PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 14, 2026Journal of Clinical Oncology0 citations

Consensus molecular subtypes and divergent genomic landscapes with clinical implications in biliary tract cancers.

View Full Paper
FBFelix E.G. BeaudryDYDuhan YendiNLNicholas Light

Key Points

  • To classify biliary tract cancers based on molecular features and understand their clinical implications.
  • Performed whole-genome and transcriptome sequencing on 165 biliary tract cancer tumors and matched normal tissues.
  • Assigned samples to 28 gene expression-based signatures to create a similarity network.
  • Applied Markov clustering to identify consensus molecular subtypes and used non-negative matrix factorization for further analysis.
  • Identified two distinct consensus molecular subtypes: BTC-CMS-A and BTC-CMS-B.
  • BTC-CMS-A tumors associated with longer overall survival and linked to hepatitis B.
  • BTC-CMS-B tumors presented higher tumor mutational burden and specific mutational signatures.

Abstract

600 Background: Biliary tract cancers (BTC), including cholangiocarcinomas and gallbladder adenocarcinomas, remain poorly understood. Stratifying this heterogeneous group of diseases based on molecular features may lead to novel precision treatments and yield urgently needed improvements in outcomes. Methods: We performed whole-genome and transcriptome sequencing of 165 laser-capture microdissected BTC tumors with paired normal tissues, representing 165 patients. First, we assigned all samples to 28 gene expression-based BTC signatures from nine previously published classifiers to create a signature similarity network. Using Markov clustering on the optimized network, we identified broad consensus molecular subtypes. Next, we used non-negative matrix factorization to decompose the consensus molecular subtype signatures into underlying components to identify associated cell types and processes. Finally, we integrated subtypes with de novo derived mutational signatures and drivers as well as electronic health records to search for prognostic and outcome implications. Results: Published subtyping classifications reflected only two underlying consensus molecular subtypes, which we named BTC-CMS-A and BTC-CMS-B. BTC-CMS-A tumors represented two thirds of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas and all mixed hepatocellular carcinomas, but no extrahepatic BTCs or gallbladder cancers, while BTC-CMS-B tumors were found along the whole biliary tract. BTC-CMS-B components exhibited markers of common bile duct epithelium but also shared expression profiles with intestinal Goblet cells, suggestive of an intestinal metaplasia histopathology. In contrast, BTC-CMS-A expressed hepatoblast markers while also exhibiting upregulation of pathways associated with kidney cell lineage. These results were validated by projecting all CMS-associated expression components onto two public single-cell RNAseq datasets. Of 16 drivers identified de novo from WGS, BAP1 and TP53 mutations were most frequent, mutually exclusive, and each was restricted to BTC-CMS-A and BTC-CMS-B, respectively. Mutational signature extraction revealed BTC-CMS-B tumors had increased tumor mutational burden and APOBEC-associated mutational signatures, whereas BTC-CMS-A was associated with increased non-homologous end-joining. Clinically, hepatitis B was more frequent in BTC-CMS-A cases, while patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis exclusively had BTC-CMS-B tumors. BTC-CMS-A was associated with significantly longer overall survival compared to CMS-B, after adjusting for clinically relevant covariates. This finding was validated in three external cohorts. Conclusions: BTC-CMS unify previous BTC classifications and display distinct clinical and genomic profiles and therefore should guide the development of targeted therapies and biomarker-driven trials.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Beaudry et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6966e72413bf7a6f02bff90ehttps://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.2_suppl.600
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper