Abstract
Testicular tumors are the most common tumors in adolescent and young men and germ cell tumors (TGCTs) account for most of all testicular cancers. Increasing incidence of TGCTs among males provides strong motivation to understand its biological and genetic basis. Gains of chromosome arm 12p and aneuploidy are nearly universal in TGCTs, but TGCTs have low point mutation rate. It is thought that TGCTs develop from premalignant intratubular germ cell neoplasia that is believed to arise from the failure of normal maturation of gonocytes during fetal or postnatal development. Progression toward invasive TGCTs (seminoma and nonseminoma) then occurs after puberty. Both inherited genetic factors and environmental risk factors emerge as important contributors to TGCT susceptibility. Genome-wide association studies have so far identified more than 30 risk loci for TGCTs, suggesting that a polygenic model fits better with the genetic landscape of the disease. Despite high cure rates because of its particular sensitivity to platinum-based chemotherapy, exploration of mechanisms underlying the occurrence, progression, metastasis, recurrence, chemotherapeutic resistance, early diagnosis and optional clinical therapeutics without long-term side effects are urgently needed to reduce the cancer burden in this underserved age group. Herein, we present an up-to-date review on clinical challenges, origin and progression, risk factors, TGCT mouse models, serum diagnostic markers, resistance mechanisms, miRNA regulation, and database resources of TGCTs. We appeal that more attention should be paid to the basic research and clinical diagnosis and treatment of TGCTs.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
TGCTs are rare tumors in the general population, but are the most commonly occurring malignancy among males between ages 15 and 44 years [1]. The diagnosis of TGCTs primarily depends on physical examination, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, measurement of serum tumor markers and pathological examination. Standard treatment for TGCTs is radical orchiectomy and/or combination with chemotherapy or radiotherapy or retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Furthermore, small interfering RNA therapy [2, 3], microRNA therapy [4, 5] and immunotherapy [6] are suggested to be potential therapeutic strategies; however, there is a long road ahead for such treatments to prove their clinical value. Significant parameters, such as angiolymphatic invasion, degree of extra testicular invasion, rete testis invasion and serum tumor marker levels [7], oncogenes [8], promoter methylation [9], polymorphism [10] and tumor-infiltrating immunocytes [11] are suggested as potential prognostic factors for TGCT patients.
TGCTs are characterized by frequent chromosomal anomalies and low rates of somatic mutations. Chromosome arm 12p amplification, such as isochromosome 12p and chromosome 12p overrepresentation, is the most common genetic hallmark that accounts for many types of TGCTs [12, 13]. The exact mechanisms of 12p gain in TGCTs are unclear, but the ubiquitous gain of 12p-derived sequences implies a significant role for some genes on 12p, such as CCND2, KRAS, TNFRSF1A, GLUT3, REA, NANOG, DPPA3, and GDF3 [14,15,16,17], in the development, pluripotency maintenance and/or progression of TGCTs.
It is not accurate to say that TGCTs are completely curable malignancies. According to the European Association of Urology (EAU) testis cancer guidelines, approximately 15–30% of TGCT patients will relapse after first-line chemotherapy and will require additional salvage therapies [18, 19]. Primary TGCTs have been reported to metastasize to the retroperitoneal lymph nodes [20], brain [21, 22], neck [23, 24], heart [25, 26], pulmonary arteries [27], inferior vena cava and aorta [28], lung [29], liver [30], stomach [31, 32] and cartilage [33]. Long-term relative survival after diagnosis of TGCTs generally continued to decline with increasing follow-up time, particularly beyond 15–30 years [34]. The side effect of TGCT therapy on other organs also offers insight into the long-term risks of TGCT survivorship. Kidney disease [35], cerebrovascular accidents, secondary leukemia, internal carotid artery occlusion and stroke associated with chemotherapy in TGCT patients have been occasionally described in the literature [36,37,38,39,40,41,42].
More recently, focus has expanded beyond survival to emphasize the quality of life issues when optimizing treatment algorithms. Attention should be paid toward persisting physical symptoms and psychosocial needs. Patients with TGCTs and azoospermia, submitted to onco-testicular sperm extraction and sperm cryopreservation, had the delivery of a healthy baby after intracytoplasmic sperm injection, which emphasizes the importance of fertility preservation in oncology patients [43, 44]. For patients with bilateral TGCTs, testis-sparing surgery provides a better quality of life (e.g., sufficient endogenous testosterone production) and may be considered a safe, feasible alternative treatment [45, 46]. Testicular self-examination (TSE) practices are found to be inadequate and efforts should be made to develop programs that can increase knowledge related to testicular cancer as well as the practice of TSE [47].
Herein, we present a comprehensive review on origin, progression, histological types, risk factors, TGCT mouse models, serum diagnostic markers, resistance mechanisms, miRNA regulation and database resources of TGCTs.
Origin, progression and histological types of TGCTs
Spermatogenesis is fundamental to the establishment and maintenance of male fertility. Given that TGCTs are believed to arise from failure of normal maturation of gonocytes, understanding the process and regulatory controls of spermatogenesis will provide valuable insights into the occurrence and features of TGCTs. It is generally considered that mammalian spermatogenesis is a complex sequential process of germ cell differentiation from primordial germ cells (PGCs) or spermatogonial stem cells (SSCs) to functional haploid sperm [48, 49] (Fig. 1, left). Spermatogenesis further requires intricate interaction between germ cells (spermatogonia, spermatocytes, round/elongating spermatids) and supporting somatic cells (Sertoli cells, Leydig cells, peritubular myoid cells, endothelial cells, macrophage and newly discovered innate lymphoid and mesenchymal cells) [50,51,52,53,54]. Recent single-cell RNA sequencing of murine or human spermatogenesis reveals a continuous developmental trajectory of germ cells from spermatogonia to spermatids (12 or 14 germ cell states) and identifies cell type-specific markers and candidate transcription regulators in each cell component [55, 56], representing a community resource and foundation to in-depth study of spermatogenesis.
The histogenesis of TGCTs is complex. It is thought that TGCTs develop from premalignant intratubular germ cell neoplasia (IGCN), also known as carcinoma in situ (CIS), that are believed to arise from failure of normal maturation of fetal germ cells from PGCs into pre-spermatogonia [57]. Expression profiling studies reveal that IGCN cells closely parallel PGCs and maintain their genome in a demethylated and undifferentiated state [58, 59]. IGCN progresses toward invasive TGCTs then after puberty, when IGCN cells begin to proliferate, likely involving the influences of hormones. TGCTs are classified broadly into two major histologic groups: seminoma and non-seminoma germ cell tumors. Non-seminoma can be further subdivided into undifferentiated embryonal carcinoma (EC), as well as differentiated teratoma, choriocarcinoma and yolk sac tumor [60] (Fig. 1, right). Both IGCN and TGCT cells are typically aneuploid, but premalignant IGCN does not gain chromosomal material from 12p, which are pathognomonic for malignant IGCN and TGCTs [61, 62]. Transition from IGCN to invasive TGCTs is associated with the loss of PTEN and P21 as well as gain of MDM2 expression [63, 64]. KRAS mutations are exclusive to the primary TGCT tumors and not in the patient-matched pre-invasive IGCN [65]. Seminoma and EC present significant differences in clinical features, therapy and prognosis, and they show characteristics of the PGCs and embryonic stem cells (ESCs), respectively [66]. For proper diagnosis of the different histological subgroups of TGCTs, immunological staining is required using distinctive molecular markers. POU class 5 homeobox 1 (POU5F1, also known as OCT3/4), is positive in IGCN, seminoma and EC, but not in any choriocarcinoma, teratoma or YST [67]. KIT proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase (KIT, also known as CD117), is positive in IGCN and seminoma and negative in EC [68]. TNF receptor superfamily member 8 (TNFRSF8, also known as CD30) expression helps pathologists to identify sites of EC in the tumors [69]. Furthermore, Glypican 3 (GPC3) is useful as an immunohistochemical marker for TGCTs differentiated to extraembryonic tissue, especially YST [70, 71]. Moreover, Sal-like protein 4 (SALL4) is a more sensitive marker than α-fetoprotein (AFP) and GPC3 for YST [72]. Integration of tumor characteristics and high-dimensional assays of genomic, epigenomic, transcriptomic and proteomic features [73] recently reveals novel distinctive molecular landscapes of TGCT histologic types and identifies previously unappreciated diversity within each component, including a separate subset of seminoma defined by KIT mutations.
The precise mechanism of the progression from premalignant IGCN to subtypes of invasive tumors is not completely understood. IGCN gives rise to seminoma and EC separately or seminoma is the intermediate stage between IGCN and EC remains a matter of debate. The first hypothesis is supported by the observation that IGCN is a phenotypically heterogeneous lesion containing cells in different stages of progression [74, 75], and KIT mutations are observed in a subset of seminoma, but not in EC [73]. The latter model is set up mainly on the basis of the phenotypic resemblance of seminoma to IGCN, learning from the studies of ploidy [76], cytogenetics [77] and pathomorphology [78]. Several studies support the common clonal origin of metastatic mature teratoma with other components of a mixed germ cell tumor [79, 80]. Intriguingly, transplantation of seminoma-like cell line TCam-2 into the seminiferous tubules results in the formation of an IGCN/seminoma, while transplantation into the flank or corpus striatum will trigger TCam-2 cells to adopt an EC-like fate. This model suggests that transition of seminoma to ECs relies on signals from the tumor microenvironment [81]. During this reprogramming, the microenvironment inhibition of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) signaling is the initial event, resulting in activation of NODAL signaling, upregulation of pluripotency factors (e.g., SOX2) and downregulation of seminoma markers (e.g., SOX17) [82, 83]. It will be interesting to further investigate whether EC can transit into seminoma upon interference with microenvironment factors.
Risk factors of TGCTs
The increased (4- to 10-fold) risk of TGCTs among brothers and sons of affected men together with findings in twin studies supports a strong genetic component contributing to TGCT susceptibility [84,85,86,87,88]. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been particularly effective in identifying multiple common variants with strong contribution to TGCT risk. Initial GWAS studies identified allele variation within the c-KIT ligand (KITLG) on 12q22 as the strongest genetic risk factor for TGCTs (per-allele OR > 2.6) [89, 90]. Approximately, 40 identified allele variations on chromosomes conferring TGCT susceptibility [91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101] are summarized in Fig. 2. Pathway-based analysis of GWAS data reveals the association of PGC formation, sex determination/differentiation, spermatogonial maintenance genes (e.g., KITLG [102], PRDM14 [103], DMRT1 [104], GATA4 [50] and DAZL [105]) with susceptibility to TGCTs. TGCT GWAS to date have been fairly small compared with those seen for other diseases, and multiple additional TGCT susceptibility loci and their functional characteristics remain to be identified.
In addition to genetic susceptibility loci, significate risk factors for the development of TGCTs include cryptorchidism [106], disorders of sex development [107], hypo/infertility [108], contralateral germ cell tumors [109] and endogenous and exogenous hormones [110]. Although the sample size is insufficient and reliable correlation should be established, environmental risk factors are currently estimated to account for half of TGCT predisposing reasons. If necessary, patients with high risks of TGCT occurrence such as family history of TGCTs, infertility and environmental risk exploration may be notified to take physical and genetic screening for the genetic susceptibility loci, credible prognosis markers or premalignant IGCN lesion.
Mouse models for TGCT study
Animal models, such as mouse models, provide novel insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying the origin, progression and development of TGCTs. Mouse strains with low versus high teratoma incidence (129 versus 129.MOLF-Chr 19 (M19)) provide original in-depth research of TGCTs in mice. M19 carries chromosome (Chr) 19 from the MOLF, whereas all other chromosomes are from the 129 strain. Approximately, 70% of M19 males develop TGCTs in contrast to approximately 5% in the 129 strain, suggesting that Chr 19 contains susceptibility loci of TGCTs [111, 112]. However, potential loci on Chr 19 have not been identified by GWAS yet.
The origin of TGCT cells predicts that developmental pathways that control germ cell pluripotency or differentiation may be involved in the malignant transformation of these cells. Using mouse strains of 129, M19 and FVB (resistant to teratoma formation), a previous study suggests that ectopic germ cell proliferation and dysexpression of germ cell pluripotency and differentiation-associated factors at a specific developmental time point, E15.5, are directly correlated with increased teratoma risk [113]. Nodal-knockout mice show premature differentiation and reduced pluripotency marker expression, and NODAL signaling components are overexpressed in human TGCT samples [114]. In contrast, germ cell expression of male sex determination gene Nanos2 is relatively low in teratoma-susceptible mouse strains and deficiency for Nanos2 increases teratoma incidence in 129 mice [115]. Furthermore, DMRT1 controls the mitosis–meiosis switch in mice and humans and loss of Dmrt1 in 129 strain mice results in a > 90% incidence of testicular teratomas [104, 116]. These genetic studies in mouse models further advance our understanding that delayed male germ cell specification and retained pluripotency may cause gonocytes to form IGCN, EC foci and teratoma on a susceptible genetic background.
An increase in tumor incidence in mice has proven to be relevant to understanding genetic risk factors for TGCTs in humans. One good example is that loss of the transmembrane Kit ligand (kitl) increases TGCT susceptibility in 129 mice [117]. GWAS have identified KITLG as a solid TGCT risk gene in humans accordingly [89]. TGCT occurrence is observed at higher incidence in mice mutant for Dnd1 [118] or Pten [119] or A1cf/Ago2 [120] in 129 inbred strains. Furthermore, spindle-associated Rhamm acts as a gatekeeper preventing IGCN initiation, because seminoma occurred in 3.7% of Rhamm mutant male mice [121]. Pierpont et al. recently developed a novel mouse TGCT model by germ cell-specific Kras activation and Pten inactivation in 129 backgrounds that developed malignant and metastatic TGCTs composed of teratoma and EC [122]. Mouse models provide biological insight into TGCT development, but their relevance to human tumorigenesis is limited, as no mutations of genes such as RHAMM and ALCF/AGO2 have been shown in human TGCTs. Whether mouse TGCT models precisely reflect the biology of human TGCTs requires to be determined.
Serum diagnostic tests for TGCTs
Compared to other solid organ malignancies, the role of serum tumor markers in TGCTs is unprecedented; these markers are fully used in the diagnosis, staging, risk stratification and surveillance of patients with TGCTs [123]. The most common serum tumor markers for TGCTs include α-fetoprotein (AFP) and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) [123]. They are relatively sensitive, specific and clinically useful tumor markers for TGCTs, providing value on diagnosis, classification, staging and prediction. Some progresses have been achieved to find novel serum biomarkers with good sensitivity and accuracy. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are short non-coding RNAs that show exciting promise as a new-style biomarker of TGCTs [124]. The sensitivity and specificity of miR-371a-3p alone is ~ 90% for the diagnosis of malignant TGCTs [125], but that value can be increased further by using a combination of other miRNAs, including miR-372-3p, miR-373-3p and miR-367-3p [126,127,128]. Furthermore, miR-371a-3p serum level is increased in recurrence of TGCT patients, indicating its additional value as a biomarker for detecting disease relapse in TGCT patients [129]. The value of miRNA serum markers needs to be validated in more studies or a prospective clinical trial. Moreover, patients in the yolk sac seminoma subgroup have the poorest clinical outcome, tending to undergo somatic transformation and chemoresistance [130]; however, identification of subtype-specific serum biomarkers is still a big challenge.
Resistance of TGCTs
TGCTs are highly curable tumors in most cases, because of the exquisite sensitivity of seminoma and EC to DNA damaging agents; however, teratomas are mostly resistant to chemotherapeutic drugs [131]. Given that TGCTs are unique in their responsiveness to platinum-based chemotherapy, they are considered as a model for exploring the molecular mechanisms behind the exceptional sensitivity of TGCT cells to DNA damaging chemotherapeutics. At present, various hypotheses on the platinum hypersensitivity of TGCT cells have been reported. An easily activated apoptotic response and the deficiency of the DNA damage response/repair activation may account for this behavior [132, 133]. The tumor-suppressor gene TP53 commonly mutated in solid tumors is rarely mutated in TGCTs (~ 1.29%) [134] and silencing of TP53 is sufficient to abrogate the hypersensitivity of TGCT cells to cisplatin [135]. A recent clinical whole-exome and transcriptome sequencing study proposes that the basis of chemosensitivity in TGCTs with a wild-type TP53 genomic background is a result of a fundamental apoptotic propensity caused by increased mitochondrial priming [65]. HMGB4, a protein preferentially expressed in testes, uniquely blocks excision repair of cisplatin–DNA adducts, 1,2-intrastrand cross-links, to potentiate the sensitivity of TGCT cells to cisplatin therapy [136]. Furthermore, chemoresistant teratomas or transformed carcinomas are associated with continued progression of reciprocal loss of heterozygosity (RLOH) copy number and reduction of pluripotency markers (NANOG and OCT3/4) [65]; however, it is uncertain whether the loss of pluripotency markers is a driver of chemoresistance.
Although the majority of TGCTs will respond with excellent cure rates, some (more than 10%) patients will relapse or demonstrate refractory disease after operation and chemotherapy. Limited options exist for patients with platinum refractory disease [137]. Exploring the mechanisms underlying platinum resistance and identifying novel treatment options that are effective in the platinum-refractory patients require an urgent priority. Both activation of the PDGFRβ-AKT pathway [138] and overexpression of MAD2γ [139] or cytoplasmic p21 [140] are explored to contribute to cisplatin-acquired resistance in TGCT cells. In contrast, disrupting MDM2-TP53 interaction [141] or stimulating expression of miR-302a [142] or miR-383 [143] increases the sensibility of TGCT cells to cisplatin exposure. Notably, compound HP-14 and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor restrain the growth of cisplatin-resistant TGCT cells [144, 145].
The mutation rate is uniformly low in TGCTs [73] and no significant difference is observed in the mutational rate between seminoma and non-seminoma cases [146]. Intriguingly, several clinical studies of TGCT patients with different response to chemotherapy indicate that some gene mutations exhibit discrepancy between resistance and sensitivity. There is a significantly higher incidence of BRAF [147] and XRCC2 [146] mutation in chemotherapy-resistant TGCTs compared with sensitive controls. Furthermore, mutations in AKT1 and PIK3CA are observed exclusively in cisplatin-resistant tumors [148]. Polymorphisms of BLMH [149], PAI-1 [150], GSTP1 [151], ARVCF [152], TPMT and COMT [153] are associated with reduced survival, higher prevalence of early relapses, platinum refractory and chemotherapy-related organ toxicity after chemotherapy for TGCT patients. Although TP53 mutations rarely occur in TGCTs, a recent study of whole-exome and targeted sequencing of cisplatin-sensitive and -resistant TGCTs suggests that TP53 alterations (16.3% vs. 0%) and combined MDM2/TP53 alterations (24.0% vs. 2.6%) are more common among cisplatin-resistant TGCTs than sensitive ones [154]. Unlike testicular primary tumors, mediastinal primary nonseminoma has frequent TP53 alterations (72.2% vs. 2.5%) and an increased rate of platinum-based therapy resistance, resulting in survival of only ~ 50% [154]. It is noteworthy that several studies support the common clonal origin of metastatic mature teratoma with other components of a mixed germ cell tumor [79, 80]. It’s still an open question why different subtypes of a mixed TGCT show the diversity of the above identified mutations and how genetics determine cisplatin resistance. In phase II studies, the combination of gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and paclitaxel achieves long-term overall survival (> 2 years) in ~ 20% of patients with cisplatin-refractory or multiply relapsed TGCTs [137, 155]. By contrast, limited effects are reported in patients treated with sunitunib [156], oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab [157] or everolimus [158].
Emerging role of miRNAs
MiRNAs recently emerge as an important regulator of TGCT cells. MiRNA expression profiles of TGCTs and normal testis tissues using small RNA sequencing reveal numerous dysregulated miRNAs in TGCTs [159, 160]. Compared with normal testes, the expression of some miRNAs (e.g., miR-199a-5p/3p, miR-514a-3p) is downregulated, while others, such as miR-223-3p, is overexpressed in TGCT tissues. Recent research has confirmed the role of miRNAs as either tumor suppressors or activators (oncomiRs) in TGCT cells. Subsequent identification of functional miRNAs–mRNAs interactions in TGCT cells helps delineate post-regulatory mechanisms and may lead to new therapies.
Forced expression of miR-199a-5p/3p in TGCT cells leads to suppression of cell growth, cancer migration, invasion and metastasis [161], indicating that miR-199a-5p/3p may act as a tumor-suppressor miRNA. Tumor cell suppression activity of the miR-199a-5p is mediated by its target PODXL [161] and MAFB [4], while miR-199a-3p inhibits tumor cell growth and migration via targeting transcription factor SP1 and glucose metabolism [5]. Furthermore, miR-199a-5p/3p and miR-214 can form a self-regulatory network via PSMD10-TP53-DNMT1 in TGCT cells [162]. MiR-514a-3p induces apoptosis through direct regulation of PEG3 and PEG3-mediated activation of the NF-kappa B pathway [159]. High miR-223-3p expression in TGCT cells targets FBXW7 to promote cell growth and inhibit apoptosis in TGCT cell lines [163]. OncomiR miR-1297 promotes growth of TGCT cells via targeting tumor-suppressor gene PTEN [164] and long-noncoding RNA MEG3 contradicts the inhibitory effects of miR-1297 on PTEN [165]. In vivo evidence should be included in miRNA studies to validate the involvement of miRNAs in TGCT progression in future.
Database to stimulate TGCT study
Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) is an international public repository that archives and freely distributes microarray, next-generation sequencing and other forms of high-throughput functional genomics data submitted by researchers. The GEO database can be searched using many different attributes including keywords (e.g., testicular germ cell tumor) and GEO accession (e.g., GSE1818). Furthermore, the GEO2R in GEO website allows us to compare two or more groups of samples in a GEO series to identify differentially expressed items and thus provides a simple interface that allows users to perform analysis without R statistical expertise. Taking the advantage of the GEO database, we can obtain informative knowledge about TGCTs. For example, GSE1818 provides RNA profiling of normal testis (n = 3), IGCN (n = 3), seminoma (n = 3), EC (n = 5), yolk sac (n = 4), teratoma (n = 4) and choriocarcinoma (n = 1). Using GEO2R to perform multiple comparisons, a series of predominant genes are observed for normal testis (e.g., KIF2A, DDEF2, and TBPL1), IGCN (e.g., CYP17A1 and ACE2), seminoma (e.g., CAPNS1, ZKSCAN3, and EIF3F), EC (e.g., GAL, BCAT1, and CALB1), yolk sac (e.g., APOA2 and CYP26A1), teratoma (e.g., COL1A1, COL61, and MFAP4) and choriocarcinoma (e.g., INSL4, CRH, and HTRA4) (Fig. 3a). It will be interesting to identify specific marker genes that mark the formation of IGCN and transition from IGCN to invasive TGCTs, because measures can be taken before IGCN progression toward malignant and invasive TGCTs or their relapse. Furthermore, RNA profiling of relapsed seminoma (n = 15), non-relapsed seminoma (n = 15), relapsed non-seminoma (n = 12) and non-relapsed non-seminoma (n = 15) is included in GSE99420. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) are obtained by GEO2R analysis between relapsed TGCTs and non-relapsed TGCTs (Fig. 3b). Moreover, GSE14231 identifies significant changes of RNA profiling in three human TGCT cell lines (833 K, GCT27 and Susa) and their cisplatin-resistant variants (n = 2 each group), and these DEGs are considered to participate in cisplatin sensitivity or resistance of TGCT cells (Fig. 3c).
The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) provides comprehensive and multi-dimensional maps of the key genomic changes in 33 types of cancer, including TGCTs. The genomic information of TCGA helps to improve the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of cancer. The cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics (http://cbioportal.org/) provides visualization, analysis and download of large-scale cancer genomics data sets, including TCGA [166, 167]. A recent systematic analysis of TCGA database concludes that TGCTs exhibit high aneuploidy and a markedly low rate of somatic mutation (mean 0.5 mutations per Mb) [73], consistent with previous exome-wide sequencing studies [146, 168, 169]. Somatic mutation of only three genes (KIT, KRAS, and NRAS) achieves significance in TGCTs, whereas large-scale copy number variation such as gain of chromosomal material from 12p is frequently observed [73]. Using TCGA and cBioPortal, a comparison of seminoma (n = 69) and EC (n = 31) samples obtains a list of differentially expressed miRNAs. Notably, miR-515 family that lists between DPRX and NLRP12 gene in Chr 19 accounts for approximately 55% of predominantly expressed genes in EC as compared with seminoma (Fig. 4). The role of miR-515 family in the distinction of EC from seminoma deserves further investigation.
Concluding remarks
In summary, we described the developmental (origin and progression), genetic (susceptibility loci) and molecular (resistance mechanisms, miRNA involvement) aspects of TGCTs, and discussed the emerging TGCT mouse models, public database resources and serum diagnostic markers with application prospects.
TGCTs are histologically heterogeneous and distinctly curable with chemotherapy. One major challenge is the development of therapeutic approaches for cisplatin-refractory or multiply relapsed TGCTs. TGCTs are highly curable tumors in most cases, because of their exquisite sensitivity of seminoma and EC to DNA damaging agents; however, teratoma are mostly resistant to chemotherapeutic drugs [131]. In most cases, surgical resection is specifically required for teratomas and identifying ways to discern teratomas from nonviable tissues after chemotherapy is important to avoid unnecessary invasive surgeries. Malignant transformation of TGCTs into somatic malignancy is uncommon [170]. Patients whose primary TGCTs contain yolk sac tumor and seminoma have a poor clinical outcome, tending to undergo chemoresistance and somatic transformation within their metastatic lesions after chemotherapy [130]. Similarly, teratoma with malignant transformation had a worse prognosis than other types of TGCTs [171].
Patient-derived xenografts (PDX) are models of cancer where the tissue or cells from a patient’s tumor are implanted into immunodeficient or humanized mice. PDX provides unique opportunities for cancer research, treatment evaluation and drug discovery. However, understanding the limitations of PDX models and the difference between PDX and human tumors in their natural environment is required for optimal application. Firstly, it is vital to ensure that appropriate PDX tumor model is used, because several studies suggest that human tumors engrafted in immunodeficient mice are susceptible to the formation of lymphocytic neoplasms [172, 173]. Secondly, PDX undergo mouse-specific tumor evolution and show genomic instability; for instance, the copy number alteration landscapes of PDX change continuously and differ from those acquired in patients [174, 175]. Moreover, further development and use of mouse genetic TGCT models will provide novel insight into the underlying molecular mechanisms of TGCTs, as well as useful tools to test therapeutic strategies. Nevertheless, whether mouse TGCT models precisely reflect the biology of various subtypes of human TGCTs requires to be determined.
Targeting of tumor cells is not equivalent to targeting tumor tissues. Tumor cells display extensive and dynamic cross-talk with the microenvironment, mainly containing tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, tumor-associated macrophages, cancer-associated fibroblasts, surrounding stroma and tumor vasculature [176]. TGCTs are frequently characterized by T lymphocyte infiltration [177]. Deep immune characterization of TGCTs shows that activated T cell infiltration is closely correlated with seminoma histology, early stage and good prognosis. Seminomas show increased T cell infiltration, decreased regulatory T cells, increased program death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and increased program-death 1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 spatial interaction compared with non-seminoma [73, 178, 179]. EMMPRIN secreted by EC cells via membrane vesicles exerts its matrix metalloproteinase-inducing effect on fibroblasts within the tumor microenvironment to promote tumor invasion [180]; thus, EMMPRIN may predict an unfavorable prognosis in patients with TGCTs [181]. MiR-125b in TGCT tumor cells promotes TGCT xenograft growth through stimulating the recruitment of tumor-associated macrophages [182]. In addition to the intrinsic properties of tumor cells, more attention should be paid to tumor microenvironment and corresponding therapeutics directing against ‘tumor’ rather than ‘tumor cells’.
Anti-PD-1 is standard immunotherapy for multiple cancers, and the expression of its ligand, PD-L1, has been described in TGCTs [6, 183]. Immunotherapy using PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors (e.g., pembrolizumab) has been performed to treat platinum-refractory TGCTs [184, 185]. However, a phase II study of anti-PD-1 in refractory TGCTs (Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02499952) was terminated due to lack of efficacy. Pembrolizumab is well tolerated, but does not appear to have clinically meaningful single-agent activity [186]. brentuximab vedotin (BV) is an antibody–drug conjugate consisting of the chimeric anti-CD30 antibody conjugated to an antimitotic drug monomethylauristatin E [187,188,189]. A phase II trial of BV in refractory CD30-positive TGCTs (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01851200) has been completed; however, the clinical outcomes have not been reported.
References
Ghazarian AA et al (2017) Future of testicular germ cell tumor incidence in the United States: forecast through 2026. Cancer 123(12):2320–2328. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.30597
Ushida H et al (2012) Therapeutic potential of SOX2 inhibition for embryonal carcinoma. J Urol 187(5):1876–1881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.12.058
Yamada Y et al (2017) A novel prognostic factor TRIM44 promotes cell proliferation and migration, and inhibits apoptosis in testicular germ cell tumor. Cancer Sci 108(1):32–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/cas.13105
Gu S et al (2013) Molecular mechanisms of regulation and action of microRNA-199a in testicular germ cell tumor and glioblastomas. PLoS One 8(12):e83980. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083980
Liu X et al (2016) microRNA-199a-3p functions as tumor suppressor by regulating glucose metabolism in testicular germ cell tumors. Mol Med Rep 14(3):2311–2320. https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2016.5472
Fankhauser CD et al (2015) Frequent PD-L1 expression in testicular germ cell tumors. Br J Cancer 113(3):411–413. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2015.244
Vogt AP, Chen Z, Osunkoya AO (2010) Rete testis invasion by malignant germ cell tumor and/or intratubular germ cell neoplasia: what is the significance of this finding? Hum Pathol 41(9):1339–1344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2010.03.005
Pinto F et al (2018) Brachyury oncogene is a prognostic factor in high-risk testicular germ cell tumors. Andrology 6(4):597–604. https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12495
Martinelli C et al (2017) MGMT and CALCA promoter methylation are associated with poor prognosis in testicular germ cell tumor patients. Oncotarget 8(31):50608–50617. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.11167
Zhu Y et al (2016) The polymorphic hMSH5 C85T allele augments radiotherapy-induced spermatogenic impairment. Andrology 4(5):873–879. https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12203
Yamada Y et al (2016) Prognostic value of CD66b positive tumor-infiltrating neutrophils in testicular germ cell tumor. BMC Cancer 16(1):898. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2926-5
Atkin NB, Baker MC (1982) Specific chromosome change, i(12p), in testicular tumours? Lancet 2(8311):1349. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(82)91557-4
Stock C et al (1996) Isochromosome 12p and maternal loss of 1p36 in a pediatric testicular germ cell tumor. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 91(2):95–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4608(95)00190-5
Juric D et al (2005) Gene expression profiling differentiates germ cell tumors from other cancers and defines subtype-specific signatures. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102(49):17763–17768. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0509082102
Rodriguez S et al (2003) Expression profile of genes from 12p in testicular germ cell tumors of adolescents and adults associated with i(12p) and amplification at 12p11.2-p12.1. Oncogene 22(12):1880–1891. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1206302
Ezeh UI et al (2005) Human embryonic stem cell genes OCT4, NANOG, STELLAR, and GDF3 are expressed in both seminoma and breast carcinoma. Cancer 104(10):2255–2265. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21432
Korkola JE et al (2006) Down-regulation of stem cell genes, including those in a 200-kb gene cluster at 12p13.31, is associated with in vivo differentiation of human male germ cell tumors. Cancer Res 66(2):820–827. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.can-05-2445
Albers P et al (2015) Guidelines on testicular cancer: 2015 update. Eur Urol 68(6):1054–1068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.044
Albers P et al (2011) EAU guidelines on testicular cancer: 2011 update. Eur Urol 60(2):304–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.05.038
Tarrant WP, Czerniak BA, Guo CC (2013) Relationship between primary and metastatic testicular germ cell tumors: a clinicopathologic analysis of 100 cases. Hum Pathol 44(10):2220–2226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2013.05.004
Iida K et al (2014) Metastasectomy as optimal treatment for late relapsing solitary brain metastasis from testicular germ cell tumor: a case report. BMC Res Notes 7:865. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-865
Ushida H et al (2013) Recurrent rhabdomyosarcoma after adjuvant chemotherapy for stage I non-seminomatous germ cell tumor with malignant transformation. Int J Urol 20(5):544–546. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2012.03197.x
Gavriel H, Kleid S (2015) Benign neck metastasis of a testicular germ cell tumor. Int Surg 100(1):164–168. https://doi.org/10.9738/INTSURG-D-13-00157.1
O’Connor A, Dias A, Timon C (2013) Role of neck dissection for metastatic nonseminomatous testicular carcinoma: case report and literature review. J Laryngol Otol 127(10):1038–1039. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022215113002090
Rascol O et al (2012) A proof-of-concept, randomized, placebo-controlled, multiple cross-overs (n-of-1) study of naftazone in Parkinson’s disease. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 26(4):557–564. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-8206.2011.00951.x
Talwar V et al (2002) Intracardiac metastases from a testicular germ cell tumor. J Assoc Physicians India 50:855
do Nascimento FB et al (2016) Right cardiac chambers involvement by a malignant testicular germ cell tumor: an imaging-pathologic correlation. Urology 93:e9–e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.03.023
Hakiman H et al (2013) Rapid progression of a germ cell tumor encasing the inferior vena cava and aorta following a radical orchiectomy. Rare Tumors 5(2):79–82. https://doi.org/10.4081/rt.2013.e21
Delahunt B et al (1990) Testicular germ cell tumor with pineal metastases. Neurosurgery 26(4):688–691. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-199004000-00023
Oing C et al (2014) Nodal, pulmonary and pleural gliomatosis in a 42-year-old-male with non-seminomatous testicular germ cell cancer. Histopathology 65(1):142–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.12374
Aydiner A et al (1993) Testicular germ cell tumor with gastric metastasis. Acta Oncol 32(4):459–460. https://doi.org/10.3109/02841869309093625
Lauro S et al (2014) Gastric metastases from testicular cancer: case report and review of literature. J Gastrointest Cancer 45(Suppl 1):22–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-013-9524-4
Assimakopoulos SF et al (2006) A case of chondrosarcoma developing in a recurrent retroperitoneal mass after chemotherapy for testicular germ cell tumor. Urol Int 77(1):86–88. https://doi.org/10.1159/000092942
Kvammen O et al (2016) Long-term relative survival after diagnosis of testicular germ cell tumor. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 25(5):773–779. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-1153
Cost NG et al (2012) Effect of testicular germ cell tumor therapy on renal function. Urology 80(3):641–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.04.064
Weijl NI et al (2000) Thromboembolic events during chemotherapy for germ cell cancer: a cohort study and review of the literature. J Clin Oncol 18(10):2169–2178. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2000.18.10.2169
Lange J et al (2017) Cisplatin-related cerebral infarction in testicular germ cell cancer: short report of three Cases and pathomechanism. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 152:76–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.11.014
Azak A et al (2008) Cerebrovascular accident during cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy of testicular germ cell tumor: an unusual case report. Anticancer Drugs 19(1):97–98. https://doi.org/10.1097/CAD.0b013e3282f0777e
Meattini I et al (2010) Ischemic stroke during cisplatin-based chemotherapy for testicular germ cell tumor: case report and review of the literature. J Chemother 22(2):134–136. https://doi.org/10.1179/joc.2010.22.2.134
Nonomura N et al (1997) Secondary acute monocytic leukemia occurring during the treatment of a testicular germ cell tumor. A case report and review of the literature. Urol Int 58(4):239–242. https://doi.org/10.1159/000282992
Matsumoto S et al (2000) Secondary leukemia following ultra high-dose chemotherapy with peripheral blood stem cell autotransplantation for refractory testicular cancer. Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi 91(10–11):687–691. https://doi.org/10.5980/jpnjurol1989.91.68
Cerrud-Rodriguez RC, Quinteros MG, Azam M (2017) Internal carotid artery occlusion and stroke as a complication of cisplatin-based chemotherapy for metastatic testicular germ cell tumour. BMJ Case Rep. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2017-220084
Furuhashi K et al (2013) Onco-testicular sperm extraction: testicular sperm extraction in azoospermic and very severely oligozoospermic cancer patients. Andrologia 45(2):107–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0272.2012.01319.x
Roque M et al (2015) Onco-testicular sperm extraction: birth of a healthy baby after fertility preservation in synchronous bilateral testicular cancer and azoospermia. Andrologia 47(4):482–485. https://doi.org/10.1111/and.12292
Kirkali Z et al (2001) Testis sparing surgery for the treatment of a sequential bilateral testicular germ cell tumor. Int J Urol 8(12):710–712. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1442-2042.2001.00395.x
Demir A et al (2004) Testis-sparing surgery in an adult with bilateral synchronous seminomatous tumor. Int J Urol 11(12):1142–1144. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2004.00946.x
Peltzer K, Pengpid S (2015) Knowledge, attitudes and practice of testicular self-examination among male university students from bangladesh, madagascar, singapore, south africa and turkey. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 16(11):4741–4743. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.11.4741
Chen SR, Liu YX (2015) Regulation of spermatogonial stem cell self-renewal and spermatocyte meiosis by Sertoli cell signaling. Reproduction 149(4):R159–R167. https://doi.org/10.1530/REP-14-0481
Chen SR et al (2013) Disruption of genital ridge development causes aberrant primordial germ cell proliferation but does not affect their directional migration. BMC Biol 11:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7007-11-22
Chen SR et al (2015) Loss of Gata4 in Sertoli cells impairs the spermatogonial stem cell niche and causes germ cell exhaustion by attenuating chemokine signaling. Oncotarget 6(35):37012–37027. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.6115
Rebourcet D et al (2014) Sertoli cells control peritubular myoid cell fate and support adult Leydig cell development in the prepubertal testis. Development 141(10):2139–2149. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.107029
DeFalco T et al (2015) Macrophages contribute to the spermatogonial niche in the adult testis. Cell Rep 12(7):1107–1119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2015.07.015
Chen SR, Liu YX (2016) Myh11-Cre is not limited to peritubular myoid cells and interaction between Sertoli and peritubular myoid cells needs investigation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113(17):E2352. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1602873113
Wang YQ et al (2018) GATA4 is a negative regulator of contractility in testicular peritubular myoid cells. Reproduction. https://doi.org/10.1530/rep-18-0148
Green CD et al (2018) A comprehensive roadmap of murine spermatogenesis defined by single-cell RNA-Seq. Dev Cell 46(5):651–667e610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2018.07.025
Wang M et al (2018) Single-cell RNA sequencing analysis reveals sequential cell fate transition during human spermatogenesis. Cell Stem Cell 23(4):599–614e594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2018.08.007
Skakkebaek NE (1972) Possible carcinoma-in situ of the testis. Lancet 2(7776):516–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(72)91909-5
Kristensen DG et al (2014) Evidence that active demethylation mechanisms maintain the genome of carcinoma in situ cells hypomethylated in the adult testis. Br J Cancer 110(3):668–678. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.727
Mitchell RT et al (2014) Intratubular germ cell neoplasia of the human testis: heterogeneous protein expression and relation to invasive potential. Mod Pathol 27(9):1255–1266. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2013.246
Vasdev N, Moon A, Thorpe AC (2013) Classification, epidemiology and therapies for testicular germ cell tumours. Int J Dev Biol 57(2–4):133–139. https://doi.org/10.1387/ijdb.130031nv
Ottesen AM et al (2003) High-resolution comparative genomic hybridization detects extra chromosome arm 12p material in most cases of carcinoma in situ adjacent to overt germ cell tumors, but not before the invasive tumor development. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 38(2):117–125. https://doi.org/10.1002/gcc.10244
Summersgill B et al (2001) Chromosomal imbalances associated with carcinoma in situ and associated testicular germ cell tumours of adolescents and adults. Br J Cancer 85(2):213–220. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjoc.2001.1889
Di Vizio D et al (2005) Loss of the tumor suppressor gene PTEN marks the transition from intratubular germ cell neoplasias (ITGCN) to invasive germ cell tumors. Oncogene 24(11):1882–1894. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1208368
Datta MW et al (2001) Transition from in situ to invasive testicular germ cell neoplasia is associated with the loss of p21 and gain of mdm-2 expression. Mod Pathol 14(5):437–442. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.3880331
Taylor-Weiner A et al (2016) Genomic evolution and chemoresistance in germ-cell tumours. Nature 540(7631):114–118. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature20596
Sperger JM et al (2003) Gene expression patterns in human embryonic stem cells and human pluripotent germ cell tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100(23):13350–13355. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2235735100
de Jong J et al (2005) Diagnostic value of OCT3/4 for pre-invasive and invasive testicular germ cell tumours. J Pathol 206(2):242–249. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.1766
Rajpert-De Meyts E, Skakkebaek NE (1994) Expression of the c-kit protein product in carcinoma-in situ and invasive testicular germ cell tumours. Int J Androl 17(2):85–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2605.1994.tb01225.x
Emerson RE, Ulbright TM (2010) Intratubular germ cell neoplasia of the testis and its associated cancers: the use of novel biomarkers. Pathology 42(4):344–355. https://doi.org/10.3109/00313021003767355
Ota S et al (2006) Oncofetal protein glypican-3 in testicular germ-cell tumor. Virchows Arch 449(3):308–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-006-0238-x
Zynger DL et al (2010) Glypican 3 has a higher sensitivity than alpha-fetoprotein for testicular and ovarian yolk sac tumour: immunohistochemical investigation with analysis of histological growth patterns. Histopathology 56(6):750–757. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.2010.03553.x
Cao D et al (2009) SALL4 is a novel diagnostic marker for testicular germ cell tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 33(7):1065–1077. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181a13eef
Shen H et al (2018) Integrated molecular characterization of testicular germ cell tumors. Cell Rep 23(11):3392–3406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2018.05.039
Skakkebaek NE, Berthelsen JG (1981) Carcinoma-in situ of the testis and invasive growth of different types of germ cell tumours. A revised germ cell theory. Int J Androl 4(Suppl s4):26–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2605.1981.tb00647.x
Rajpert-De Meyts E, Kvist M, Skakkebaek NE (1996) Heterogeneity of expression of immunohistochemical tumour markers in testicular carcinoma in situ: pathogenetic relevance. Virchows Arch 428(3):133–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00200655
de Graaff WE et al (1992) Ploidy of testicular carcinoma in situ. Lab Investig 66(2):166–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00761-005-0952-z
de Jong B et al (1990) Pathogenesis of adult testicular germ cell tumors. A cytogenetic model. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 48(2):143–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4608(90)90115-Q
Srigley JR et al (1988) The ultrastructure and histogenesis of male germ neoplasia with emphasis on seminoma with early carcinomatous features. Ultrastruct Pathol 12(1):67–86. https://doi.org/10.3109/01913128809048477
Kernek KM et al (2003) Identical allelic losses in mature teratoma and other histologic components of malignant mixed germ cell tumors of the testis. Am J Pathol 163(6):2477–2484. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9440(10)63602-4
Jones TD et al (2006) Clonal origin of metastatic testicular teratomas. Clin Cancer Res 12(18):5377–5383. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0444
Nettersheim D et al (2012) Establishment of a versatile seminoma model indicates cellular plasticity of germ cell tumor cells. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 51(7):717–726. https://doi.org/10.1002/gcc.21958
Nettersheim D et al (2015) BMP inhibition in seminomas initiates acquisition of pluripotency via NODAL signaling resulting in reprogramming to an embryonal carcinoma. PLoS Genet 11(7):e1005415. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1005415
Nettersheim D et al (2016) SOX2 is essential for in vivo reprogramming of seminoma-like TCam-2 cells to an embryonal carcinoma-like fate. Oncotarget 7(30):47095–47110. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.9903
Hemminki K, Li X (2004) Familial risk in testicular cancer as a clue to a heritable and environmental aetiology. Br J Cancer 90(9):1765–1770. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601714
Chia VM et al (2009) Risk of cancer in first- and second-degree relatives of testicular germ cell tumor cases and controls. Int J Cancer 124(4):952–957. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.23971
Neale RE et al (2008) Testicular cancer in twins: a meta-analysis. Br J Cancer 98(1):171–173. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6604136
Swerdlow AJ et al (1997) Risks of breast and testicular cancers in young adult twins in England and Wales: evidence on prenatal and genetic aetiology. Lancet 350(9093):1723–1728. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(97)05526-8
Teh BT et al (1999) Familial testicular cancer: lack of evidence for trinucleotide repeat expansions and association with PKD1 in one family. J Med Genet 36(4):348–349. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2788.1999.00200.x
Kanetsky PA et al (2009) Common variation in KITLG and at 5q31.3 predisposes to testicular germ cell cancer. Nat Genet 41(7):811–815. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.393
Rapley EA et al (2009) A genome-wide association study of testicular germ cell tumor. Nat Genet 41(7):807–810. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.394
Turnbull C et al (2010) Variants near DMRT1, TERT and ATF7IP are associated with testicular germ cell cancer. Nat Genet 42(7):604–607. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.607
Kanetsky PA et al (2011) A second independent locus within DMRT1 is associated with testicular germ cell tumor susceptibility. Hum Mol Genet 20(15):3109–3117. https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddr207
Dalgaard MD et al (2012) A genome-wide association study of men with symptoms of testicular dysgenesis syndrome and its network biology interpretation. J Med Genet 49(1):58–65. https://doi.org/10.1136/jmedgenet-2011-100174
Chung CC et al (2013) Meta-analysis identifies four new loci associated with testicular germ cell tumor. Nat Genet 45(6):680–685. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2634
Ruark E et al (2013) Identification of nine new susceptibility loci for testicular cancer, including variants near DAZL and PRDM14. Nat Genet 45(6):686–689. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2635
Schumacher FR et al (2013) Testicular germ cell tumor susceptibility associated with the UCK2 locus on chromosome 1q23. Hum Mol Genet 22(13):2748–2753. https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddt109
Litchfield K et al (2015) Multi-stage genome-wide association study identifies new susceptibility locus for testicular germ cell tumour on chromosome 3q25. Hum Mol Genet 24(4):1169–1176. https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddu511
Kristiansen W et al (2015) Two new loci and gene sets related to sex determination and cancer progression are associated with susceptibility to testicular germ cell tumor. Hum Mol Genet 24(14):4138–4146. https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddv129
Litchfield K et al (2017) Identification of 19 new risk loci and potential regulatory mechanisms influencing susceptibility to testicular germ cell tumor. Nat Genet 49(7):1133–1140. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3896
Wang Z et al (2017) Meta-analysis of five genome-wide association studies identifies multiple new loci associated with testicular germ cell tumor. Nat Genet 49(7):1141–1147. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3879
Paumard-Hernandez B et al (2018) Whole exome sequencing identifies PLEC, EXO5 and DNAH7 as novel susceptibility genes in testicular cancer. Int J Cancer 143(8):1954–1962. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.31604
Runyan C et al (2006) Steel factor controls midline cell death of primordial germ cells and is essential for their normal proliferation and migration. Development 133(24):4861–4869. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.02688
Yamaji M et al (2008) Critical function of Prdm14 for the establishment of the germ cell lineage in mice. Nat Genet 40(8):1016–1022. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.186
Matson CK et al (2010) The mammalian doublesex homolog DMRT1 is a transcriptional gatekeeper that controls the mitosis versus meiosis decision in male germ cells. Dev Cell 19(4):612–624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2010.09.010
Gill ME et al (2011) Licensing of gametogenesis, dependent on RNA binding protein DAZL, as a gateway to sexual differentiation of fetal germ cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(18):7443–7448. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1104501108
Seetharam V et al (2014) Bilateral cryptorchidism with bilateral synchronous abdominal testicular germ cell tumour. BMJ Case Rep. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2013-203085
Chemes HE et al (2015) Is a CIS phenotype apparent in children with disorders of sex development? Milder testicular dysgenesis is associated with a higher risk of malignancy. Andrology 3(1):59–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.301
Machiela MJ et al (2017) Mosaic chromosome Y loss and testicular germ cell tumor risk. J Hum Genet 62(6):637–640. https://doi.org/10.1038/jhg.2017.20
Dieckmann KP et al (2014) Contralateral testicular biopsy in patients with germ cell tumors: practice patterns in Germany 2014. Urologe A 53(11):1651–1655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-014-3657-3
Morimoto LM et al (2018) Neonatal hormone concentrations and risk of testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT). Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 27(4):488–495. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0879
Matin A et al (1999) Susceptibility to testicular germ-cell tumours in a 129.MOLF-Chr 19 chromosome substitution strain. Nat Genet 23(2):237–240. https://doi.org/10.1038/13874
Zhu R, Matin A (2014) Tumor loci and their interactions on mouse chromosome 19 that contribute to testicular germ cell tumors. BMC Genet 15:65. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2156-15-65
Heaney JD et al (2012) Germ cell pluripotency, premature differentiation and susceptibility to testicular teratomas in mice. Development 139(9):1577–1586. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.076851
Spiller CM et al (2012) Endogenous Nodal signaling regulates germ cell potency during mammalian testis development. Development 139(22):4123–4132. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.083006
Dawson EP et al (2018) Delayed male germ cell sex-specification permits transition into embryonal carcinoma cells with features of primed pluripotency. Development. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.156612
Krentz AD et al (2009) The DM domain protein DMRT1 is a dose-sensitive regulator of fetal germ cell proliferation and pluripotency. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(52):22323–22328. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0905431106
Heaney JD et al (2008) Loss of the transmembrane but not the soluble kit ligand isoform increases testicular germ cell tumor susceptibility in mice. Cancer Res 68(13):5193–5197. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-0779
Youngren KK et al (2005) The Ter mutation in the dead end gene causes germ cell loss and testicular germ cell tumours. Nature 435(7040):360–364. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03595
Kimura T et al (2003) Conditional loss of PTEN leads to testicular teratoma and enhances embryonic germ cell production. Development 130(8):1691–1700. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.00392
Carouge D et al (2016) Parent-of-origin effects of A1CF and AGO2 on testicular germ-cell tumors, testicular abnormalities, and fertilization bias. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113(37):E5425–E5433. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1604773113
Li H et al (2016) Impaired planar germ cell division in the testis, caused by dissociation of RHAMM from the spindle, results in hypofertility and seminoma. Cancer Res 76(21):6382–6395. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-0179
Pierpont TM et al (2017) Chemotherapy-induced depletion of OCT4-positive cancer stem cells in a mouse model of malignant testicular cancer. Cell Rep 21(7):1896–1909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2017.10.078
Barlow LJ, Badalato GM, McKiernan JM (2010) Serum tumor markers in the evaluation of male germ cell tumors. Nat Rev Urol 7(11):610–617. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2010.166
Murray MJ, Huddart RA, Coleman N (2016) The present and future of serum diagnostic tests for testicular germ cell tumours. Nat Rev Urol 13(12):715–725. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2016.170
Spiekermann M et al (2015) MicroRNA miR-371a-3p in serum of patients with germ cell tumours: evaluations for establishing a serum biomarker. Andrology 3(1):78–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2047-2927.2014.00269.x
Syring I et al (2015) Circulating serum miRNA (miR-367-3p, miR-371a-3p, miR-372-3p and miR-373-3p) as biomarkers in patients with testicular germ cell cancer. J Urol 193(1):331–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.010
Murray MJ et al (2016) A pipeline to quantify serum and cerebrospinal fluid microRNAs for diagnosis and detection of relapse in paediatric malignant germ-cell tumours. Br J Cancer 114(2):151–162. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2015.429
Gillis AJ et al (2013) Targeted serum miRNA (TSmiR) test for diagnosis and follow-up of (testicular) germ cell cancer patients: a proof of principle. Mol Oncol 7(6):1083–1092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molonc.2013.08.002
Terbuch A et al (2018) MiR-371a-3p serum levels are increased in recurrence of testicular germ cell tumor patients. Int J Mol Sci. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19103130
Tu SM et al (2016) Intratumoral heterogeneity: role of differentiation in a potentially lethal phenotype of testicular cancer. Cancer 122(12):1836–1843. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29996
Comiter CV et al (1998) Prognostic features of teratomas with malignant transformation: a clinicopathological study of 21 cases. J Urol 159(3):859–863. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)63754-6
Bartkova J et al (2007) DNA damage response in human testes and testicular germ cell tumours: biology and implications for therapy. Int J Androl 30(4):282–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2605.2007.00772.x (discussion 291)
Cavallo F, Feldman DR, Barchi M (2013) Revisiting DNA damage repair, p53-mediated apoptosis and cisplatin sensitivity in germ cell tumors. Int J Dev Biol 57(2–4):273–280. https://doi.org/10.1387/ijdb.130135mb
Peng HQ et al (1993) Mutations of the p53 gene do not occur in testis cancer. Cancer Res 53(15):3574–3578. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01525437
Gutekunst M et al (2011) p53 hypersensitivity is the predominant mechanism of the unique responsiveness of testicular germ cell tumor (TGCT) cells to cisplatin. PLoS One 6(4):e19198. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019198
Awuah SG, Riddell IA, Lippard SJ (2017) Repair shielding of platinum-DNA lesions in testicular germ cell tumors by high-mobility group box protein 4 imparts cisplatin hypersensitivity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 114(5):950–955. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1615327114
Oechsle K et al (2011) Long-term survival after treatment with gemcitabine and oxaliplatin with and without paclitaxel plus secondary surgery in patients with cisplatin-refractory and/or multiply relapsed germ cell tumors. Eur Urol 60(4):850–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.06.019
Juliachs M et al (2014) The PDGFRbeta-AKT pathway contributes to CDDP-acquired resistance in testicular germ cell tumors. Clin Cancer Res 20(3):658–667. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-1131
Lopez-Saavedra A et al (2016) MAD2gamma, a novel MAD2 isoform, reduces mitotic arrest and is associated with resistance in testicular germ cell tumors. Cell Cycle 15(15):2066–2076. https://doi.org/10.1080/15384101.2016.1198863
Koster R et al (2010) Cytoplasmic p21 expression levels determine cisplatin resistance in human testicular cancer. J Clin Invest 120(10):3594–3605. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI41939
Koster R et al (2011) Disruption of the MDM2-p53 interaction strongly potentiates p53-dependent apoptosis in cisplatin-resistant human testicular carcinoma cells via the Fas/FasL pathway. Cell Death Dis 2:e148. https://doi.org/10.1038/cddis.2011.33
Liu L et al (2013) MicroRNA-302a sensitizes testicular embryonal carcinoma cells to cisplatin-induced cell death. J Cell Physiol 228(12):2294–2304. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.24394
Huang H et al (2014) microRNA-383 impairs phosphorylation of H2AX by targeting PNUTS and inducing cell cycle arrest in testicular embryonal carcinoma cells. Cell Signal 26(5):903–911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cellsig.2014.01.016
Nitzsche B et al (2012) Anti-tumour activity of two novel compounds in cisplatin-resistant testicular germ cell cancer. Br J Cancer 107(11):1853–1863. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2012.481
Cavallo F et al (2012) Reduced proficiency in homologous recombination underlies the high sensitivity of embryonal carcinoma testicular germ cell tumors to cisplatin and poly (adp-ribose) polymerase inhibition. PLoS One 7(12):e51563. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051563
Litchfield K et al (2015) Whole-exome sequencing reveals the mutational spectrum of testicular germ cell tumours. Nat Commun 6:5973. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms6973
Honecker F et al (2009) Microsatellite instability, mismatch repair deficiency, and BRAF mutation in treatment-resistant germ cell tumors. J Clin Oncol 27(13):2129–2136. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.18.8623
Feldman DR et al (2014) Presence of somatic mutations within PIK3CA, AKT, RAS, and FGFR3 but not BRAF in cisplatin-resistant germ cell tumors. Clin Cancer Res 20(14):3712–3720. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-2868
de Haas EC et al (2008) Variation in bleomycin hydrolase gene is associated with reduced survival after chemotherapy for testicular germ cell cancer. J Clin Oncol 26(11):1817–1823. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.14.1606
de Haas EC et al (2010) Association of PAI-1 gene polymorphism with survival and chemotherapy-related vascular toxicity in testicular cancer. Cancer 116(24):5628–5636. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25300
Oldenburg J et al (2007) Cisplatin-induced long-term hearing impairment is associated with specific glutathione s-transferase genotypes in testicular cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol 25(6):708–714. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2006.08.9599
Fung C et al (2012) Chemotherapy refractory testicular germ cell tumor is associated with a variant in armadillo repeat gene deleted in velco-cardio-facial syndrome (ARVCF). Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 3:163. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2012.00163
Ross CJ et al (2009) Genetic variants in TPMT and COMT are associated with hearing loss in children receiving cisplatin chemotherapy. Nat Genet 41(12):1345–1349. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.478
Bagrodia A et al (2016) Genetic determinants of cisplatin resistance in patients with advanced germ cell tumors. J Clin Oncol 34(33):4000–4007. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.68.7798
Seidel C et al (2016) Efficacy and safety of gemcitabine, oxaliplatin, and paclitaxel in cisplatin-refractory germ cell cancer in routine care—registry data from an outcomes research project of the German Testicular Cancer Study Group. Urol Oncol 34(4):167.e21–167.e28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2015.11.007
Oechsle K et al (2011) Preclinical and clinical activity of sunitinib in patients with cisplatin-refractory or multiply relapsed germ cell tumors: a Canadian Urologic Oncology Group/German Testicular Cancer Study Group cooperative study. Ann Oncol 22(12):2654–2660. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdr026
Jain A et al (2014) Phase II clinical trial of oxaliplatin and bevacizumab in refractory germ cell tumors. Am J Clin Oncol 37(5):450–453. https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0b013e31827de90d
Mego M et al (2016) Phase II study of everolimus in refractory testicular germ cell tumors. Urol Oncol 34(3):122.e117–122.e122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2015.10.010
Ozata DM et al (2017) Loss of miR-514a-3p regulation of PEG3 activates the NF-kappa B pathway in human testicular germ cell tumors. Cell Death Dis 8(5):e2759. https://doi.org/10.1038/cddis.2016.464
Rijlaarsdam MA et al (2015) Identification of known and novel germ cell cancer-specific (embryonic) miRs in serum by high-throughput profiling. Andrology 3(1):85–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.298
Cheung HH et al (2011) Methylation of an intronic region regulates miR-199a in testicular tumor malignancy. Oncogene 30(31):3404–3415. https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2011.60
Chen BF et al (2014) A miR-199a/miR-214 self-regulatory network via PSMD10, TP53 and DNMT1 in testicular germ cell tumor. Sci Rep 4:6413. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep06413
Liu J et al (2017) miR2233p regulates cell growth and apoptosis via FBXW7 suggesting an oncogenic role in human testicular germ cell tumors. Int J Oncol 50(2):356–364. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2016.3807
Yang NQ et al (2014) miRNA-1297 induces cell proliferation by targeting phosphatase and tensin homolog in testicular germ cell tumor cells. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 15(15):6243–6246
Yang NQ et al (2016) Crosstalk between Meg3 and miR-1297 regulates growth of testicular germ cell tumor through PTEN/PI3K/AKT pathway. Am J Transl Res 8(2):1091–1099
Cerami E et al (2012) The cBio cancer genomics portal: an open platform for exploring multidimensional cancer genomics data. Cancer Discov 2(5):401–404. https://doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.CD-12-0095
Gao J et al (2013) Integrative analysis of complex cancer genomics and clinical profiles using the cBioPortal. Sci Signal 6(269):pl1. https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.2004088
Cutcutache I et al (2015) Exome-wide sequencing shows low mutation rates and identifies novel mutated genes in seminomas. Eur Urol 68(1):77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.040
Litchfield K et al (2016) Rare disruptive mutations in ciliary function genes contribute to testicular cancer susceptibility. Nat Commun 7:13840. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13840
Mikuz G, Colecchia M (2012) Teratoma with somatic-type malignant components of the testis. A review and an update. Virchows Arch 461(1):27–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-012-1251-x
Giannatempo P et al (2016) Treatment and clinical outcomes of patients with teratoma with somatic-type malignant transformation: an international collaboration. J Urol 196(1):95–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.082
Bondarenko G et al (2015) Patient-derived tumor xenografts are susceptible to formation of human lymphocytic tumors. Neoplasia 17(9):735–741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neo.2015.09.004
Wetterauer C et al (2015) Early development of human lymphomas in a prostate cancer xenograft program using triple knock-out immunocompromised mice. Prostate 75(6):585–592. https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.22939
Colombo PE et al (2015) Ovarian carcinoma patient derived xenografts reproduce their tumor of origin and preserve an oligoclonal structure. Oncotarget 6(29):28327–28340. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.5069
Ben-David U et al (2017) Patient-derived xenografts undergo mouse-specific tumor evolution. Nat Genet 49(11):1567–1575. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3967
Mazzieri R et al (2011) Targeting the ANG2/TIE2 axis inhibits tumor growth and metastasis by impairing angiogenesis and disabling rebounds of proangiogenic myeloid cells. Cancer Cell 19(4):512–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2011.02.005
Hvarness T et al (2013) Phenotypic characterisation of immune cell infiltrates in testicular germ cell neoplasia. J Reprod Immunol 100(2):135–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jri.2013.10.005
Siska PJ et al (2017) Deep exploration of the immune infiltrate and outcome prediction in testicular cancer by quantitative multiplexed immunohistochemistry and gene expression profiling. Oncoimmunology 6(4):e1305535. https://doi.org/10.1080/2162402X.2017.1305535
Cheng L, Lyu B, Roth LM (2017) Perspectives on testicular germ cell neoplasms. Hum Pathol 59:10–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2016.08.002
Milia-Argeiti E et al (2014) EMMPRIN/CD147-encriched membrane vesicles released from malignant human testicular germ cells increase MMP production through tumor-stroma interaction. Biochim Biophys Acta 1840(8):2581–2588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbagen.2014.02.026
Bi XC et al (2012) Extracellular matrix metalloproteinase inducer: a novel poor prognostic marker for human seminomas. Clin Transl Oncol 14(3):190–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-012-0783-5
Batool A et al (2018) A miR-125b/CSF1-CX3CL1/tumor-associated macrophage recruitment axis controls testicular germ cell tumor growth. Cell Death Dis 9(10):962. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-018-1021-z
Cierna Z et al (2016) Prognostic value of programmed-death-1 receptor (PD-1) and its ligand 1 (PD-L1) in testicular germ cell tumors. Ann Oncol 27(2):300–305. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv574
Shah S et al (2016) Clinical response of a patient to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy and the immune landscape of testicular germ cell tumors. Cancer Immunol Res 4(11):903–909. https://doi.org/10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-16-0087
Loh KP, Fung C (2017) Novel therapies in platinum-refractory metastatic germ cell tumor: a case report with a focus on a PD-1 inhibitor. Rare Tumors 9(2):6867. https://doi.org/10.4081/rt.2017.6867
Adra N et al (2018) Phase II trial of pembrolizumab in patients with platinum refractory germ-cell tumors: a hoosier cancer research network study GU14-206. Ann Oncol 29(1):209–214. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx680
Okeley NM et al (2010) Intracellular activation of SGN-35, a potent anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate. Clin Cancer Res 16(3):888–897. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-2069
Ratta R et al (2016) Immunotherapy advances in uro-genital malignancies. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 105:52–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2016.06.012
Schonberger S et al (2018) Brentuximab vedotin exerts profound antiproliferative and pro-apoptotic efficacy in CD30-positive as well as cocultured CD30-negative germ cell tumour cell lines. J Cell Mol Med 22(1):568–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcmm.13344
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Young Elite Scientists Sponsorship Program by CAST (Grant no. YESS20160118 to SR Chen); National Natural Science Foundation of China (31501198 to SR Chen); CAS-TWAS President’s Fellowship for International PhD Students (to A Batool).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Batool, A., Karimi, N., Wu, XN. et al. Testicular germ cell tumor: a comprehensive review. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 76, 1713–1727 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-019-03022-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-019-03022-7