Investigator

Richard K. Yang

Assistant Professor, Molecular Genetic Pathology · The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pathology

RKYRichard K. Yang
Papers(2)
Clinical and Genomic …Long-Term Follow-up o…
Collaborators(10)
Karen H. LuBarrett C. LawsonShannon N. WestinYing YuanAlexander J. LazarAmadeo B. BiterAmber M. JohnsonAmir A. JazaeriBhavana SinghBrenda Melendez
Institutions(1)
The University Of Tex…

Papers

Clinical and Genomic Landscape of RAS Mutations in Gynecologic Cancers

Abstract Purpose: We aimed to describe RAS mutations in gynecologic cancers as they relate to clinicopathologic and genomic features, survival, and therapeutic implications. Experimental Design: Gynecologic cancers with available somatic molecular profiling data at our institution between February 2010 and August 2022 were included and grouped by RAS mutation status. Overall survival was estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method, and multivariable analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazard model. Results: Of 3,328 gynecologic cancers, 523 (15.7%) showed any RAS mutation. Patients with RAS-mutated tumors were younger (57 vs. 60 years nonmutated), had a higher prevalence of endometriosis (27.3% vs. 16.9%), and lower grades (grade 1/2, 43.2% vs. 8.1%, all P < 0.0001). The highest prevalence of KRAS mutation was in mesonephric-like endometrial (100%, n = 9/9), mesonephric-like ovarian (83.3%, n = 5/6), mucinous ovarian (60.4%), and low-grade serous ovarian (44.4%) cancers. After adjustment for age, cancer type, and grade, RAS mutation was associated with worse overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.3; P = 0.001]. Specific mutations were in KRAS (13.5%), NRAS (2.0%), and HRAS (0.51%), most commonly KRAS G12D (28.4%) and G12V (26.1%). Common co-mutations were PIK3CA (30.9%), PTEN (28.8%), ARID1A (28.0%), and TP53 (27.9%), of which 64.7% were actionable. RAS + MAPK pathway-targeted therapies were administered to 62 patients with RAS-mutated cancers. While overall survival was significantly higher with therapy [8.4 years [(95% confidence interval (CI), 5.5–12.0) vs. 5.5 years (95% CI, 4.6–6.6); HR = 0.67; P = 0.031], this effect did not persist in multivariable analysis. Conclusions: RAS mutations in gynecologic cancers have a distinct histopathologic distribution and may impact overall survival. PIK3CA, PTEN, and ARID1A are potentially actionable co-alterations. RAS pathway-targeted therapy should be considered.

Long-Term Follow-up of Levonorgestrel Intrauterine Device for Atypical Hyperplasia and Early Endometrial Cancer Reveals Relapse Characterized by Immune Exhaustion

Abstract Purpose: Nonsurgical treatment options are increasingly needed for endometrial atypical hyperplasia (AH) and endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC). Despite promising initial response rates, prospective long-term data and determinants for relapse are limited. Materials and Methods: Follow-up data from patients in our prospective phase II trial of levonorgestrel intrauterine device (LIUD) for AH/G1EEC were collected from medical records. Spatial transcriptomics (Nanostring GeoMX digital spatial profiling) with in silico cell type deconvolution and pathway analyses were employed on longitudinal biopsy samples from five patients across pre-treatment, on-treatment, and relapse. Results: Of 43 participants exhibiting initial response to LIUD, 41 had follow-up data. Sixteen (39%) experienced relapse. Clinical factors associated with shorter response duration included younger age, initial diagnosis of G1EEC, lack of response at 6 months, premenopausal status, and Hispanic ethnicity (P < 0.05), but only 6-month response status remained a significant predictor in a multivariate model (P = 0.023). LIUD increased abundance of NK cells (ΔMCP-counter score = 46.13, FDR = 0.004) and cytotoxic lymphocytes (ΔMCP-counter score = 277.67, FDR = 0.004), as well as lymphocyte cytotoxicity markers PRF1 (log2FC = 1.62, FDR = 0.025) and GZMA (log2FC = 2.47, FDR = 0.008). NK cells were reduced at relapse (ΔMCP-counter score = −55.96, FDR = 0.02). Immune-related pathways (IFNα response and TGFβ signaling) were enriched at relapse (FDR < 0.05). IDO1 expression, reflecting immune exhaustion, was upregulated at relapse (FDR < 0.05). Conclusions: Upfront resistance and relapse after initial response to LIUD for AH/G1EEC impacts nearly half of patients, remaining a major hurdle for nonsurgical treatment of AH/G1EEC. Molecular studies evaluating longitudinal biopsies from a small cohort implicate immune mechanisms at relapse, including reversal of progestin-related immunomodulation and increased immune exhaustion. See related commentary by Johannet and Friedman, p. 5001

93Works
2Papers
35Collaborators
Skin NeoplasmsNeoplasmsPrognosisBiomarkers, TumorEndometrial NeoplasmsNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalUveal NeoplasmsTumor Suppressor Proteins

Positions

2020–

Assistant Professor, Molecular Genetic Pathology

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · Pathology

Education

2014

MD, PhD

University of Wisconsin Madison · Institute for Clinical and Translational Research

Country

US