Lacey J Hart, Kenny Barker, Denis Ruzdija, Aaron Bertolo, Irasema Concepcion Paster, Ricardo J Estrada-Mendizabal, Jose Manuel Guillen, Alejandro Recio-Boiles, Juan Chipollini
{"title":"Tumor profiling of advanced urothelial carcinoma: Comparative analysis based on social determinants of health.","authors":"Lacey J Hart, Kenny Barker, Denis Ruzdija, Aaron Bertolo, Irasema Concepcion Paster, Ricardo J Estrada-Mendizabal, Jose Manuel Guillen, Alejandro Recio-Boiles, Juan Chipollini","doi":"10.1016/j.urolonc.2025.06.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Studies on the genomic characteristics of urothelial carcinoma (UC) patients from diverse backgrounds are scarce. Herein, we sought to characterize genomic landscapes of advanced UC in a regional representative cohort to examine the possibility that patients from different backgrounds may have socioeconomic-influenced molecular changes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively evaluated clinical and genomic findings of UC patients presenting to the University of Arizona Cancer Center (Tucson, AZ) from 2016 to 2023. Molecular profiles were obtained using DNA next-generation sequencing (Caris Life Sciences) and stratified based on Area Deprivation Index (ADI) collected from each patient residential address. Patients were categorized as living in low (1-49) or high (50-100) ADI residences, with increasing scores indicating higher socioeconomic disadvantage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 97 patients, 43 resided in low ADI areas and 54 in high ADI areas. Higher Hispanic ethnicity (P = 0.011) and lower mean household income (P < 0.001) were seen in high ADI areas. There were no differences in microsatellite instability, loss of heterozygosity or PD-L1 expression. Patients from high ADI neighborhoods had lower TMB scores (62.7 % vs. 51.3%) when compared to low ADI neighborhoods (P = 0.291). The genes with higher rates of alterations when comparing low vs high ADI areas were PIK3CA (20.9% vs. 16.7%, P = 0.610), TP53 (62.8% vs. 40.7%, P = 0.041), KDM (18.6% vs. 22.2%, P = 0.802), ARID1A (20.9% vs. 25.9%, P = 0.636), and TERT (41.9% vs. 35.2%, P = 0.674). A high rate of immunotherapy use (66.7%) and clinic trial enrollment (73.3%) was noted in high ADI patients. There were no overall survival differences between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Few genomic differences were seen based on socioeconomic status. Lower rates of TP53 alterations and low TMB were seen in patients from disadvantaged neighborhoods. Neighborhood-level factors potentially leading to cancer disparities warrant investigation.</p>","PeriodicalId":23408,"journal":{"name":"Urologic Oncology-seminars and Original Investigations","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urologic Oncology-seminars and Original Investigations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2025.06.008","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Studies on the genomic characteristics of urothelial carcinoma (UC) patients from diverse backgrounds are scarce. Herein, we sought to characterize genomic landscapes of advanced UC in a regional representative cohort to examine the possibility that patients from different backgrounds may have socioeconomic-influenced molecular changes.
Methods: We retrospectively evaluated clinical and genomic findings of UC patients presenting to the University of Arizona Cancer Center (Tucson, AZ) from 2016 to 2023. Molecular profiles were obtained using DNA next-generation sequencing (Caris Life Sciences) and stratified based on Area Deprivation Index (ADI) collected from each patient residential address. Patients were categorized as living in low (1-49) or high (50-100) ADI residences, with increasing scores indicating higher socioeconomic disadvantage.
Results: Among 97 patients, 43 resided in low ADI areas and 54 in high ADI areas. Higher Hispanic ethnicity (P = 0.011) and lower mean household income (P < 0.001) were seen in high ADI areas. There were no differences in microsatellite instability, loss of heterozygosity or PD-L1 expression. Patients from high ADI neighborhoods had lower TMB scores (62.7 % vs. 51.3%) when compared to low ADI neighborhoods (P = 0.291). The genes with higher rates of alterations when comparing low vs high ADI areas were PIK3CA (20.9% vs. 16.7%, P = 0.610), TP53 (62.8% vs. 40.7%, P = 0.041), KDM (18.6% vs. 22.2%, P = 0.802), ARID1A (20.9% vs. 25.9%, P = 0.636), and TERT (41.9% vs. 35.2%, P = 0.674). A high rate of immunotherapy use (66.7%) and clinic trial enrollment (73.3%) was noted in high ADI patients. There were no overall survival differences between the groups.
Conclusion: Few genomic differences were seen based on socioeconomic status. Lower rates of TP53 alterations and low TMB were seen in patients from disadvantaged neighborhoods. Neighborhood-level factors potentially leading to cancer disparities warrant investigation.
期刊介绍:
Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations is the official journal of the Society of Urologic Oncology. The journal publishes practical, timely, and relevant clinical and basic science research articles which address any aspect of urologic oncology. Each issue comprises original research, news and topics, survey articles providing short commentaries on other important articles in the urologic oncology literature, and reviews including an in-depth Seminar examining a specific clinical dilemma. The journal periodically publishes supplement issues devoted to areas of current interest to the urologic oncology community. Articles published are of interest to researchers and the clinicians involved in the practice of urologic oncology including urologists, oncologists, and radiologists.