Literature DB >> 23528430

Heterogeneity of colorectal cancer (CRC) in reference to KRAS proto-oncogene utilizing WAVE technology.

K Perez1, R Walsh, K Brilliant, L Noble, E Yakirevich, V Breese, C Jackson, D Chatterjee, V Pricolo, L Roth, N Shah, T Cataldo, H Safran, D Hixson, P Quesenberry.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: New drugs targeting specific genes required for unregulated growth and metastases have improved survival rates for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Resistance to monoclonal antibodies specific for the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has been attributed to the presence of activating point mutations in the proto-oncogene KRAS. The use of EGFR inhibitor monotherapy in patients that have KRAS wild type has produced response rates of only 10-20%. The molecular basis for clinical resistance remains poorly understood. We propose two possible explanations to explain these low response rates; 1) levels of resistant CRC cells carrying mutated KRAS are below the sensitivity of standard direct sequencing modalities (<5%) or 2) the standard practice of analyzing a single area within a heterogeneous tumor is a practice that can overlook areas with mutated KRAS.
METHODS: In a collaborative effort with the surgical and molecular pathology departments, 3 formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue blocks of human CRC were obtained from the human tissue bank maintained by the Lifespan Pathology Department and/or the human tissue bank maintained by the Molecular Pathology Core of the COBRE for Cancer Research Development. The three specimens previously demonstrated KRAS mutations detected by the Applied Biosystems Kit. The Wave system 4500 (high performance ion-pairing liquid chromatography (IP-HPLC)) was utilized to evaluate tissue for the presence of KRAS proto-oncogene mutations at codons 12 and 13.
RESULTS: Initially, the sensitivity of WAVE technology was compared with direct sequencing by evaluating a dilutional series. WAVE detected mutant alleles at levels of 2.5% compared to 20% performed with standard direct sequencing. Samples from three patients were evaluated by WAVE technology. Eight samples from patient 1 were analyzed. In two of eight samples, no mutations were detected at concentrations as low as 5%. In one sample a mutation was noted by WAVE and not by direct sequencing. All four samples from patient 2 tested positive for Exon 12/13 mutations. Of the seven samples from patient 3, five were positive for Exon 12/13 mutations and two were negative for Exon 12/13 mutations.
CONCLUSION: In these studies the analysis of three patients' colorectal cancer tissues were analyzed utilizing the WAVE technology. Results demonstrated a greater degree of sensitivity in mutation detection when compared to standard sequencing. These studies also demonstrated heterogeneity of expression of KRAS mutations between areas of the tissue samples at a genomic level. The low clinical response rates to EGFR inhibition might be explained by the variation in mutation presence, which was dependent upon the region examined. The heterogeneity demonstrated in these studies provides another phenotypic variant that will impact clinical care. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colorectal cancer; KRAS; WAVE system

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23528430      PMCID: PMC4015467          DOI: 10.1016/j.yexmp.2013.01.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Mol Pathol        ISSN: 0014-4800            Impact factor:   3.362


  19 in total

1.  Metastatic colorectal cancer KRAS genotyping in routine practice: results and pitfalls.

Authors:  Aude Lamy; France Blanchard; Florence Le Pessot; Richard Sesboüé; Frédéric Di Fiore; Jessie Bossut; Elodie Fiant; Thierry Frébourg; Jean-Christophe Sabourin
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2011-04-22       Impact factor: 7.842

Review 2.  KRAS mutation testing for predicting response to anti-EGFR therapy for colorectal carcinoma: proposal for an European quality assurance program.

Authors:  J H J M van Krieken; A Jung; T Kirchner; F Carneiro; R Seruca; F T Bosman; P Quirke; J F Fléjou; T Plato Hansen; G de Hertogh; P Jares; C Langner; G Hoefler; M Ligtenberg; D Tiniakos; S Tejpar; G Bevilacqua; A Ensari
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2008-09-18       Impact factor: 4.064

3.  COLD-PCR enrichment of rare cancer mutations prior to targeted amplicon resequencing.

Authors:  Coren A Milbury; Mick Correll; John Quackenbush; Renee Rubio; G Mike Makrigiorgos
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2011-12-21       Impact factor: 8.327

4.  KRAS mutation status is predictive of response to cetuximab therapy in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Astrid Lièvre; Jean-Baptiste Bachet; Delphine Le Corre; Valérie Boige; Bruno Landi; Jean-François Emile; Jean-François Côté; Gorana Tomasic; Christophe Penna; Michel Ducreux; Philippe Rougier; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Pierre Laurent-Puig
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2006-04-15       Impact factor: 12.701

5.  Mutation detection by clonal sequencing of PCR amplicons and grouped read typing is applicable to clinical diagnostics.

Authors:  Philip A Chambers; Lucy F Stead; Joanne E Morgan; Ian M Carr; Kate M Sutton; Christopher M Watson; Victoria Crowe; Helen Dickinson; Paul Roberts; Clive Mulatero; Matthew Seymour; Alexander F Markham; Paul M Waring; Philip Quirke; Graham R Taylor
Journal:  Hum Mutat       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 4.878

6.  A rapid and sensitive enzymatic method for epidermal growth factor receptor mutation screening.

Authors:  Pasi A Jänne; Ana M Borras; Yanan Kuang; Andrew M Rogers; Victoria A Joshi; Hema Liyanage; Neal Lindeman; Jeffrey C Lee; Balazs Halmos; Elizabeth A Maher; Robert J Distel; Matthew Meyerson; Bruce E Johnson
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2006-02-01       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  Chemotherapy, bevacizumab, and cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Jolien Tol; Miriam Koopman; Annemieke Cats; Cees J Rodenburg; Geert J M Creemers; Jolanda G Schrama; Frans L G Erdkamp; Allert H Vos; Cees J van Groeningen; Harm A M Sinnige; Dirk J Richel; Emile E Voest; Jeroen R Dijkstra; Marianne E Vink-Börger; Ninja F Antonini; Linda Mol; Johan H J M van Krieken; Otilia Dalesio; Cornelis J A Punt
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-02-05       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing.

Authors:  Marco Gerlinger; Andrew J Rowan; Stuart Horswell; James Larkin; David Endesfelder; Eva Gronroos; Pierre Martinez; Nicholas Matthews; Aengus Stewart; Charles Swanton; M Math; Patrick Tarpey; Ignacio Varela; Benjamin Phillimore; Sharmin Begum; Neil Q McDonald; Adam Butler; David Jones; Keiran Raine; Calli Latimer; Claudio R Santos; Mahrokh Nohadani; Aron C Eklund; Bradley Spencer-Dene; Graham Clark; Lisa Pickering; Gordon Stamp; Martin Gore; Zoltan Szallasi; Julian Downward; P Andrew Futreal
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Detection of low prevalence somatic mutations in solid tumors with ultra-deep targeted sequencing.

Authors:  Olivier Harismendy; Richard B Schwab; Lei Bao; Jeff Olson; Sophie Rozenzhak; Steve K Kotsopoulos; Stephanie Pond; Brian Crain; Mark S Chee; Karen Messer; Darren R Link; Kelly A Frazer
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 13.583

10.  Intra-tumoral heterogeneity of KRAS and BRAF mutation status in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC) and cost-effectiveness of multiple sample testing.

Authors:  Susan D Richman; Philip Chambers; Matthew T Seymour; Catherine Daly; Sophie Grant; Gemma Hemmings; Philip Quirke
Journal:  Anal Cell Pathol (Amst)       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 2.916

View more
  7 in total

1.  Updated guidelines for biomarker testing in colorectal carcinoma: a national consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology.

Authors:  P García-Alfonso; J García-Foncillas; R Salazar; P Pérez-Segura; R García-Carbonero; E Musulén-Palet; M Cuatrecasas; S Landolfi; S Ramón Y Cajal; S Navarro
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2014-11-06       Impact factor: 3.405

2.  Mutant KRAS Enhances Tumor Cell Fitness by Upregulating Stress Granules.

Authors:  Elda Grabocka; Dafna Bar-Sagi
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 41.582

3.  Tumour heterogeneity in the clinic.

Authors:  Philippe L Bedard; Aaron R Hansen; Mark J Ratain; Lillian L Siu
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2013-09-19       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 4.  Dual PET and Near-Infrared Fluorescence Imaging Probes as Tools for Imaging in Oncology.

Authors:  Fei-Fei An; Mark Chan; Harikrishna Kommidi; Richard Ting
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Bayesian hierarchical meta-analytic methods for modeling surrogate relationships that vary across treatment classes using aggregate data.

Authors:  Tasos Papanikos; John R Thompson; Keith R Abrams; Nicolas Städler; Oriana Ciani; Rod Taylor; Sylwia Bujkiewicz
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-01-28       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 6.  To go or not to go? Biological logic gating engineered T cells.

Authors:  Rebecca C Abbott; Hannah E Hughes-Parry; Misty R Jenkins
Journal:  J Immunother Cancer       Date:  2022-04       Impact factor: 13.751

7.  Spheroid-Formation (Colonosphere) Assay for in Vitro Assessment and Expansion of Stem Cells in Colon Cancer.

Authors:  Sameerah Shaheen; Mehreen Ahmed; Federica Lorenzi; Abdolrahman S Nateri
Journal:  Stem Cell Rev Rep       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 5.739

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.