MYC were similar in comparative groups. GA in AR and ATM were more frequent in CRPC than CRNEPC. The median TMB was higher in CRNEPC than CRPC and higher in TMP- than TMP+ tumors. TMP- CRPC and TMP- CRNEPC had higher TMB levelsthan TMP+ tumors in both groups. MSI-High status was more frequent in the TMP- CRPC and TMP- CRNEPC groups. Conclusions: For CRPC but not CRNEPC, the frequency of TMP+CRPC cases appears lower in advanced vsearly stage disease (TCGA data). CGP reveals significant differences in both targetable GA and markers of immunotherapy response between TMP+ and TMP- CRPC and CRNEC. Thus, when CRPC and CRNEPC areevaluated as to their TMPRSS2:ERG fusion status, significant genomic differences emerge which may impact therapy selection.[Table: see text]