Hi-c FFPE sequencing analysis is highly concordant with FISH and detects additional variants informing diagnosis and treatment in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Abstract Background: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), accounting for approximately 30% of all NHL cases. DLBCL diagnosis relies on histologic examination, immunophenotyping, molecular and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis to differentiate it from similar NHL subtypes with overlapping morphological features, including more high-grade lymphomas like double-hit lymphoma. Because FISH is performed in a panel of single- or dual-target test format and analyzed through microscopy and manual image analysis, assessment of multiple target biomarkers can be cumbersome and expensive. As additional biomarkers for diagnosis, subtyping, prognosis, and therapeutic decision-making become available, target panels will become larger, posing additional challenges to clinical laboratories. Patients and Methods In this study, Hi-C sequencing of FFPE samples was performed to identify all genomic rearrangements by a single sequencing analysis for an unselected DLBCL case series of 159 patients, and the results were compared to FISH for the detection of clinically important variants. Results Hi-C sequencing showed superior performance compared to FISH: standard FISH for DLBCL includes testing for MYC, BCL2, and BCL6. Between FISH and Hi-C, these biomarkers were detected 105 times, of which, FISH detected 80/105 (76%) and Hi-C detected 102/105 (97%). The cohort included 4 double-hit lymphomas by FISH but Hi-C sequencing detected five. Besides DLBCL diagnostic biomarkers (MYC, BCL2, BCL6), many additional biomarkers were detected by Hi-C sequencing including variants not tested by FISH because the clinical suspicion was ambiguous and the relevant FISH probes were not used, and those not tested because the biomarkers were not thought to be common and, hence, left out of the FISH panel. In total, Hi-C sequencing detected additional biomarkers in 42 (26%) cases, including (1) variants targeted by FISH (i.e. MYC, BCL2, BCL6) but negative, (2) classification biomarkers for other lymphomas (CCND1, MALT, IRF4), and (3) those not tested because the biomarkers are not common and not included in the FISH panel. These additional biomarkers were supportive of suspected diagnosis of DLBCL versus double-hit lymphoma (24 cases), prompted reconsideration of a different diagnosis that may have led to different treatments (6 cases, e.g. mantle cell lymphoma), or biomarkers such as PDL1, ALK, and ATM which have implications for targeted therapies and/or inclusion in clinical trials (5 cases). Conclusion The Hi-C FFPE sequencing technology has the potential to improve the workflow of pathology labs for detection of a wide range of structural variants informing precision diagnosis and treatment for lymphomas.