Tomomitsu Tahara1, Eiichiro Yamamoto2, Priyanka Madireddi1, Hiromu Suzuki3, Reo Maruyama3, Woonbok Chung1, Judith Garriga1, Jaroslav Jelinek1, Hiro-O Yamano4, Tamotsu Sugai5, Yutaka Kondo6, Minoru Toyota3, Jean-Pierre J Issa1, Marcos R H Estécio7. 1. Fels Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Biology, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 2. First Department of Internal Medicine, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Japan; Department of Molecular Biology, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Japan. 3. Department of Molecular Biology, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo, Japan. 4. Department of Gastroenterology, Akita Red Cross Hospital, Akita, Japan. 5. Department of Pathology, Iwate Medical University, Morioka, Japan. 6. Division of Molecular Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, Nagoya, Japan. 7. Department of Molecular Carcinogenesis, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Center for Cancer Epigenetics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: mestecio@mdanderson.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Subgroups of colorectal carcinomas (CRCs) characterized by DNA methylation anomalies are termed CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP)1, CIMP2, or CIMP-negative. The pathogenesis of CIMP1 colorectal carcinomas, and their effects on patients' prognoses and responses to treatment, differ from those of other CRCs. We sought to identify genetic somatic alterations associated with CIMP1 CRCs. METHODS: We examined genomic DNA samples from 100 primary CRCs, 10 adenomas, and adjacent normal-appearing mucosae from patients undergoing surgery or colonoscopy at 3 tertiary medical centers. We performed exome sequencing of 16 colorectal tumors and their adjacent normal tissues. Extensive comparison with known somatic alterations in CRCs allowed segregation of CIMP1-exclusive alterations. The prevalence of mutations in selected genes was determined from an independent cohort. RESULTS: We found that genes that regulate chromatin were mutated in CIMP1 CRCs; the highest rates of mutation were observed in CHD7 and CHD8, which encode members of the chromodomain helicase/adenosine triphosphate-dependent chromatin remodeling family. Somatic mutations in these 2 genes were detected in 5 of 9 CIMP1 CRCs. A prevalence screen showed that nonsilencing mutations in CHD7 and CHD8 occurred significantly more frequently in CIMP1 tumors (18 of 42 [43%]) than in CIMP2 (3 of 34 [9%]; P < .01) or CIMP-negative tumors (2 of 34 [6%]; P < .001). CIMP1 markers had increased binding by CHD7, compared with all genes. Genes altered in patients with CHARGE syndrome (congenital malformations involving the central nervous system, eye, ear, nose, and mediastinal organs) who had CHD7 mutations were also altered in CRCs with mutations in CHD7. CONCLUSIONS: Aberrations in chromatin remodeling could contribute to the development of CIMP1 CRCs. A better understanding of the biological determinants of CRCs can be achieved when these tumors are categorized according to their epigenetic status.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Subgroups of colorectal carcinomas (CRCs) characterized by DNA methylation anomalies are termed CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP)1, CIMP2, or CIMP-negative. The pathogenesis of CIMP1 colorectal carcinomas, and their effects on patients' prognoses and responses to treatment, differ from those of other CRCs. We sought to identify genetic somatic alterations associated with CIMP1 CRCs. METHODS: We examined genomic DNA samples from 100 primary CRCs, 10adenomas, and adjacent normal-appearing mucosae from patients undergoing surgery or colonoscopy at 3 tertiary medical centers. We performed exome sequencing of 16 colorectal tumors and their adjacent normal tissues. Extensive comparison with known somatic alterations in CRCs allowed segregation of CIMP1-exclusive alterations. The prevalence of mutations in selected genes was determined from an independent cohort. RESULTS: We found that genes that regulate chromatin were mutated in CIMP1 CRCs; the highest rates of mutation were observed in CHD7 and CHD8, which encode members of the chromodomain helicase/adenosine triphosphate-dependent chromatin remodeling family. Somatic mutations in these 2 genes were detected in 5 of 9 CIMP1 CRCs. A prevalence screen showed that nonsilencing mutations in CHD7 and CHD8 occurred significantly more frequently in CIMP1 tumors (18 of 42 [43%]) than in CIMP2 (3 of 34 [9%]; P < .01) or CIMP-negative tumors (2 of 34 [6%]; P < .001). CIMP1 markers had increased binding by CHD7, compared with all genes. Genes altered in patients with CHARGE syndrome (congenital malformations involving the central nervous system, eye, ear, nose, and mediastinal organs) who had CHD7 mutations were also altered in CRCs with mutations in CHD7. CONCLUSIONS: Aberrations in chromatin remodeling could contribute to the development of CIMP1 CRCs. A better understanding of the biological determinants of CRCs can be achieved when these tumors are categorized according to their epigenetic status.
Authors: Daniel J Weisenberger; Kimberly D Siegmund; Mihaela Campan; Joanne Young; Tiffany I Long; Mark A Faasse; Gyeong Hoon Kang; Martin Widschwendter; Deborah Weener; Daniel Buchanan; Hoey Koh; Lisa Simms; Melissa Barker; Barbara Leggett; Joan Levine; Myungjin Kim; Amy J French; Stephen N Thibodeau; Jeremy Jass; Robert Haile; Peter W Laird Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2006-06-25 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Tobias Sjöblom; Siân Jones; Laura D Wood; D Williams Parsons; Jimmy Lin; Thomas D Barber; Diana Mandelker; Rebecca J Leary; Janine Ptak; Natalie Silliman; Steve Szabo; Phillip Buckhaults; Christopher Farrell; Paul Meeh; Sanford D Markowitz; Joseph Willis; Dawn Dawson; James K V Willson; Adi F Gazdar; James Hartigan; Leo Wu; Changsheng Liu; Giovanni Parmigiani; Ben Ho Park; Kurtis E Bachman; Nickolas Papadopoulos; Bert Vogelstein; Kenneth W Kinzler; Victor E Velculescu Journal: Science Date: 2006-09-07 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Seema R Lalani; Arsalan M Safiullah; Susan D Fernbach; Karine G Harutyunyan; Christina Thaller; Leif E Peterson; John D McPherson; Richard A Gibbs; Lisa D White; Margaret Hefner; Sandra L H Davenport; John M Graham; Carlos A Bacino; Nancy L Glass; Jeffrey A Towbin; William J Craigen; Steven R Neish; Angela E Lin; John W Belmont Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2005-12-29 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Marcos R H Estécio; Pearlly S Yan; Ashraf E K Ibrahim; Carmen S Tellez; Lanlan Shen; Tim H-M Huang; Jean-Pierre J Issa Journal: Genome Res Date: 2007-09-04 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: Nathaniel H Boyd; Kiera Walker; Adetokunbo Ayokanmbi; Emily R Gordon; Julia Whetsel; Cynthia M Smith; Richard G Sanchez; Farah D Lubin; Asmi Chakraborty; Anh Nhat Tran; Cameron Herting; Dolores Hambardzumyan; G Yancey Gillespie; James R Hackney; Sara J Cooper; Kai Jiao; Anita B Hjelmeland Journal: Stem Cells Date: 2019-01-24 Impact factor: 6.277
Authors: Aarathi Sugathan; Marta Biagioli; Christelle Golzio; Serkan Erdin; Ian Blumenthal; Poornima Manavalan; Ashok Ragavendran; Harrison Brand; Diane Lucente; Judith Miles; Steven D Sheridan; Alexei Stortchevoi; Manolis Kellis; Stephen J Haggarty; Nicholas Katsanis; James F Gusella; Michael E Talkowski Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-10-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Crystal S Seldon; Lauren E Colbert; William A Hall; Sarah B Fisher; David S Yu; Jerome C Landry Journal: World J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2016-04-15