Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2018
Lobular Carcinomas In Situ Display Intralesion Genetic Heterogeneity and Clonal Evolution in the Progression to Invasive Lobular Carcinoma.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lee Ju Youn, Schizas Michail, Geyer Felipe C, Selenica Pier, Piscuoglio Salvatore, Sakr Rita A, Ng Charlotte K Y, Carniello Jose V Scarpa, Towers Russell, Giri Dilip D, de Andrade Victor P, Papanastasiou Anastasios D, Viale Agnes, Harris Reuben S, Solit David B, Weigelt Britta, Reis-Filho Jorge S, King Tari A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is a preinvasive lesion of the breast. We sought to define its genomic landscape, whether intralesion genetic heterogeneity is present in LCIS, and the clonal relatedness between LCIS and invasive breast cancers.Experimental Design: We reanalyzed whole-exome sequencing (WES) data and performed a targeted amplicon sequencing validation of mutations identified in 43 LCIS and 27 synchronous more clinically advanced lesions from 24 patients [9 ductal carcinomas in situ (DCIS), 13 invasive lobular carcinomas (ILC), and 5 invasive ductal carcinomas (IDC)]. Somatic genetic alterations, mutational signatures, clonal composition, and phylogenetic trees were defined using validated computational methods.
RESULTS: WES of 43 LCIS lesions revealed a genomic profile similar to that previously reported for ILCs, with CDH1 mutations present in 81% of the lesions. Forty-two percent (18/43) of LCIS were found to be clonally related to synchronous DCIS and/or ILCs, with clonal evolutionary patterns indicative of clonal selection and/or parallel/branched progression. Intralesion genetic heterogeneity was higher among LCIS clonally related to DCIS/ILC than in those nonclonally related to DCIS/ILC. A shift from aging to APOBEC-related mutational processes was observed in the progression from LCIS to DCIS and/or ILC in a subset of cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the contention that LCIS has a repertoire of somatic genetic alterations similar to that of ILCs, and likely constitutes a nonobligate precursor of breast cancer. Intralesion genetic heterogeneity is observed in LCIS and should be considered in studies aiming to develop biomarkers of progression from LCIS to more advanced lesions.
RESULTS: WES of 43 LCIS lesions revealed a genomic profile similar to that previously reported for ILCs, with CDH1 mutations present in 81% of the lesions. Forty-two percent (18/43) of LCIS were found to be clonally related to synchronous DCIS and/or ILCs, with clonal evolutionary patterns indicative of clonal selection and/or parallel/branched progression. Intralesion genetic heterogeneity was higher among LCIS clonally related to DCIS/ILC than in those nonclonally related to DCIS/ILC. A shift from aging to APOBEC-related mutational processes was observed in the progression from LCIS to DCIS and/or ILC in a subset of cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the contention that LCIS has a repertoire of somatic genetic alterations similar to that of ILCs, and likely constitutes a nonobligate precursor of breast cancer. Intralesion genetic heterogeneity is observed in LCIS and should be considered in studies aiming to develop biomarkers of progression from LCIS to more advanced lesions.