| Literature DB >> 27462774 |
Riccardo Masetti1, Ilaria Castelli1, Annalisa Astolfi2, Salvatore Nicola Bertuccio1, Valentina Indio2, Marco Togni1,3, Tamara Belotti1, Salvatore Serravalle1, Giuseppe Tarantino2, Marco Zecca4, Martina Pigazzi5, Giuseppe Basso5, Andrea Pession1, Franco Locatelli6,7.
Abstract
Despite significant improvement in treatment of childhood acute myeloid leukemia (AML), 30% of patients experience disease recurrence, which is still the major cause of treatment failure and death in these patients. To investigate molecular mechanisms underlying relapse, we performed whole-exome sequencing of diagnosis-relapse pairs and matched remission samples from 4 pediatric AML patients without recurrent cytogenetic alterations. Candidate driver mutations were selected for targeted deep sequencing at high coverage, suitable to detect small subclones (0.12%). BiCEBPα mutation was found to be stable and highly penetrant, representing a separate biological and clinical entity, unlike WT1 mutations, which were extremely unstable. Among the mutational patterns underlying relapse, we detected the acquisition of proliferative advantage by signaling activation (PTPN11 and FLT3-TKD mutations) and the increased resistance to apoptosis (hyperactivation of TYK2). We also found a previously undescribed feature of AML, consisting of a hypermutator phenotype caused by SETD2 inactivation. The consequent accumulation of new mutations promotes the adaptability of the leukemia, contributing to clonal selection. We report a novel ASXL3 mutation characterizing a very small subclone (<1%) present at diagnosis and undergoing expansion (60%) at relapse. Taken together, these findings provide molecular clues for designing optimal therapeutic strategies, in terms of target selection, adequate schedule design and reliable response-monitoring techniques.Entities:
Keywords: FLT3-TKD mutation; SETD2 mutation; acute myeloid leukemia relapse; pediatric acute myeloid leukemia; whole-exome massively parallel sequencing
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27462774 PMCID: PMC5302950 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.10778
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Clinical features of the AML patients enrolled in this study
| Patient ID | Gender | Age atdiagnosis(years) | FAB subtype | WBC atdiagnosis(109/L) | BM blastsat diagnosis(%) | WBC at relapse (109/L) | BM blastsat relapse(%) | Extramedullary involvement | Time torelapse(months) | HSCT (type) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | 3.3 | M2 | 12.01 | 70 | 3.21 | 60 | NO | 24 | YES | |
| M | 14.5 | M5 | 114.04 | 92 | 53.01 | 80 | NO | 14 | YES | |
| F | 7.4 | M4 | 4.02 | 53 | 1.7 | 70 | NO | 11 | YES | |
| M | 12.6 | M1 | 14 | 80 | 6.9 | 24 | YES (Tonsils) | 18 | YES |
patient alive and in CR;
HSCT in 1st CR;
HSCT in 2nd CR;
HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; AUTO, autologous; MFD, matched family donor; MUD, matched unrelated donor; WBC, white blood cells.
Figure 1Somatic non synonymous mutations detected by WES in 4 pediatric AML
Panel 1a: The image is a plot created with the use of Circos software (), showing all somatic mutations detected in each patient. Chromosomes are arranged clockwise from chromosome 1 to X, each grey circle represents a single patient, proceeding from AML#1 to AML#4 from the outer to the inner circle, each dot represents one mutation. Panel 1b: Mutations are grouped into functional categories of genes involved according to Pubmed annotation. Each box represents a single mutation, each color represents a distinct patient.
Results of targeted deep sequencing of candidate driver mutations
| Gene | Patient | Chr | Start | Ref | Alt | cDNA | Protein | MF at diagnosis | Inferred clone size at diagnosis | MF at remission | MF at relapse | Inferred clone size at relapse |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TYK2 | AML#1 | 19 | 10467264 | A | T | c.T2597A | p.L866H | 43,0% | 80-90% | 0,40% | 14,9% | 30% |
| RREB1 | AML#2 | 6 | 7231420 | G | A | c.G3088A | p.V1030M | 57,6% | 100% | ND | 53,1% | 100% |
| PSIP1 | AML#2 | 9 | 15469966 | G | T | c.C1003A | p.P335T | ND | 0% | ND | 43,9% | 40-50% |
| ASXL3 | AML#2 | 18 | 31324221 | C | T | c.C4409T | p.P1470L | 0,3% | <1% | ND | 29,7% | 60% |
| WT1 | AML#2 | 11 | 32438075 | C | G | c.G962C | p.G321A | ND | 0% | ND | 40,0% | 40% |
| CEBPA | AML#2 | 19 | 33792384 | - | CTG | c.937_938 insCAG | p.K313 delinsQK | 88,6% | 100% | 0,08% | 80,8% | 100% |
| SETD2 | AML#2 | 3 | 47098968 | - | GGTG | c.6306_6307 insCACC | p.P2102fs | 32,5% | 60-70% | 0,07% | 31,7% | 60-70% |
| WISP1 | AML#2 | 8 | 134239889 | G | A | c.G1040A | p.R347K | ND | 0% | ND | 34,0% | 60-70% |
| FLT3 | AML#3 | 13 | 28592640 | A | T | c.T2505A | p.D835E | 3,4% | <10% | ND | 13,3% | 25-30% |
| WT1 | AML#3 | 11 | 32417913 | - | GTACAAGA | c.1139_1140 insTCTTGTAC | p.R380fs | 13,9% | 25-30% | ND | 4,2% | <10% |
| SALL1 | AML#3 | 16 | 51174616 | A | G | c.T1517C | p.I506T | ND | 0% | ND | 28,6% | 50-60% |
| UBE2D3 | AML#3 | 4 | 103722704 | T | C | c.A211G | p.T71A | ND | 0% | ND | 27,7% | 50-60% |
| PTPN11 | AML#3 | 12 | 112888199 | C | T | c.C215T | p.A72V | ND | 0% | ND | 31,9% | 60-70% |
| TEK | AML#4 | 9 | 27212867 | G | A | c.G2849A | p.R950Q | ND | 0% | ND | 21,0% | 40-50% |
| WT1 | AML#4 | 11 | 32417907 | - | CCGA | c.1145_1146 insTCGG | p.A382fs | 27,6% | 55% | ND | ND | 0% |
Chr: chromosome; Ref: reference; Alt: alteration; MF: mutation frequency; ND: not detected;
corrected for copy number variations.
Figure 2Sanger sequencing validation of somatic mutations
Panel 2a: Sanger validation of biCEBPα mutation in patient AML#2. Homozygous CAG in-frame insertion is detected in the whole tumor population both at diagnosis and at relapse, while is not detected in remission sample used as germinal counterpart. High coverage targeted deep sequencing was actually able to detect a very small clone (< 0,1%) carrying this mutation persisting at remission. Panel 2b: Sanger validation of ASXL3 mutation in patient AML#2. Point mutation c.C4409T is detected only at relapse. Backtracking of this mutation through high coverage targeted deep sequencing was able to detect a minor subclone carrying this mutation even at diagnosis.
Figure 3Graphical representation of clonal evolution from primary diagnosis to relapse based on targeted deep sequencing of driver mutations
Panel 3a: Clonal evolution in patient AML#3. The primary tumor differentiates into subclones through the acquisition of new somatic mutations, including WT1 and FLT3-TKD. Those clones survive chemotherapy and contribute to relapse. Later acquisition of additional mutations, such as PTPN11, SALL1 and UBE2D3, further increases clonal heterogeneity and confers a higher degree of complexity to the disease. Reported percentages refer to the estimated size population of each clone inferred from the MF calculated on targeted deep sequencing data for each mutation and adjusted for CN. Panel 3b: Clonal evolution in patient AML#2. The entire tumor population both in the primary and in the relapse samples carries a biCEBPα and a RREB1 mutation. The inactivation of SETD2 in a substantial fraction of the cells is associated with the acquisition of a mutator phenotype causing differentiation into multiple minor subclones through the acquisition of additional somatic mutations, increasing the plasticity and adaptability of the leukemia. High coverage targeted deep sequencing was able to detect persistence of biCEBPAα and SETD2 mutation during remission. Reported percentages refer to the estimated size population of each clone inferred from the MF calculated on targeted deep sequencing data for each mutation and adjusted for CN.