Novel genetic and epigenetic alterations in ... - Ous-research.no
Novel genetic and epigenetic alterations in ... - Ous-research.no Novel genetic and epigenetic alterations in ... - Ous-research.no
DISCUSSIONColorectal cancer is a very common disease with a poor 5-year survival. Any finding whichaid in discriminating patients with a good versus poor prognosis will therefore have animpact on a large number of patients. Currently, tumor stage at time of diagnosis is the onlyparameter used in classifying patients into different categories, in which fit patients withstage III disease who will receive adjuvant chemotherapy.[15;16] Still, there are some patientswith a stage II disease who will experience recurrence, and who would benefit fromchemotherapy. On the other hand, some 50% of stage III patients will not recur aftersurgery alone and could be spared from the treatment related side-effects. With the aim offinding markers with prognostic potential in a low-risk group of colorectal cancer patients,we analyzed 41 genes with coding oligonucleotide repeats (all but one were mononucleotide)in two independent series of colorectal MSI tumors.This same approach has been performed in earlier studies, but in very small numbers of bothgenes and patients. Results are differing, some find mutations in both of TGFBR2 and BAXto be associated with poor prognosis,[17;18] another study finds them to be associated withan improved survival,[19;20] while some do not find any associations to survival at all.[21] Asmall study found that mutation in ATR showed a trend towards improved survival,although not significant.[22] A couple of studies have looked at protein expression of someof the genes included here in association to survival and found that low BAX expression isassociated with poor survival,[23] and that strong staining of RAD50/MRE11/NBS1 wasassociated with a favorable survival.[24] In order to include driver-genes that are likely tohave an impact on tumorigenesis in the study, strict selection criteria were employed.18
When comparing our findings of mutation frequencies with literature, we saw thatACVR2A, OGT and RAD50 had a higher mutation rate in our analyses, while ADCY2,EP300, PA2G4 and SEC63 were less frequently mutated as compared to the literature. Mostof these genes have been the subject of few or single studies, often with a very restrictedsample size, and therefore discrepancies were not unexpected. In the instance of ACVR2Aanother study has found a similarly high mutation frequency.[25] To the best of ourknowledge, this is the first study to analyze indels in EP300 in primary tumors. Previously ithas been shown to be mutated in 4 of 7 CRC cell lines.[26] The low mutation frequency seenhere indicates that it is not among the driving forces in colorectal tumorigenesis.Some genes showed more than a 10% difference in mutation frequency between the twotumor series (AIM2, ASTE1, EP300, EPHB2, MARCKS, PCNXL2, RBBP8, RCC2,SEMG1, SPINK5 and SYCP1). There may be biological as well as technological explanationsfor this discrepancy. Firstly, some biological variation is expected. Also, the fact that the testseries includes a higher number of non-right-sided tumors makes us expect the mutationfrequencies to be slightly lower. In fact, when comparing only right-sided tumors themutation frequencies in the two series were more similar as only SPINK5 and EP300 weresignificantly different. All of the differently mutated genes were more often mutated in theformalin fixed validation series. It may be that the tissue fixation protocol plays a part in theelevated mutation frequencies.Correlation analysis indicated that ACVR2A:TGFBR2, TAF1B:ASTE1, TAF1B:ACVR2A,and MRE11A:ASTE1 were correlated in the test series, of which the pairs of TAF1B:ACVR2A and MRE11A:ASTE1 were confirmed in the validation series. All these genes19
- Page 98 and 99: Journal of Translational Medicine 2
- Page 100 and 101: Journal of Translational Medicine 2
- Page 102 and 103: Journal of Translational Medicine 2
- Page 105: Paper IITerje Ahlquist, Guro E Lind
- Page 108 and 109: BackgroundMost cases of colorectal
- Page 110 and 111: ADAMTS1 CDKN2A CRABP1 HOXA9 MAL MGM
- Page 112 and 113: pseudogene, leading to a high rate
- Page 114 and 115: strands. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1
- Page 116 and 117: concomitant absence of transcript a
- Page 119 and 120: Volume 10 Number 7 July 2008 pp. 68
- Page 121 and 122: 682 RAS Signaling in Colorectal Car
- Page 123 and 124: 684 RAS Signaling in Colorectal Car
- Page 125 and 126: 686 RAS Signaling in Colorectal Car
- Page 127: Table W2. Detailed Somatic Events o
- Page 131 and 132: Identification of RCC2 as a prognos
- Page 133 and 134: INTRODUCTIONMicrosatellite instabil
- Page 135 and 136: unselected series of primary tumors
- Page 137 and 138: specificity, i.e. that they only am
- Page 139 and 140: On the assumption that DNA repair a
- Page 141 and 142: In order to ensure that gene mutati
- Page 143 and 144: Figure 2. Mutation frequency differ
- Page 145 and 146: and TAF1B (0.50), ACVR2A and ASTE1
- Page 147: Multivariate analysesA multivariate
- Page 151 and 152: The test series included a low numb
- Page 153 and 154: entering M-phase remains to be seen
- Page 155 and 156: 12. Duval A, Reperant M, Hamelin R
- Page 157 and 158: 34. Martineau-Thuillier S, Andreass
- Page 159: AppendicesAppendix I:List of abbrev
- Page 163 and 164: Critical Reviews TM in Oncogenesis,
- Page 165 and 166: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 167 and 168: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 169 and 170: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 171 and 172: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 173 and 174: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 175 and 176: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 177 and 178: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 179 and 180: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 181 and 182: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 183 and 184: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 185 and 186: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 187 and 188: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 189 and 190: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
- Page 191: TARGET GENES OF MSI COLORECTAL CANC
DISCUSSIONColorectal cancer is a very common disease with a poor 5-year survival. Any f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g whichaid <strong>in</strong> discrim<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g patients with a good versus poor prog<strong>no</strong>sis will therefore have animpact on a large number of patients. Currently, tumor stage at time of diag<strong>no</strong>sis is the onlyparameter used <strong>in</strong> classify<strong>in</strong>g patients <strong>in</strong>to different categories, <strong>in</strong> which fit patients withstage III disease who will receive adjuvant chemotherapy.[15;16] Still, there are some patientswith a stage II disease who will experience recurrence, <strong>and</strong> who would benefit fromchemotherapy. On the other h<strong>and</strong>, some 50% of stage III patients will <strong>no</strong>t recur aftersurgery alone <strong>and</strong> could be spared from the treatment related side-effects. With the aim off<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g markers with prog<strong>no</strong>stic potential <strong>in</strong> a low-risk group of colorectal cancer patients,we analyzed 41 genes with cod<strong>in</strong>g oligonucleotide repeats (all but one were mo<strong>no</strong>nucleotide)<strong>in</strong> two <strong>in</strong>dependent series of colorectal MSI tumors.This same approach has been performed <strong>in</strong> earlier studies, but <strong>in</strong> very small numbers of bothgenes <strong>and</strong> patients. Results are differ<strong>in</strong>g, some f<strong>in</strong>d mutations <strong>in</strong> both of TGFBR2 <strong>and</strong> BAXto be associated with poor prog<strong>no</strong>sis,[17;18] a<strong>no</strong>ther study f<strong>in</strong>ds them to be associated withan improved survival,[19;20] while some do <strong>no</strong>t f<strong>in</strong>d any associations to survival at all.[21] Asmall study found that mutation <strong>in</strong> ATR showed a trend towards improved survival,although <strong>no</strong>t significant.[22] A couple of studies have looked at prote<strong>in</strong> expression of someof the genes <strong>in</strong>cluded here <strong>in</strong> association to survival <strong>and</strong> found that low BAX expression isassociated with poor survival,[23] <strong>and</strong> that strong sta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g of RAD50/MRE11/NBS1 wasassociated with a favorable survival.[24] In order to <strong>in</strong>clude driver-genes that are likely tohave an impact on tumorigenesis <strong>in</strong> the study, strict selection criteria were employed.18