Display options
Share it on

J Pathol Clin Res. 2021 Jul;7(4):350-360. doi: 10.1002/cjp2.215. Epub 2021 May 05.

DNA methylation-based profiling of bone and soft tissue tumours: a validation study of the 'DKFZ Sarcoma Classifier'.

The journal of pathology. Clinical research

Iben Lyskjaer, Solange De Noon, Roberto Tirabosco, Ana Maia Rocha, Daniel Lindsay, Fernanda Amary, Hongtao Ye, Daniel Schrimpf, Damian Stichel, Martin Sill, Christian Koelsche, Nischalan Pillay, Andreas Von Deimling, Stephan Beck, Adrienne M Flanagan

Affiliations

  1. Research Department of Pathology, University College London, UCL Cancer Institute, London, UK.
  2. Medical Genomics Research Group, University College London, UCL Cancer Institute, London, UK.
  3. Department of Histopathology, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, UK.
  4. Department of Neuropathology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
  5. Clinical Cooperation Unit Neuropathology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
  6. Hopp-Children's Cancer Center (KiTZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
  7. Division of Pediatric Neurooncology, German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
  8. Department of General Pathology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

PMID: 33949149 PMCID: PMC8185366 DOI: 10.1002/cjp2.215

Abstract

Diagnosing bone and soft tissue neoplasms remains challenging because of the large number of subtypes, many of which lack diagnostic biomarkers. DNA methylation profiles have proven to be a reliable basis for the classification of brain tumours and, following this success, a DNA methylation-based sarcoma classification tool from the Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ) in Heidelberg has been developed. In this study, we assessed the performance of their classifier on DNA methylation profiles of an independent data set of 986 bone and soft tissue tumours and controls. We found that the 'DKFZ Sarcoma Classifier' was able to produce a diagnostic prediction for 55% of the 986 samples, with 83% of these predictions concordant with the histological diagnosis. On limiting the validation to the 820 cases with histological diagnoses for which the DKFZ Classifier was trained, 61% of cases received a prediction, and the histological diagnosis was concordant with the predicted methylation class in 88% of these cases, findings comparable to those reported in the DKFZ Classifier paper. The classifier performed best when diagnosing mesenchymal chondrosarcomas (CHSs, 88% sensitivity), chordomas (85% sensitivity), and fibrous dysplasia (83% sensitivity). Amongst the subtypes least often classified correctly were clear cell CHSs (14% sensitivity), malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours (27% sensitivity), and pleomorphic liposarcomas (29% sensitivity). The classifier predictions resulted in revision of the histological diagnosis in six of our cases. We observed that, although a higher tumour purity resulted in a greater likelihood of a prediction being made, it did not correlate with classifier accuracy. Our results show that the DKFZ Classifier represents a powerful research tool for exploring the pathogenesis of sarcoma; with refinement, it has the potential to be a valuable diagnostic tool.

© 2021 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology: Clinical Research published by The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland & John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords: bone; classifier; methylation profiling; sarcoma; soft tissue

References

  1. Nat Commun. 2018 Jul 17;9(1):2765 - PubMed
  2. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2013 Nov;1829(11):1161-74 - PubMed
  3. Acta Neuropathol. 2016 Jun;131(6):877-87 - PubMed
  4. Int J Cancer. 2012 Aug 15;131(4):E508-17 - PubMed
  5. Nat Commun. 2021 Jan 21;12(1):498 - PubMed
  6. Nat Commun. 2013;4:2166 - PubMed
  7. Nature. 2018 Mar 22;555(7697):469-474 - PubMed
  8. BMJ. 2019 Mar 12;364:l886 - PubMed
  9. J Pathol Clin Res. 2020 Apr;6(2):113-123 - PubMed
  10. Neurooncol Adv. 2019 Nov 28;2(Suppl 1):i50-i61 - PubMed
  11. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016 Apr;40(4):479-89 - PubMed
  12. Nat Commun. 2015 Dec 04;6:8971 - PubMed
  13. Cancer Res. 2019 Jan 1;79(1):7-20 - PubMed
  14. Cancer Cell. 2019 Mar 18;35(3):441-456.e8 - PubMed
  15. J Pathol Clin Res. 2020 Oct;6(4):297-307 - PubMed
  16. Nat Genet. 2012 Mar 04;44(4):461-6 - PubMed
  17. Cell. 2017 Nov 2;171(4):950-965.e28 - PubMed
  18. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020 Feb;4(2):121-130 - PubMed
  19. Mod Pathol. 2007 Apr;20(4):482-96 - PubMed
  20. Mod Pathol. 2016 Jun;29(6):582-90 - PubMed
  21. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol. 2020 Aug;46(5):478-492 - PubMed
  22. Nat Commun. 2017 Jun 23;8:15936 - PubMed
  23. Genes (Basel). 2020 Apr 02;11(4): - PubMed
  24. Oncotarget. 2015 Dec 15;6(40):42429-44 - PubMed
  25. Pac Symp Biocomput. 2018;23:204-215 - PubMed
  26. J Pathol. 2020 Oct;252(2):151-164 - PubMed
  27. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 2009 Nov;195(1):1-11 - PubMed
  28. BMC Bioinformatics. 2019 Aug 16;20(1):428 - PubMed
  29. J Pathol. 2020 Dec;252(4):433-440 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support