Metabolomics, machine learning and immunohistochemistry to predict succinate dehydrogenase mutational status in phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas

Phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas (PPGLs) are rare neuroendocrine tumours with a hereditary background in over one‐third of patients. Mutations in succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) genes increase the risk for PPGLs and several other tumours. Mutations in subunit B (SDHB) in particular are a risk factor for metastatic disease, further highlighting the importance of identifying SDHx mutations for patient management. Genetic variants of unknown significance, where implications for the patient and family members are unclear, are a problem for interpretation. For such cases, reliable methods for evaluating protein functionality are required. Immunohistochemistry for SDHB (SDHB‐IHC) is the method of choice but does not assess functionality at the enzymatic level. Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry‐based measurements of metabolite precursors and products of enzymatic reactions provide an alternative method. Here, we compare SDHB‐IHC with metabolite profiling in 189 tumours from 187 PPGL patients. Besides evaluating succinate:fumarate ratios (SFRs), machine learning algorithms were developed to establish predictive models for interpreting metabolite data. Metabolite profiling showed higher diagnostic specificity compared to SDHB‐IHC (99.2% versus 92.5%, p = 0.021), whereas sensitivity was comparable. Application of machine learning algorithms to metabolite profiles improved predictive ability over that of the SFR, in particular for hard‐to‐interpret cases of head and neck paragangliomas (AUC 0.9821 versus 0.9613, p = 0.044). Importantly, the combination of metabolite profiling with SDHB‐IHC has complementary utility, as SDHB‐IHC correctly classified all but one of the false negatives from metabolite profiling strategies, while metabolite profiling correctly classified all but one of the false negatives/positives from SDHB‐IHC. From 186 tumours with confirmed status of SDHx variant pathogenicity, the combination of the two methods resulted in 185 correct predictions, highlighting the benefits of both strategies for patient management. © 2020 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

[1]  K. Pacak,et al.  Targeting NRF2-Governed Glutathione Synthesis for SDHB-Mutated Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma , 2020, Cancers.

[2]  U. Shankavaram,et al.  Long intergenic noncoding RNA profiles of pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma: A novel prognostic biomarker , 2020, International journal of cancer.

[3]  Graeme Eisenhofer,et al.  Steroid metabolomics: machine learning and multidimensional diagnostics for adrenal cortical tumors, hyperplasias, and related disorders , 2019, Current Opinion in Endocrine and Metabolic Research.

[4]  K. Pacak,et al.  Pheochromocytoma (PHEO) and Paraganglioma (PGL) , 2019, Cancers.

[5]  Andrew H. Beck,et al.  Computational pathology definitions, best practices, and recommendations for regulatory guidance: a white paper from the Digital Pathology Association , 2019, The Journal of pathology.

[6]  T. Dwight,et al.  Metabolomics in the Diagnosis of Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma , 2019, Hormone and Metabolic Research.

[7]  Shidan Wang,et al.  Pathology Image Analysis Using Segmentation Deep Learning Algorithms. , 2019, The American journal of pathology.

[8]  Hai Su,et al.  Pathologist-level interpretable whole-slide cancer diagnosis with deep learning , 2019, Nat. Mach. Intell..

[9]  K. Pacak,et al.  Pheochromocytomas and Paragangliomas: From Genetic Diversity to Targeted Therapies , 2019, Cancers.

[10]  O. Dekkers,et al.  Increased Mortality in SDHB but Not in SDHD Pathogenic Variant Carriers , 2019, Cancers.

[11]  Kwanjeera Wanichthanarak,et al.  Rise of Deep Learning for Genomic, Proteomic, and Metabolomic Data Integration in Precision Medicine , 2018, Omics : a journal of integrative biology.

[12]  D. Aust,et al.  Metabolome-guided genomics to identify mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase, fumarate hydratase and succinate dehydrogenase genes in pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma , 2018, Genetics in Medicine.

[13]  K. Pacak,et al.  Targeting NAD+/PARP DNA Repair Pathway as a Novel Therapeutic Approach to SDHB-Mutated Cluster I Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma , 2018, Clinical Cancer Research.

[14]  A. Gill Succinate dehydrogenase (SDH)‐deficient neoplasia , 2018, Histopathology.

[15]  M. Esteller,et al.  Targeted Exome Sequencing of Krebs Cycle Genes Reveals Candidate Cancer–Predisposing Mutations in Pheochromocytomas and Paragangliomas , 2017, Clinical Cancer Research.

[16]  C. Lázaro,et al.  PheoSeq: A Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing Assay for Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma Diagnostics. , 2017, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.

[17]  Jenny Welander,et al.  Consensus Statement on next-generation-sequencing-based diagnostic testing of hereditary phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas , 2017, Nature Reviews Endocrinology.

[18]  T. Dwight,et al.  Utility of the succinate:fumarate ratio for assessing SDH dysfunction in different tumor types☆ , 2016, Molecular genetics and metabolism reports.

[19]  B. Klink,et al.  Epigenetic Mutation of the Succinate Dehydrogenase C Promoter in a Patient With Two Paragangliomas. , 2016, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[20]  A. Tischler,et al.  SDHB/SDHA immunohistochemistry in pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas: a multicenter interobserver variation analysis using virtual microscopy: a Multinational Study of the European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumors (ENS@T) , 2015, Modern Pathology.

[21]  Bale,et al.  Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation of Sequence Variants: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology , 2015, Genetics in Medicine.

[22]  M. Sibony,et al.  SDHD immunohistochemistry: a new tool to validate SDHx mutations in pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma. , 2015, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[23]  W. Dinjens,et al.  Toward an improved definition of the genetic and tumor spectrum associated with SDH germ-line mutations , 2014, Genetics in Medicine.

[24]  F. Beuschlein,et al.  Krebs cycle metabolite profiling for identification and stratification of pheochromocytomas/paragangliomas due to succinate dehydrogenase deficiency. , 2014, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[25]  W. Young,et al.  Pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline. , 2014, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[26]  Jana Marie Schwarz,et al.  MutationTaster2: mutation prediction for the deep-sequencing age , 2014, Nature Methods.

[27]  Jing Hu,et al.  SIFT web server: predicting effects of amino acid substitutions on proteins , 2012, Nucleic Acids Res..

[28]  A. Gill Succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) and mitochondrial driven neoplasia , 2012, Pathology.

[29]  W. Dinjens,et al.  SDHA immunohistochemistry detects germline SDHA gene mutations in apparently sporadic paragangliomas and pheochromocytomas. , 2011, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[30]  E. van Marck,et al.  An immunohistochemical procedure to detect patients with paraganglioma and phaeochromocytoma with germline SDHB, SDHC, or SDHD gene mutations: a retrospective and prospective analysis. , 2009, The Lancet. Oncology.

[31]  E. Baudin,et al.  Succinate dehydrogenase B gene mutations predict survival in patients with malignant pheochromocytomas or paragangliomas. , 2007, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[32]  P. Bork,et al.  Human non-synonymous SNPs: server and survey. , 2002, Nucleic acids research.

[33]  R. Fisher THE USE OF MULTIPLE MEASUREMENTS IN TAXONOMIC PROBLEMS , 1936 .