Should you repeat mismatch repair testing in cases of tumour recurrence? An evaluation of repeat mismatch repair testing by the use of immunohistochemistry in recurrent tumours of the gastrointestinal and gynaecological tracts. Issue 4 (18th February 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Aird, John J; Steel, Michael J; Chow, Christine; Ho, Julie; Wolber, Robert; Gilks, C Blake; Hoang, Lynn N; Schaeffer, David F
• Is Part Of: Histopathology. Volume 76:Issue 4(2020)
• Page Start: 521
• Page End: 530
• Publication Date: 2020-02-18
• Subjects: DNA mismatch repair -- endometrial carcinoma -- gastrointestinal cancer -- immunohistochemistry; Histology, Pathological -- Periodicals; 611.018
• DOI: 10.1111/his.14026
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0309-0167

Abstract

Abstract : Aims: The role of mismatch repair (MMR) testing has evolved from identifying Lynch syndrome patients to predicting response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. This has led to requests from clinicians to retest recurrences of MMR‐proficient primary tumours in the hope that the recurrence may show a different MMR status and qualify the patient for treatment. We aimed to determine whether repeat testing is warranted. Methods and results: We evaluated recurrent tumours (local recurrences or metastases) from 137 patients with MMR‐proficient primary tumours of the gastrointestinal and gynaecological tracts. The local recurrences and metastases all occurred at least 30 days after resection of the primary tumour. We used a combination of a tissue microarray and whole slide staining to perform immunohistochemistry (IHC) for PMS2, MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6, and compared the results with the MMR status of the primary tumour. Three of 137 (2%) initially showed a discordant staining pattern. However, further investigation showed that these discordances were attributable to some of the known pitfalls associated with MMR IHC interpretation – post‐radiotherapy loss of MSH6 expression and subclonal loss of MLH1 staining. We did not identify any cases with a genuine discordance in MMR status. Conclusion: We conclude that repeat MMR IHC testing of recurrences is not warranted, as MMR status does not change relative to that of the primary tumour.