A Cohort Study of Cyclin D1 Expression and Prognosis in 602 Colon Cancer Cases
Shuji OginoKatsuhiko NoshoNatsumi IraharaShoko KureKaori ShimaYoshifumi BabaSaori ToyodaLi ChenEdward L. GiovannucciJeffrey A. MeyerhardtCharles S. Fuchs
74
Citation
53
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
Cyclin D1 and cyclin-dependent kinases (CDK) are commonly activated in colorectal cancer. The activity of cyclin D1 can be blocked by CDK inhibitors, including p27 (CDKN1B) and p21 (CDKN1A, which is induced by p53). However, prognostic significance of tumoral cyclin D1 remains uncertain, and no previous study has considered potential confounding effect of p53, p21, p27, and related molecular events [microsatellite instability (MSI), CpG island methylator phenotype, and LINE-1 hypomethylation].Among 602 colon cancer patients (stage I-IV) in two prospective cohort studies, cyclin D1 overexpression was detected in 330 (55%) tumors by immunohistochemistry. Cox proportional hazard models computed hazard ratios (HR) of colon cancer-specific and overall mortalities, adjusted for patient characteristics and tumoral molecular features, including p53, p21, p27, cyclooxygenase-2, fatty acid synthase, LINE-1 methylation, CpG island methylator phenotype, MSI, BMI, KRAS, and BRAF.Cyclin D1 overexpression was associated with a low cancer-specific mortality in Kaplan-Meier analysis (P = 0.006), and in both univariate Cox regression [unadjusted HR, 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.47-0.88; P = 0.0063] and multivariate analyses (adjusted HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.39-0.84; P = 0.0048). Similar findings were observed for an overall mortality (adjusted HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.57-0.98; P = 0.036). Notably, the effect of cyclin D1 on survival might differ by MSI status (P(interaction) = 0.008). Compared with tumors that were both cyclin D1-negative and MSI-low/microsatellite stable, the presence of either cyclin D1 or MSI-high or both seemed to confer better clinical outcome (adjusted HR point estimates, 0.10-0.65).Cyclin D1 overexpression is associated with longer survival in colon cancer.Keywords:
Microsatellite Instability
e15565 Background: KRAS mutations are common oncogenic events across cancers, but effective RAS-directed therapies are lacking. However, recent studies support use of PD-1 blockade in most subsets of lung cancer with KRAS short variant mutations (KRAS SV ) (PMID: 28039262), and preclinical data supports combined MEK and SHP2 inhibition in KRAS amplified ( KRAS a ) GEA (PMID: 30093730). We sought to explore the landscape of KRAS altered GEA and compare genomic profiles of KRAS-altered and KRAS wild-type (WT) cases for biomarkers of response to targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Methods: 6,667 tissue specimens from patients with advanced GEA were assayed using hybrid capture-based comprehensive genomic profiling. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was determined on up to 1.1 Mbp of sequenced DNA and microsatellite instability (MSI) was determined on 95 or 114 loci. Descriptive statistics were used to compare among subgroups. Results: KRAS SV and KRAS a were identified in 11% and 5.8% of gastric adenocarcinoma (GA), respectively, and in 7.2% and 17% of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA), respectively. KRAS a and KRAS SV were nearly mutually exclusive, co-occurring in only 4.4% of KRAS altered cases. ERBB2 alterations were less common in KRAS SV and KRAS a GEA (both 9%) as compared with KRAS WT GEA (19%) (p = 1.9E-16). EGFR a was less common in KRAS SV vs KRAS a GEA (1.9% vs 9.3%, p = 2.6E-8), whereas PIK3CA SV was more common in KRAS SV vs KRAS a (16% vs 5.0%, p = 1.5E-11). Median TMB for all groups was similar; however, KRAS SV GEA had a higher mean TMB (9.7 mut/Mb) as compared to KRAS a (5.1 mut/Mb, p = 5.0E-12) and KRAS WT cases (5.8 mut/Mb, p = 2.2E-07). KRAS codon 12/13 accounted for > 80% of predicted pathogenic mutations. MSI-high was also more prevalent in KRAS SV (11.3%) vs KRAS a (0.9%, p = 4.8E-15) and KRAS WT GEA (2.4%, p = 1.8E-25). MSI-high KRAS SV GEA was associated with older patient age (median 72 years) and with high TMB (median 40.9 mut/mb). Conclusions: GA was enriched for KRAS mutation whereas EA was enriched for KRAS amplification. KRAS WT vs KRAS SV vs KRAS a each presented distinct genomic profiles. KRAS a in the absence of KRAS mutation exists in 11% of GEA and warrants further exploration to inform combination treatment strategies.
Microsatellite Instability
Cite
Citations (0)
e19324 Background: KRAS G12C mutations are present in 15% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and have recently been shown to confer sensitivity to KRAS(G12C) inhibitors. This study aims to assess the clinical features and outcomes with KRAS G12C mutant NSCLC in a real-world setting. Methods: Patients enrolled in an Australian prospective cohort study, Thoracic Malignancies Cohort (TMC), between July 2012 to October 2019 with metastatic or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC, with available KRAS test results, and without EGFR, ALK, or ROS1 gene aberrations, were selected. Data was extracted from TMC and patient records. Clinicopathologic features, treatment and overall survival was compared for KRAS wildtype ( KRAS WT ) and KRAS mutated ( KRAS mut ) patients, and between KRAS G12C ( KRAS G12C ) and other ( KRAS other ) mutations. Results: Of 1386 patients with non squamous NSCLC, 1040 were excluded for: non metastatic or recurrent (526); KRAS not tested (356); ALK, EGFR or ROS1 positive (154); duplicate (4). Of 346 patients analysed, 202 (58%) were KRAS WT and 144 (42%) were KRAS mut , of whom 65 (45%) were KRAS G12C . 100% of pts with KRAS G12C were smokers, compared to 92% of KRAS other and 83% of KRAS WT . The prevalence of brain metastases over entire follow-up period was similar between KRAS mut and KRAS WT (33% vs 40%, p = 0.17), and KRAS G12C and KRAS other (40% vs 41%, p = 0.74). Likewise, there was no difference in the proportion of patients receiving one or multiple lines of systemic therapy. Overall survival (OS) was also similar between KRAS mut and KRAS WT (p = 0.54), and KRAS G12C and KRAS other (p = 0.39). Conclusions: In this real-world prospective cohort, patients had comparable clinical features regardless of having a KRAS mut , KRAS G12C or KRAS other mutation, or being KRAS WT . Treatment and survival were also similar between groups. While not prognostic, KRAS G12C may be an important predictive biomarker as promising KRAS G12C covalent inhibitors continue to be developed.
Cite
Citations (3)
74 Background: KRAS mutation is rare ( < 5%) in gastroesophageal cancer (GEC). However, the incidence of KRAS gene amplification (amp+), consequent protein levels, and prognostic and/or therapeutic implications are unknown. Methods: 410 GEC samples and 30 cell lines were assessed for KRAS gene copy number (GCN) by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) (n = 90), Kras expression by selected reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (Kras-SRM-MS) (n = 393), and Kras-SRM level evaluated for correlation with KRAS amp+ status (n = 73). Survival analysis was performed comparing KRAS amp+ versus non-amp+ patients. When possible, concurrent 315 gene next-generation sequencing was also performed. Four KRAS-amplified xenograft lines (CAT-2,12,14,15) were established from malignant effusions. Tumorigenic activity of KRAS amp+ lines (CAT lines, MKN-1) were assessed using MTT and soft agar assays in vitro and subcutaneous xenograft models, compared to non-amp+ lines. Inhibitory assays were performed using KRAS siRNA and CRIPSR, and commercial inhibitors targeting downstream effectors MEK and/or PIK3CA. Results: KRAS FISH revealed clustered gene amp+ in 28.9% (26/90); these patients had worse prognosis than non-amp+ patients. GCN significantly correlated with Kras expression. All KRAS amp+ cell lines significantly overexpressed Kras protein and were tumorigenic in xenograft subcutaneous models. KRAS siRNA and KRAS CRISPR of KRAS amp+ cell lines demonstrated inhibition in MTT viability and soft agar assays, compared to appropriate controls, and demonstrated significant and durable xenograft growth reduction. Conversely, inhibition using MEK and/or PI3K inhibitors demonstrated only transient growth reduction in vivo. Conclusions: KRAS gene amp+ was observed in a large subset (26%) of GEC patients, which correlated with extreme expression by mass spectrometry. Established xenograft lines serve as models to investigate therapeutic strategies for KRAS amp+ patients. Inhibition using MEK/PIK3CA inhibitors provided transient benefit for KRAS amp+ tumors while durable inhibition was observed with Kras protein knockdown, suggesting potential benefit from novel siRNA therapeutics currently in development.
Cite
Citations (0)
Abstract Background : KRAS is the most frequently mutated oncogene in cancer, however efforts to develop targeted therapies have been largely unsuccessful. Recently, two small-molecule inhibitors, AMG 510 and MRTX849, have shown promising activity in KRAS G12C-mutant solid tumors. The current study aims to assess the molecular profile of KRAS G12C in colorectal (CRC) and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tested in a clinical certified laboratory. Methods : CRC and NSCLC samples submitted for KRAS testing between 2017 and 2019 were reviewed. CRC samples were tested for KRAS and NRAS by pyrosequencing, while NSCLC samples were submitted to next generation sequencing of KRAS, NRAS, EGFR, and BRAF. Results : The dataset comprised 4,897 CRC and 4,686 NSCLC samples. Among CRC samples, KRAS was mutated in 2,354 (48.1%). Most frequent codon 12 mutations were G12D in 731 samples (15.2%) and G12V in 462 (9.6%), followed by G12C in 167 (3.4%). KRAS mutations were more frequent in females than males (p=0.003), however this difference was exclusive of non-G12C mutants (p<0.001). KRAS mutation frequency was lower in the South and North regions (p=0.003), but again KRAS G12C did not differ significantly (p=0.80). In NSCLC, KRAS mutations were found in 1,004 samples (21.4%). As opposed to CRC samples, G12C was the most common mutation in KRAS, in 346 cases (7.4%). The frequency of KRAS G12C was higher in the South and Southeast regions (p=0.012), and lower in patients younger than 50 years (p<0.001). KRAS G12C mutations were largely mutually exclusive with other driver mutations; only 11 NSCLC (3.2%) and 3 CRC (1.8%) cases had relevant co-mutations. Conclusions : KRAS G12C presents in frequencies higher than several other driver mutations, represent a large volume of patients in absolute numbers. KRAS testing should be considered in all CRC and NSCLC patients, independently of clinical or demographic characteristics.
Pyrosequencing
Cite
Citations (2)
Background Although most people with relapsing onset multiple sclerosis (R-MS) eventually transition to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS), little is known about disability progression in SPMS. Methods All R-MS patients in the Cardiff MS registry were included. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine a) hazard of converting to SPMS and b) hazard of attaining EDSS 6.0 and 8.0 in SPMS. Results 1611 R-MS patients were included. Older age at MS onset (hazard ratio [HR] 1.02, 95%CI 1.01–1.03), male sex (HR 1.71, 95%CI 1.41–2.08), and residual disability after onset (HR 1.38, 95%CI 1.11–1.71) were asso- ciated with increased hazard of SPMS. Male sex (EDSS 6.0 HR 1.41 [1.04–1.90], EDSS 8.0 HR 1.75 [1.14–2.69]) and higher EDSS at SPMS onset (EDSS 6.0 HR 1.31 [1.17–1.46]; EDSS 8.0 HR 1.38 [1.19–1.61]) were associated with increased hazard of reaching disability milestones, while older age at SPMS was associated with a lower hazard of progression (EDSS 6.0 HR 0.94 [0.92–0.96]; EDSS 8.0: HR 0.92 [0.90–0.95]). Conclusions Different factors are associated with hazard of SPMS compared to hazard of disability progres- sion after SPMS onset. These data may be used to plan services, and provide a baseline for comparison for future interventional studies and has relevance for new treatments for SPMS RobertsonNP@cardiff.ac.uk
Cite
Citations (0)
70 Background: KRAS mutations are common oncogenic events across cancers, but effective RAS-directed therapies are lacking. However, recent studies support use of PD-1 blockade in most subsets of lung cancer with KRAS short variant mutations (KRAS SV ) (PMID: 28039262), and preclinical data supports combined MEK and SHP2 inhibition in KRAS amplified ( KRAS a ) GEA (PMID: 30093730). We sought to explore the landscape of KRAS altered GEA and compare genomic profiles of KRAS-altered and KRAS wild-type (WT) cases for biomarkers of response to targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Methods: 6,667 tissue specimens from patients with advanced GEA were assayed using hybrid capture-based comprehensive genomic profiling. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was determined on up to 1.1 Mbp of sequenced DNA and microsatellite instability (MSI) was determined on 95 or 114 loci. Descriptive statistics were used to compare among subgroups. Results: KRAS SV and KRAS a were identified in 11% and 5.8% of gastric adenocarcinoma (GA), respectively, and in 7.2% and 17% of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA), respectively. KRAS a and KRAS SV were nearly mutually exclusive, co-occurring in only 4.4% of KRAS altered cases. ERBB2 alterations were less common in KRAS SV and KRAS a GEA (both 9%) as compared with KRAS WT GEA (19%) (p = 1.9E-16). EGFR a was less common in KRAS SV versus KRAS a GEA (1.9% vs. 9.3%, p = 2.6E-8), whereas PIK3CA SV was more common in KRAS SV versus KRAS a (16% vs 5.0%, p = 1.5E-11). Median TMB for all groups was similar; however, KRAS SV GEA had a higher mean TMB (9.7 mut/Mb) as compared to KRAS a (5.1 mut/Mb, p = 5.0E-12) and KRAS WT cases (5.8 mut/Mb, p = 2.2E-07). KRAS codon 12/13 accounted for > 80% of predicted pathogenic mutations. MSI-high was also more prevalent in KRAS SV (11.4%) versus KRAS a (0.9%, p = 4.8E-15) and KRAS WT GEA (3.0%, p = 1.8E-25). MSI-high KRAS SV GEA was associated with older patient age (median 72 years) and with high TMB (median 40.9 mut/mb). Conclusions: GA was enriched for KRAS mutation whereas EA was enriched for KRAS amplification. KRAS WT versus KRAS SV versus KRAS a each presented distinct genomic profiles. KRAS a in the absence of KRAS mutation exists in 11% of GEA and warrants further exploration to inform combination treatment strategies.
Microsatellite Instability
Cite
Citations (1)
Concomitant
Cite
Citations (0)
Abstract Background KRAS is the most frequently mutated oncogene in cancer, however efforts to develop targeted therapies have been largely unsuccessful. Recently, two small-molecule inhibitors, AMG 510 and MRTX849, have shown promising activity in KRAS G12C-mutant solid tumors. The current study aims to assess the molecular profile of KRAS G12C in colorectal (CRC) and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tested in a clinical certified laboratory. Methods CRC and NSCLC samples submitted for KRAS testing between 2017 and 2019 were reviewed. CRC samples were tested for KRAS and NRAS by pyrosequencing, while NSCLC samples were submitted to next generation sequencing of KRAS , NRAS , EGFR , and BRAF . Results The dataset comprised 4897 CRC and 4686 NSCLC samples. Among CRC samples, KRAS was mutated in 2354 (48.1%). Most frequent codon 12 mutations were G12D in 731 samples (14.9%) and G12V in 522 (10.7%), followed by G12C in 167 (3.4%). KRAS mutations were more frequent in females than males ( p = 0.003), however this difference was exclusive of non-G12C mutants ( p < 0.001). KRAS mutation frequency was lower in the South and North regions ( p = 0.003), but again KRAS G12C did not differ significantly ( p = 0.80). In NSCLC, KRAS mutations were found in 1004 samples (21.4%). As opposed to CRC samples, G12C was the most common mutation in KRAS , in 346 cases (7.4%). The frequency of KRAS G12C was higher in the South and Southeast regions ( p = 0.012), and lower in patients younger than 50 years ( p < 0.001). KRAS G12C mutations were largely mutually exclusive with other driver mutations; only 11 NSCLC (3.2%) and 1 CRC (0.6%) cases had relevant co-mutations. Conclusions KRAS G12C presents in frequencies higher than several other driver mutations, and may represent a large volume of patients in absolute numbers. KRAS testing should be considered in all CRC and NSCLC patients, independently of clinical or demographic characteristics.
Surgical oncology
Pyrosequencing
Cite
Citations (31)
4065 Background: KRAS mutation is rare (< 5%) in gastroesophageal cancer (GEC). However, the incidence of KRAS gene amplification (amp+), consequent protein levels, and prognostic and/or therapeutic implications are unknown. Methods: 410 GEC samples and 30 cell lines were assessed for KRAS gene copy number (GCN) by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) (n = 90), Kras expression by selected reaction monitoring mass spectrometry (Kras-SRM-MS) (n = 393), and Kras-SRM level evaluated for correlation with KRAS amp+ status (n = 73). Survival analysis was performed comparing KRAS amp+ versus non-amp+ patients. When possible, concurrent 315 gene next-generation sequencing was also performed. Four KRAS-amplified xenograft lines (CAT-2,12,14,15) were established from malignant effusions. Tumorigenic activity of KRAS amp+ lines (CAT lines, MKN-1) were assessed using MTT and soft agar assays in vitro and subcutaneous xenograft models, compared to non-amp+ lines. Inhibitory assays were performed using KRAS siRNA and CRIPSR, and commercial inhibitors targeting downstream effectors MEK and/or PIK3CA. Results: KRAS FISH revealed clustered gene amp+ in 28.9% (26/90); these patients had worse prognosis than non-amp+ patients. GCN significantly correlated with Kras expression. All KRAS amp+ cell lines significantly overexpressed Kras protein and were tumorigenic in xenograft subcutaneous models. KRAS siRNA and KRAS CRISPR of KRAS amp+ cell lines demonstrated inhibition in MTT viability and soft agar assays, compared to appropriate controls, and demonstrated significant and durable xenograft growth reduction. Conversely, inhibition using MEK and/or PI3K inhibitors demonstrated only transient growth reduction in vivo. Conclusions: KRAS gene amp+ was observed in a large subset (26%) of GEC patients, which correlated with extreme expression by mass spectrometry. Established xenograft lines serve as models to investigate therapeutic strategies for KRAS amp+ patients. Inhibition using MEK/PIK3CA inhibitors provided transient benefit for KRAS amp+ tumors while durable inhibition was observed with Kras protein knockdown, suggesting potential benefit from novel siRNA therapeutics currently in development.
Cite
Citations (0)
The hazard ratio and median survival time are the routine indicators in survival analysis. We briefly introduced the relationship between hazard ratio and median survival time and the role of proportional hazard assumption. We compared 110 pairs of hazard ratio and median survival time ratio in 58 articles and demonstrated the reasons for the difference by examples. The results showed that the hazard ratio estimated by the Cox regression model is unreasonable and not equivalent to median survival time ratio when the proportional hazard assumption is not met. Therefore, before performing the Cox regression model, the proportional hazard assumption should be tested first. If proportional hazard assumption is met, Cox regression model can be used; if proportional hazard assumption is not met, restricted mean survival times is suggested.风险比（hazard ratio，HR）和中位生存时间是生存分析时的常规分析和报告指标。本文简要介绍了HR和中位生存时间的关系以及比例风险假定在这两者之间的作用，分析了检索出的58篇文献中的110对风险比和中位生存时间比的差异，并通过实例阐明了产生这种差异的原因。结果表明，在不满足比例风险假定时，Cox回归模型计算得到的风险比是不合理的，且与中位生存时间之比不等价。因此，在使用Cox回归模型前，应先进行比例风险假定的检验，只有符合比例风险假定时才能使用该模型；当不符合比例风险假定时，建议使用限制性平均生存时间。.
Cite
Citations (0)