In the current era of precision oncology, it is widely acknowledged that CRC is a heterogeneous disease entity. Tumor location (right- or left-sided colon cancer or rectal cancer) is a crucial factor in determining disease progression as well as prognosis and influences disease management. In the last decade, numerous works have reported that the microbiome is an important element of CRC carcinogenesis, progression and therapy response. Owing to the heterogeneous nature of microbiomes, the findings of these studies were inconsistent. The majority of the studies combined colon cancer (CC) and rectal cancer (RC) samples as CRC for analysis. Furthermore, the small intestine, as the major site for immune surveillance in the gut, is understudied compared to the colon. Thus, the CRC heterogeneity puzzle is far from being solved, and more research is necessary for prospective trials that separately investigate CC and RC. Our prospective study aimed to map the colon cancer landscape using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing in biopsy samples from the terminal ileum, healthy colon tissue, healthy rectal tissue and tumor tissue as well as in preoperative and postoperative stool samples of 41 patients. While fecal samples provide a good approximation of the average gut microbiome composition, mucosal biopsies allow for detecting subtle variations in local microbial communities. In particular, the small bowel microbiome has remained poorly characterized, mainly because of sampling difficulties. Our analysis revealed the following: (i) right- and left-sided colon cancers harbor distinct and diverse microbiomes, (ii) the tumor microbiome leads to a more consistent cancer-defined microbiome between locations and reveals a tumor microbiome–ileal microbiome association, (iii) the stool only partly reflects the microbiome landscape in patients with CC, and (iv) mechanical bowel preparation and perioperative antibiotics together with surgery result in major changes in the stool microbiome, characterized by a significant increase in the abundance of potentially pathogenic bacteria, such as Enterococcus. Collectively, our results provide new and valuable insights into the complex microbiome landscape in patients with colon cancer.

Background: The prognostic value of Immunoscore was evaluated in Stage II/III colon cancer (CC) patients, but it remains unclear in Stage I/II, and in early-stage subgroups at risk. An international Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) study evaluated the pre-defined consensus Immunoscore in tumors from 1885 AJCC/UICC-TNM Stage I/II CC patients from Canada/USA (Cohort 1) and Europe/Asia (Cohort 2). METHODS: Digital-pathology is used to quantify the densities of CD3+ and CD8+ T-lymphocyte in the center of tumor (CT) and the invasive margin (IM). The time to recurrence (TTR) was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), prognosis in Stage I, Stage II, Stage II-high-risk, and microsatellite-stable (MSS) patients. RESULTS: High-Immunoscore presented with the lowest risk of recurrence in both cohorts. In Stage I/II, recurrence-free rates at 5 years were 78.4% (95%-CI, 74.4–82.6), 88.1% (95%-CI, 85.7–90.4), 93.4% (95%-CI, 91.1–95.8) in low, intermediate and high Immunoscore, respectively (HR (Hi vs. Lo) = 0.27 (95%-CI, 0.18–0.41); p < 0.0001). In Cox multivariable analysis, the association of Immunoscore to outcome was independent (TTR: HR (Hi vs. Lo) = 0.29, (95%-CI, 0.17–0.50); p < 0.0001) of the patient’s gender, T-stage, sidedness, and microsatellite instability-status (MSI). A significant association of Immunoscore with survival was found for Stage II, high-risk Stage II, T4N0 and MSS patients. The Immunoscore also showed significant association with TTR in Stage-I (HR (Hi vs. Lo) = 0.07 (95%-CI, 0.01–0.61); P = 0.016). The Immunoscore had the strongest (69.5%) contribution χ² for influencing survival. Patients with a high Immunoscore had prolonged TTR in T4N0 tumors even for patients not receiving chemotherapy, and the Immunoscore remained the only significant parameter in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: In early CC, low Immunoscore reliably identifies patients at risk of relapse for whom a more intensive surveillance program or adjuvant treatment should be considered.

With an increasing indication spectrum of antiresorptive drugs, the medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw secondary to bisphosphonate therapy [MRONJ (BP)] is continuously gaining clinical relevance. Impaired osteoclast function, accompanied by altered cell morphology and expression of osteoclastic effector proteins, contributes to the pathogenesis of MRONJ (BP). However, the underlying regulatory mechanisms at a transcriptional level are unaddressed so far. These mechanisms are crucial to the development of disease-characteristic osteoclastic anomalies, that contribute to the pathogenesis of MRONJ (BP). NFATc1 is considered a master upstream osteoclastic activator, whereas BCL6 acts as osteoclastic suppressor. The present study aimed to elucidate the NFATc1 and BCL6 mediated osteoclastic regulation and activity in MRONJ (BP) compared to osteoradionecrosis (ORN) and osteomyelitis (OM) and normal jaw bone. Formalin-fixed jaw bone specimens from 70 patients [MRONJ (BP) n = 30; OM: n = 15, ORN: n = 15, control: n = 10] were analyzed retrospectively for osteoclast expression of NFATc1 and BCL6. The specimens were processed for H&E staining and immunohistochemistry. The histological sections were digitalized and analyzed by virtual microscopy. Osteoclastic expression of NFATc1 and BCL6 was significantly higher in MRONJ (BP) specimens compared to OM and control specimens. NFATc1 and BCL6 labeling indices revealed no significant differences between MRONJ (BP) and ORN. The ratio of nuclear BCL6+ osteoclasts to cytoplasmic BCL6+ osteoclasts revealed significantly higher values for MRONJ (BP) specimens compared to OM and controls. This study displays that osteoclasts in MRONJ (BP) tissues feature increased expression of the higher-level regulators, paradoxically of both NFATc1 and BCL6. These observations can help to explain the genesis of morphologically altered and resorptive inactive osteoclasts in MRONJ (BP) tissues by outlining the transcriptional regulation of the pathomechanically relevant osteoclastic effector proteins. Furthermore, they strengthen the etiological delineation of MRONJ (BP) from OM and extend the osteoclast profiles of MRONJ (BP), OM and ORN and thus could lead to a better histopathological differentiation that can improve treatment decision and motivate new therapeutic concepts.

Purpose Enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2) is associated with epigenetic gene silencing and aggressiveness in many tumor types. However, the prognostic impact of high EZH2 expression is controversially discussed for colorectal cancer. For this reason, we immunohistochemically analyzed EZH2 expression in 105 specimens from colon cancer patients separately for tumor center and invasion front. Methods All sections from tissue microarrays were evaluated manually and digitally using Definiens Tissue Studio software (TSS). To mirror-image the EZH2 status at the tumor invasion front, we treated HCT116 colon cancer cells with the EZH2 inhibitor 3-Deazaneplanocin A (DZNep) and studied the growth of in ovo xenografts in the chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) assay. Results We showed a significant decrease in EZH2 expression and the repressive H3K27me3 code at the tumor invasion front as supported by the TSS-constructed heatmaps. Loss of EZH2 at tumor invasion front, but not in tumor center was correlated with unfavorable prognosis and more advanced tumor stages. The observed cell cycle arrest in vitro and in vivo was associated with higher tumor aggressiveness. Xenografts formed by DZNep-treated HCT116 cells showed loosely packed tumor masses, infiltrative growth into the CAM, and high vessel density. Conclusion The differences in EZH2 expression between tumor center and invasion front as well as different scoring and cutoff values can most likely explain controversial literature data concerning the prognostic value of EZH2. Epigenetic therapies using EZH2 inhibitors have to be carefully evaluated for each specific tumor type, since alterations in cell differentiation might lead to unfavorable results.

Bladder cancer (BCa) is the ninth most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide. Although there are several well-established molecular and immunological classifications, markers for tumor cells and immune cells that are associated with prognosis are still needed. The chemokine CC motif ligand 2 (CCL2) could be such a marker. We analyzed the expression of CCL2 by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in 168 muscle invasive BCa samples using a tissue microarray. Application of a single cut-off for the staining status of tumor cells (TCs; positive vs. negative) and immune cells (ICs; ≤6% of ICs vs. >6% of ICs) revealed 57 cases (33.9%) and 70 cases (41.7%) with CCL2-positive TCs or ICs, respectively. IHC results were correlated with clinicopathological and survival data. Positive CCL2 staining in TCs was associated with shorter overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and relapse-free survival (RFS) (p = 0.004, p = 0.036, and p = 0.047; log rank test) and appeared to be an independent prognostic factor for OS (RR = 1.70; p = 0.007; multivariate Cox’s regression analysis). In contrast, positive CCL2 staining in the ICs was associated with longer OS, DSS, and RFS (p = 0.032, p = 0.001, and p = 0.001; log rank test) and appeared to be an independent prognostic factor for DSS (RR = 1.77; p = 0.031; multivariate Cox’s regression analysis). Most interestingly, after separating the patients according to their lymph node status (N0 vs. N1+2), CCL2 staining in the ICs was differentially associated with prognosis. In the N0 group, CCL2 positivity in the ICs was a positive independent prognostic factor for OS (RR = 1.99; p = 0.014), DSS (RR = 3.17; p = 0.002), and RFS (RR = 3.10; p = 0.002), whereas in the N1+2 group, CCL2 positivity was a negative independent factor for OS (RR = 3.44; p = 0.019)) and RFS (RR = 4.47; p = 0.010; all multivariate Cox’s regression analyses). In summary, CCL2 positivity in TCs is a negative prognostic factor for OS, and CCL2 can mark ICs that are differentially associated with prognosis depending on the nodal stage of BCa patients. Therefore, CCL2 staining of TCs and ICs is suggested as a prognostic biomarker for BCa patients.