B Smith1, R Neff1, D E Cohn1, F J Backes1, A A Suarez2, D G Mutch3, C M Rush1, C J Walker1, P J Goodfellow4. 1. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, James Comprehensive Cancer Center at The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States. 2. Department of Pathology, Wexner Medical Center at The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States. 3. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States. 4. Division of Gynecologic Oncology, James Comprehensive Cancer Center at The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States. Electronic address: Paul.Goodfellow@osumc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Forkhead box protein A2 (FOXA2) plays an important in development, cellular metabolism and tumorigenesis. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) identified a modest frequency of FOXA2 mutations in endometrioid endometrial cancers (EEC). The current study sought to determine the relationship between FOXA2 mutation and clinicopathologic features in EEC and FOXA2 expression. METHODS: Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification and sequencing were used to identify mutations in 542 EEC. Western blot, quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR (qRT-PCR) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) were used to assess expression. Methylation analysis was performed using combined bisulfite restriction analysis (COBRA) and sequencing. Chi-squared, Fisher's exact, Student's t- and log-rank tests were performed. RESULTS: Fifty-one mutations were identified in 49 tumors (9.4% mutation rate). The majority of mutations were novel, loss of function (LOF) (78.4%) mutations, and most disrupted the DNA-binding domain (58.8%). Six recurrent mutations were identified. Only two tumors had two mutations and there was no evidence for FOXA2 allelic loss. Mutation status was associated with tumor grade and not associated with survival outcomes. Methylation of the FOXA2 promoter region was highly variable. Most tumors expressed FOXA2 at both the mRNA and protein level. In those tumors with mutations, the majority of cases expressed both alleles. CONCLUSION: FOXA2 is frequently mutated in EEC. The pattern of FOXA2 mutations and expression in tumors suggests complex regulation and a haploinsufficient or dominant-negative tumor suppressor function. In vitro studies may shed light on how mutations in FOXA2 affect FOXA2 pioneer and/or transcription factor functions in EEC.
BACKGROUND:Forkhead box protein A2 (FOXA2) plays an important in development, cellular metabolism and tumorigenesis. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) identified a modest frequency of FOXA2 mutations in endometrioid endometrial cancers (EEC). The current study sought to determine the relationship between FOXA2 mutation and clinicopathologic features in EEC and FOXA2 expression. METHODS: Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification and sequencing were used to identify mutations in 542 EEC. Western blot, quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR (qRT-PCR) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) were used to assess expression. Methylation analysis was performed using combined bisulfite restriction analysis (COBRA) and sequencing. Chi-squared, Fisher's exact, Student's t- and log-rank tests were performed. RESULTS: Fifty-one mutations were identified in 49 tumors (9.4% mutation rate). The majority of mutations were novel, loss of function (LOF) (78.4%) mutations, and most disrupted the DNA-binding domain (58.8%). Six recurrent mutations were identified. Only two tumors had two mutations and there was no evidence for FOXA2 allelic loss. Mutation status was associated with tumor grade and not associated with survival outcomes. Methylation of the FOXA2 promoter region was highly variable. Most tumors expressed FOXA2 at both the mRNA and protein level. In those tumors with mutations, the majority of cases expressed both alleles. CONCLUSION:FOXA2 is frequently mutated in EEC. The pattern of FOXA2 mutations and expression in tumors suggests complex regulation and a haploinsufficient or dominant-negative tumor suppressor function. In vitro studies may shed light on how mutations in FOXA2 affect FOXA2 pioneer and/or transcription factor functions in EEC.
Authors: Jae-Wook Jeong; Inseok Kwak; Kevin Y Lee; Tae Hoon Kim; Michael J Large; Colin L Stewart; Klaus H Kaestner; John P Lydon; Francesco J DeMayo Journal: Biol Reprod Date: 2010-05-19 Impact factor: 4.285
Authors: Israel Zighelboim; Paul J Goodfellow; Feng Gao; Randall K Gibb; Matthew A Powell; Janet S Rader; David G Mutch Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: L A Aaltonen; P Peltomäki; J P Mecklin; H Järvinen; J R Jass; J S Green; H T Lynch; P Watson; G Tallqvist; M Juhola Journal: Cancer Res Date: 1994-04-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Teresa Davoli; Andrew Wei Xu; Kristen E Mengwasser; Laura M Sack; John C Yoon; Peter J Park; Stephen J Elledge Journal: Cell Date: 2013-10-31 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Ingvild Løberg Tangen; Camilla Krakstad; Mari K Halle; Henrica M J Werner; Anne M Oyan; Kanthida Kusonmano; Kjell Petersen; Karl Henning Kalland; Lars A Akslen; Jone Trovik; Antoni Hurtado; Helga B Salvesen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-05-21 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Andrew M Kelleher; Wang Peng; James K Pru; Cindy A Pru; Francesco J DeMayo; Thomas E Spencer Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Robert Neff; Craig M Rush; Blair Smith; Floor J Backes; David E Cohn; Paul J Goodfellow Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2018-09-29 Impact factor: 7.396
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: Peng Wang; San-Pin Wu; Kelsey E Brooks; Andrew M Kelleher; Jessica J Milano-Foster; Francesco J DeMayo; Thomas E Spencer Journal: Endocrinology Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 4.736
Authors: Andrew M Kelleher; Susanta K Behura; Gregory W Burns; Steven L Young; Francesco J DeMayo; Thomas E Spencer Journal: FASEB J Date: 2019-04-05 Impact factor: 5.834