OBJECTIVES: Gynecologic carcinosarcoma is an aggressive malignancy that requires more effective treatment approaches. However, therapeutic implications regarding the specific gynecologic site of origin and the admixture of carcinomatous and sarcomatous elements that define this tumor remain uncertain. Therefore, broad genotyping was performed to identify tissue-specific somatic mutational profiles that may help direct targeted therapies in this complex neoplasia. METHODS: Genotyping was conducted on primary gynecologic carcinosarcomas arising from various disease sites (uterus, ovary, fallopian tube, vagina) and within isolated histological subcomponents. Nucleic acids extracted from diagnostic tissue were used in a genotyping platform that simultaneously queried >120 common mutations across 14 cancer genes. Mutational status was correlated with clinical variables using logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. RESULTS: Cancer gene mutations were identified in 46% of the 52 patient cohort and include TP53 (23%), PIK3CA (19%), KRAS (15%), CTNNB1 (4%) and NRAS (2%). Mutation in a single gene was observed in 31% of patient samples, while synchronous mutations involving 2 and 3 genes were noted in 13% and 2% of samples, respectively. Comparative evaluation of the carcinomatous and sarcomatous elements within a tumor demonstrated a similar mutation signature. Mutations in PIK3CA, KRAS and NRAS were exclusive to tumors of uterine origin and age-adjusted Cox proportional hazards modeling associated advanced age, stage and TP53 mutations with decreased survival in the uterine subset. CONCLUSION: While carcinosarcomas across gynecologic disease sites are histologically similar, therapeutically relevant mutations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase pathways predominated in carcinosarcomas arising in the uterus.
OBJECTIVES: Gynecologic carcinosarcoma is an aggressive malignancy that requires more effective treatment approaches. However, therapeutic implications regarding the specific gynecologic site of origin and the admixture of carcinomatous and sarcomatous elements that define this tumor remain uncertain. Therefore, broad genotyping was performed to identify tissue-specific somatic mutational profiles that may help direct targeted therapies in this complex neoplasia. METHODS: Genotyping was conducted on primary gynecologic carcinosarcomas arising from various disease sites (uterus, ovary, fallopian tube, vagina) and within isolated histological subcomponents. Nucleic acids extracted from diagnostic tissue were used in a genotyping platform that simultaneously queried >120 common mutations across 14 cancer genes. Mutational status was correlated with clinical variables using logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. RESULTS:Cancer gene mutations were identified in 46% of the 52 patient cohort and include TP53 (23%), PIK3CA (19%), KRAS (15%), CTNNB1 (4%) and NRAS (2%). Mutation in a single gene was observed in 31% of patient samples, while synchronous mutations involving 2 and 3 genes were noted in 13% and 2% of samples, respectively. Comparative evaluation of the carcinomatous and sarcomatous elements within a tumor demonstrated a similar mutation signature. Mutations in PIK3CA, KRAS and NRAS were exclusive to tumors of uterine origin and age-adjusted Cox proportional hazards modeling associated advanced age, stage and TP53 mutations with decreased survival in the uterine subset. CONCLUSION: While carcinosarcomas across gynecologic disease sites are histologically similar, therapeutically relevant mutations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase pathways predominated in carcinosarcomas arising in the uterus.
Authors: Matthieu Le Gallo; Meghan L Rudd; Mary Ellen Urick; Nancy F Hansen; Maria J Merino; David G Mutch; Paul J Goodfellow; James C Mullikin; Daphne W Bell Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-09-21 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Munveer S Bhangoo; Peter Boasberg; Pareen Mehta; Julia A Elvin; Siraj M Ali; Winnie Wu; Samuel J Klempner Journal: Oncologist Date: 2018-01-31
Authors: Susana M Campos; William E Brady; Katherine M Moxley; Roisin E O'Cearbhaill; Paula S Lee; Paul A DiSilvestro; Jacob Rotmensch; Peter G Rose; Premal H Thaker; David M O'Malley; Parviz Hanjani; Rosemary E Zuna; Martee L Hensley Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2014-03-01 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Siân Jones; Nicolas Stransky; Christine L McCord; Ethan Cerami; James Lagowski; Devon Kelly; Samuel V Angiuoli; Mark Sausen; Lisa Kann; Manish Shukla; Rosemary Makar; Laura D Wood; Luis A Diaz; Christoph Lengauer; Victor E Velculescu Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2014-09-19 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Melissa K McConechy; Lien N Hoang; Michael Herman Chui; Janine Senz; Winnie Yang; Nirit Rozenberg; Robertson Mackenzie; Jessica N McAlpine; David G Huntsman; Blaise A Clarke; Cyril Blake Gilks; Cheng-Han Lee Journal: J Pathol Clin Res Date: 2015-04-09