Literature DB >> 16444749

Molecular classification of mucoepidermoid carcinomas-prognostic significance of the MECT1-MAML2 fusion oncogene.

Afrouz Behboudi1, Fredrik Enlund, Marta Winnes, Ywonne Andrén, Anders Nordkvist, Ilmo Leivo, Emilie Flaberg, Laszlo Szekely, Antti Mäkitie, Reidar Grenman, Joachim Mark, Göran Stenman.   

Abstract

Mucoepidermoid carcinomas (MECs) of the salivary and bronchial glands are characterized by a recurrent t(11;19)(q21;p13) translocation resulting in a MECT1-MAML2 fusion in which the CREB-binding domain of the CREB coactivator MECT1 (also known as CRTC1, TORC1 or WAMTP1) is fused to the transactivation domain of the Notch coactivator MAML2. To gain further insights into the molecular pathogenesis of MECs, we cytogenetically and molecularly characterized a series of 29 MECs. A t(11;19) and/or an MECT1-MAML2 fusion was detected in more than 55% of the tumors. Several cases with cryptic rearrangements that resulted in gene fusions were detected. In fusion-negative MECs, the most common aberration was a single or multiple trisomies. Western blot and immunohistochemical studies demonstrated that the MECT1-MAML2 fusion protein was expressed in all MEC-specific cell types. In addition, cotransfection experiments showed that the fusion protein colocalized with CREB in homogeneously distributed nuclear granules. Analyses of potential downstream targets of the fusion revealed differential expression of the cAMP/CREB (FLT1 and NR4A2) and Notch (HES1 and HES5) target genes in fusion-positive and fusion-negative MECs. Moreover, clinical follow-up studies revealed that fusion-positive patients had a significantly lower risk of local recurrence, metastases, or tumor-related death compared to fusion-negative patients (P = 0.0012). When considering tumor-related deaths only, the estimated median survival for fusion-positive patients was greater than 10 years compared to 1.6 years for fusion-negative patients. These findings suggest that molecularly classifying MECs on the basis of an MECT1-MAML2 fusion is histopathologically and clinically relevant and that the fusion is a useful marker in predicting the biological behavior of MECs. 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16444749     DOI: 10.1002/gcc.20306

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer        ISSN: 1045-2257            Impact factor:   5.006


  90 in total

1.  Gene deletions and amplifications in human hepatocellular carcinomas: correlation with hepatocyte growth regulation.

Authors:  Michael A Nalesnik; George Tseng; Ying Ding; Guo-Sheng Xiang; Zhong-liang Zheng; YanPing Yu; James W Marsh; George K Michalopoulos; Jian-Hua Luo
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 4.307

Review 2.  New tricks from an old oncogene: gene fusion and copy number alterations of MYB in human cancer.

Authors:  Göran Stenman; Mattias K Andersson; Ywonne Andrén
Journal:  Cell Cycle       Date:  2010-08-28       Impact factor: 4.534

3.  The MECT1-MAML2 gene fusion and benign Warthin's tumor: is the MECT1-MAML2 gene fusion specific to mucuepidermoid carcinoma?

Authors:  Marta Winnes; Fredrik Enlund; Joachim Mark; Göran Stenman
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.568

Review 4.  Mutation-associated fusion cancer genes in solid tumors.

Authors:  Frederic J Kaye
Journal:  Mol Cancer Ther       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 6.261

5.  Fusion proteins in head and neck neoplasms: Clinical implications, genetics, and future directions for targeting.

Authors:  Derek A Escalante; He Wang; Christopher E Fundakowski
Journal:  Cancer Biol Ther       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 4.742

6.  Composite hemangioendothelioma with neuroendocrine marker expression: an aggressive variant.

Authors:  Kyle D Perry; Alyaa Al-Lbraheemi; Brian P Rubin; Jin Jen; Hongzheng Ren; Jin Sung Jang; Asha Nair; Jaime Davila; Stefan Pambuccian; Andrew Horvai; William Sukov; Henry D Tazelaar; Andrew L Folpe
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 7.842

Review 7.  Salivary mucoepidermoid carcinoma revisited.

Authors:  Andrés Coca-Pelaz; Juan P Rodrigo; Asterios Triantafyllou; Jennifer L Hunt; Alessandra Rinaldo; Primož Strojan; Missak Haigentz; William M Mendenhall; Robert P Takes; Vincent Vander Poorten; Alfio Ferlito
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-04-26       Impact factor: 2.503

8.  Correlation of Crtc1/3-Maml2 fusion status, grade and survival in mucoepidermoid carcinoma.

Authors:  Andrew C Birkeland; Susan K Foltin; Nicole L Michmerhuizen; Rebecca C Hoesli; Andrew J Rosko; Serena Byrd; Megan Yanik; Jacques E Nor; Carol R Bradford; Mark E Prince; Thomas E Carey; Jonathan B McHugh; Matthew E Spector; J Chad Brenner
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2017-03-10       Impact factor: 5.337

Review 9.  Molecular heterogeneity in mucoepidermoid carcinoma: conceptual and practical implications.

Authors:  Diana Bell; Adel K El-Naggar
Journal:  Head Neck Pathol       Date:  2013-03-05

10.  [Molecular markers in salivary gland tumors: their use in diagnostic and prognostic workup].

Authors:  A Fehr; G Stenman; J Bullerdiek; T Löning
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.011

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.