| Literature DB >> 23403822 |
G Nishikawa1, S Sekine, R Ogawa, A Matsubara, T Mori, H Taniguchi, R Kushima, N Hiraoka, K Tsuta, H Tsuda, Y Kanai.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The molecular basis for the development of appendiceal mucinous tumours, which can be a cause of pseudomyxoma peritonei, remains largely unknown.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23403822 PMCID: PMC3590682 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.47
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Cancer ISSN: 0007-0920 Impact factor: 7.640
Primer sequences
| Mutation analysis | ACTGTTTCGGTTGGCTTTGGTGA | AGGGACTGGGGTGAATGTCAAGA | | |
| Mutation analysis | GACATTCACCCCAGTCCCTCTGG | GAACAGCCAAGCCCACAGCA | | |
| Mutation analysis | AGGCCTGCTGAAAATGACTG | GGTCCTGCACCAGTAATATGCA | | |
| RT–PCR | GACTGCCATCATCTTCGTGGTG | GAGTGGTGTAGCGAGCGAACT | | |
| RT–PCR | CAAGTTGACCAGTGCCGTTC | GACACGACCTCCGACCAC | | |
| RT–PCR | AGACCTGTACGCCAACACAG | CGGACTCGTCATACTCCTGC | | |
| qRT–PCR | GACCTCCAGCACAGTTTTATCA | GGTGGTCCTCATTGATCCAG | #34 | |
| qRT–PCR | AGCACCAGTGCCCAAGTCT | ACTCCTGGCAGTCCATGC | #43 | |
| qRT–PCR | CGCCCTGCCTATCTGTATTC | TCCCCACAGGGAGTGTGTAG | #57 |
Abbreviation: RT–PCR=reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction.
Figure 1Histology of appendiceal mucinous tumours. (A–E) Histological and immunohistochemical findings of LAMN (A–C, E, F) and MAC (D). LAMN exhibiting a villous growth pattern (A). The tumour cells had low-grade cytological atypia. Mucin pools were present in the subserosal layer and were partly lined by mucinous epithelium (arrowheads). The stroma showed hyalinizing fibrosis (B). Peritoneal deposits of LAMN (C). Low-grade tumour cells grew on the surface of the omentum without evidence of stromal invasion (arrowheads) (C). MAC. Abundant mucin production and a frankly invasive growth pattern were evident. The tumour cells showed cytologically high-grade atypia, with a high nuclear–cytoplasmic ratio and prominent nucleoli (inset) (D). LAMN exhibiting diffuse MUC2 expression (E) and focal MUC5AC expression (F).
Clinicopathological features and mutation statuses of appendiceal mucinous tumours
| 1 | 30/M | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | − | — | c.35G>A |
| 2 | 59/F | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.602G>A | c.35G>A |
| 3 | 72/M | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | − | — | c.34G>T |
| 4 | 63/F | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.601C>T | c.35G>T |
| 5 | 62/F | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | − | — | — |
| 6 | 53/M | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | 1+ | c.602G>A | c.38G>A |
| 7 | 71/F | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | 1+ | — | c.35G>T |
| 8 | 77/F | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.602G>A | — |
| 9 | 82/M | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.602G>A | c.35G>A |
| 10 | 72/M | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | 1+ | c.602G>A | c.35G>T |
| 11 | 55/F | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | 1+ | — | c.38G>A |
| 12 | 55/M | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | − | — | c.35G>A |
| 13 | 72/M | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | − | — | c.35G>A |
| 14 | 40/M | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | − | — | c.35G>A |
| 15 | 84/F | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.602G>A | c.35G>T |
| 16 | 70/M | LAMN | − | − | − | 2+ | 1+ | — | c.35G>A |
| 17 | 66/F | LAMN | + | − | − | 2+ | 2+ | — | c.35G>C |
| 18 | 56/F | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | − | — | c.35G>A |
| 19 | 52/F | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.601C>T | c.35G>T |
| 20 | 82/F | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | 1+ | — | c.38G>A |
| 21 | 47/M | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | 2+ | — | c.35G>A |
| 22 | 52/F | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | − | c.601C>T, c.602G>A | c.35G>A |
| 23 | 59/M | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.601C>T | c.35G>T |
| 24 | 69/F | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | 2+ | — | c.35G>T |
| 25 | 51/F | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | 1+ | — | c.35G>T |
| 26 | 49/F | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | 1+ | — | c.35G>T |
| 27 | 69/F | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.602G>A | c.35G>T |
| 28 | 64/F | LAMN | + | + | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.601C>T, c.602G>A | c.38G>A |
| 29 | 56/M | LAMN | N/A | + | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.601C>T | c.35G>A |
| 30 | 57/F | LAMN | N/A | + | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.601C>T | c.35G>A |
| 31 | 67/F | LAMN | N/A | + | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.601C>A | c.35G>A |
| 32 | 68/M | LAMN | N/A | + | − | 2+ | 2+ | c.601C>T | c.35G>T |
| 33 | 58/F | MAC | + | − | − | 2+ | 1+ | — | c.34G>A |
| 34 | 57/M | MAC | + | − | + | 2+ | 1+ | — | c.35G>A |
| 35 | 51/M | MAC | + | + | + | − | 1+ | — | c.35G>A |
Abbreviations: LN=lymph node metastasis; M=male; F=female; LAMN=low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm; MAC=mucinous adenocarcinoma; N/A=not assessed.
The immunohistochemistry for MUC2 and MUC5AC were scored as: 0, <10% positive cells; +1, 11–50% positive cells; +2, >50% positive cells.
Tumour specimens of primary appendiceal tumours were unavailable and thus peritoneal (cases 29–31) or omental (case 32) deposits were analysed.
Figure 2GNAS and KRAS mutations in LAMNs. Representative GNAS and KRAS mutations identified in LAMNs. Missense mutations are indicated by the arrowheads. All the samples were sequenced using reverse primers.
GNAS and KRAS mutations in mucinous tumours of diverse organs
| | | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Appendix | Low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm | 32 | 16 (50%) | 1 | c.601C>A | p.R201S | 30 (94%) | 1 | c.34G>T | p.G12C |
| | | | | 6 | c.601C>T | p.R201C | | 13 | c.35G>A | p.G12D |
| | | | | 7 | c.602G>A | p.R201H | | 1 | c.35G>C | p.G12A |
| | | | | 2 | c.601C>T, c.602G>A | p.R201C, p.R201H | | 11 | c.35G>T | p.G12V |
| | | | | | | | | 4 | c.38G>A | p.G13D |
| | Mucinous adenocarcinoma | 3 | 0 | | | | 3 (100%) | 1 | c.34G>A | p.G12S |
| | | | | | | | | 2 | c.35G>A | p.G12D |
| Colorectum | Mucinous adenocarcinoma | 33 | 3 (9%) | 1 | c.601C>T | p.R201C | 9 (27%) | 4 | c.35G>A | p.G12D |
| | | | | 2 | c.602G>A | p.R201H | | 4 | c.35G>T | p.G12V |
| | | | | | | | | 1 | c.38G>A | p.G13D |
| Ovary | Mucinous cystadenoma | 23 | 2 (9%) | 1 | c.602G>A | p.R201H | 7 (30%) | 2 | c.35G>A | p.G12D |
| | | | | 1 | c.601C>T, c.602G>A | p.R201C, p.R201H | | 5 | c.35G>T | p.G12V |
| | Mucinous borderline tumour | 24 | 0 | | | | 21 (88%) | 1 | c.34G>C | p.G12R |
| | | | | | | | | 11 | c.35G>A | p.G12D |
| | | | | | | | | 8 | c.35G>T | p.G12V |
| | | | | | | | | 1 | c.37G>T | p.G13C |
| | Mucinous cystadenocarcinoma | 15 | 0 | | | | 8 (53%) | 1 | c.34G>C | p.G12R |
| | | | | | | | | 2 | c.35G>A | p.G12D |
| | | | | | | | | 5 | c.35G>T | p.G12V |
| Pancreas | Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm | 37 | 30 (81%) | 1 | c.601C>A | p.R201S | 25 (68%) | 1 | c.34G>A | p.G12S |
| | | | | 15 | c.601C>T | p.R201C | | 3 | c.34G>C | p.G12R |
| | | | | 12 | c.602G>A | p.R201H | | 7 | c.35G>A | p.G12D |
| | | | | 2 | c.601C>T, c.602G>A | p.R201C, p.R201H | | 13 | c.35G>T | p.G12V |
| | | | | | | | | 1 | c.38G>A | p.G13D |
| Lung | Mucinous adenocarcinoma | 18 | 0 | | | | 14 (78%) | 2 | c.34G>T | p.G12C |
| | | | | | | | | 7 | c.35G>A | p.G12D |
| | | | | | | | | 5 | c.35G>T | p.G12V |
| Breast | Mucinous adenocarcinoma | 36 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
N, total number of examined lesions; n, lesions with each mutation.
Formerly mucinous-bronchioloalveolar carcinoma.
Figure 3Introduction of GNAS (A) Establishment of HT29 cells stably expressing a mutant GNAS. RT–PCR analysis showed the expression of the GNAS transgene in HT29-GNASR201H cells. The Zeocin-resistant gene (Zeo) was expressed in HT29-GNASR201H cells and the mock transfectant. ACTB served as a positive control. (B) Elevated cAMP level in HT29-GNASR201H cells. The bars indicate averages+s.d. *P<0.05. (C) Cell proliferation assay in vitro. The graphs indicate the average cell numbers of triplicate experiments. HT29-GNASR201H cells did not show altered cell proliferation. (D) Cell morphology in vitro. HT29-GNASR201H cells showed prominent intracytoplasmic vacuoles compared with parental HT29 and the mock transfectant. (E) Increased mucin expression in HT29-GNASR201H cells. Cells were cultured in the presence or absence of a PKA inhibitor, H89, and the MUC2 and MUC5AC expression levels were determined using qRT–PCR. Bars indicate averages+s.d. *P<0.05 (compared with parental HT29); #P<0.05 (compared with H89–). (F) Tumourigenicity in vivo. A total of 3 × 106 cells were implanted into nude mice subcutaneously, and the tumours were weighed 3 weeks later. No significant difference in tumour weight was observed between the groups. The horizontal bars indicate the averages. (G) Histology of tumour xenografts. Parental HT29 and mock-transfected cells mainly showed a solid growth pattern with a few small intracytoplasmic lumina, whereas HT29-GNASR201H cells exhibited prominent luminal formation.