Literature DB >> 27633522

Extensive next-generation sequencing analysis in chronic lymphocytic leukemia at diagnosis: clinical and biological correlations.

Gian Matteo Rigolin1, Elena Saccenti2, Cristian Bassi3, Laura Lupini3, Francesca Maria Quaglia2, Maurizio Cavallari2, Sara Martinelli2, Luca Formigaro2, Enrico Lista2, Maria Antonella Bardi2, Eleonora Volta2, Elisa Tammiso2, Aurora Melandri2, Antonio Urso2, Francesco Cavazzini2, Massimo Negrini3, Antonio Cuneo2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis represents a sensitive, reproducible, and resource-efficient technique for routine screening of gene mutations.
METHODS: We performed an extensive biologic characterization of newly diagnosed CLL, including NGS analysis of 20 genes frequently mutated in CLL and karyotype analysis to assess whether NGS and karyotype results could be of clinical relevance in the refinement of prognosis and assessment of risk of progression. The genomic DNA from peripheral blood samples of 200 consecutive CLL patients was analyzed using Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine, a NGS platform that uses semiconductor sequencing technology. Karyotype analysis was performed using efficient mitogens.
RESULTS: Mutations were detected in 42.0 % of cases with 42.8 % of mutated patients presenting 2 or more mutations. The presence of mutations by NGS was associated with unmutated IGHV gene (p = 0.009), CD38 positivity (p = 0.010), risk stratification by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) (p < 0.001), and the complex karyotype (p = 0.003). A high risk as assessed by FISH analysis was associated with mutations affecting TP53 (p = 0.012), BIRC3 (p = 0.003), and FBXW7 (p = 0.003) while the complex karyotype was significantly associated with TP53, ATM, and MYD88 mutations (p = 0.003, 0.018, and 0.001, respectively). By multivariate analysis, the multi-hit profile (≥2 mutations by NGS) was independently associated with a shorter time to first treatment (p = 0.004) along with TP53 disruption (p = 0.040), IGHV unmutated status (p < 0.001), and advanced stage (p < 0.001). Advanced stage (p = 0.010), TP53 disruption (p < 0.001), IGHV unmutated status (p = 0.020), and the complex karyotype (p = 0.007) were independently associated with a shorter overall survival.
CONCLUSIONS: At diagnosis, an extensive biologic characterization including NGS and karyotype analyses using novel mitogens may offer new perspectives for a better refinement of risk stratification that could be of help in the clinical management of CLL patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chronic lymphocytic leukemia; Complex karyotype; Gene mutation analysis; Next-generation sequencing; Prognosis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27633522      PMCID: PMC5025606          DOI: 10.1186/s13045-016-0320-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hematol Oncol        ISSN: 1756-8722            Impact factor:   17.388


Background

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) displays a heterogeneous clinical course [1-3], some patients living for years with asymptomatic disease and others experiencing early progression requiring therapeutic intervention. Modern treatment algorithms must take into account age, comorbidities, and prognostic/predictive factors, including genetic lesions [4]. Adverse prognostic factors include stage [5], positivity for CD38, ZAP70, and CD49d [6-8], and, among genetic features, the unmutated configuration of the variable region of the immunoglobulin heavy chain gene (IGHV) [6] and specific molecular cytogenetic lesions revealed by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). More recently, karyotype aberrations were shown to represent strong prognostic factors [9-14], and large retrospective studies demonstrated that TP53, NOTCH1, and SF3B1 gene mutations have a negative impact on the time to first treatment (TTFT) and overall survival (OS) [15-17]. These data were in part confirmed by prospective clinical trials using homogeneous treatment protocols [18, 19], and recurrent genomic lesions were included within comprehensive prognostic indexes [20, 21] helping clinicians to counsel patients more appropriately, to define the follow-up interval, and, potentially, to provide a rational basis to design early intervention protocols for high-risk patients [22]. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques documented that, besides the aforementioned genes, a number of previously unidentified genes may be mutated in CLL and that the disruption of putative core cellular pathways represents an important mechanism promoting disease progression and drug resistance [23-26]. NGS may detect minor cell populations (subclones) harboring a variety of gene mutations, including NOTCH1, SF3B1, BIRC3, and TP53 mutations, the latter having a negative prognostic impact that was similar to TP53 clonal mutations [27-29] as detected by conventional sequencing techniques (i.e., Sanger sequencing). Thus, NGS is becoming of age for usage in clinical practice, and indeed, over 50 % of CLL patients were shown to carry mutations in one or more genes [30, 31], potentially making NGS a sensitive tool for the detection of mutations including subclonal mutations. To assess whether an extended mutational screening by NGS at diagnosis could allow for a refinement of our capability to predict TTFT and OS, we designed a CLL-specific gene panel, covering hotspots or complete coding regions of 20 genes more frequently mutated in CLL. We performed NGS of these 20 genes using a resource-efficient platform in 200 consecutive newly diagnosed patients representing over 90 % of CLL incident cases in our region. By correlating mutational data obtained by an extensive genetic/cytogenetic characterization with clinic-biological parameters and outcome, we were able to show that NGS screening was an independent prognostic factor for TTFT and that complex karyotype was a strong predictor of an inferior survival in this patient population.

Methods

Patients

The study cohort consisted of 200 consecutive untreated CLL patients diagnosed and followed between 2007 and 2014. All patients were diagnosed according to NCI criteria [32]. Only patients with a Matutes immunophenotypic score [33] ≥3 (i.e., typical CLL) were included. CD38 and ZAP-70 were tested on peripheral blood (PB) cells, as described [34]. When needed, mantle cell lymphoma was excluded by the evaluation of cyclin D1. The study was approved by the local ethics committee. Indications for treatment included increased white blood cell count with <6 month lymphocyte doubling time, anemia or thrombocytopenia due to bone marrow infiltration or autoimmune phenomena not responding to steroids, and disease progression in the Binet staging system. Fludarabine and bendamustine (since 2010), containing regimens in association with or without rituximab, were used as first-line treatment; chlorambucil was used in elderly and unfit patients according to shared treatment policy adopted at our center.

Cytogenetic and FISH analyses

Interphase FISH was performed on PB samples obtained at diagnosis using probes for the following regions: 13q14, 12q13, 11q22/ATM, and 17p13/TP53 (Vysis/Abbott Co, Downers Grove, IL) as described [35]. Each patient was categorized into a FISH risk group according to the following classification: favorable group (isolated 13q14 deletion or absence of FISH aberrations), unfavorable group (deletions of 11q22 or of 17p13), and intermediate group (trisomy 12). Cytogenetic analysis was performed on the same samples used for FISH analysis using CpG-oligonucleotide DSP30 (2 μmol/l TibMolBiol Berlin, Germany) plus IL2 (100 U/ml Stem Cell Technologies Inc., Milan, Italy) as described [36]. The complex karyotype was defined by the presence of at least 3 chromosome aberrations.

IGHV analysis

IGHV genes were amplified from genomic DNA and sequenced according to standard methods with the cutoff of 98 % homology to the germline sequence to discriminate between mutated (<98 %) and unmutated (≥98 %) cases, as reported [35].

Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine (PGM) analysis

NGS analysis was performed on the same samples used for FISH and cytogenetic analyses. In all samples, the percentage of CLL cells was over 90 % as assessed by flow cytometry analysis. Agilent HaloPlex Target Enrichment kit (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) was used to produce libraries of exonic regions from 20 genes (ATM, BIRC3, BRAF, CDKN2A, PTEN, CDH2, DDX3X, FBXW7, KIT, KLHL6, KRAS, MYD88, NOTCH1, NRAS, PIK3CA, POT1, SF3B1, TP53, XPO1, ZMYM3) starting from genomic DNA from PB samples, according to HaloPlex Target Enrichment System (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Diluted libraries were linked to Ion Sphere Particles, clonally amplified in an emulsion PCR and enriched using Ion OneTouch emulsion PCR System (Life technologies, Foster City, CA, USA). Exon-enriched DNA was precipitated with magnetic beads coated with streptavidin. Enriched, template-positive Ion Sphere Particles were loaded in one ion chip and sequenced using Ion Torrent PGM (Life technologies, Foster City, CA, USA). Sequencing data were aligned to the human reference genome (GRCh37). Data analysis and variant identification were performed using Torrent Suite 3.4 and Variant Caller plugin 3.4.4 (Life technologies, Foster City, CA, USA) [37].

Statistical analysis

The Mann-Whitney and the Pearson’s chi-squared tests were applied for quantitative and categorical variables, respectively. TTFT was calculated as the interval between diagnosis and the start of first-line treatment. OS was calculated from the date of diagnosis until death due to any cause or until the last patient follow-up. Survival curves were compared by the log-rank test. Proportional hazards regression analysis was used to identify the significant independent prognostic variables on TTFT. The stability of the Cox model was internally validated using bootstrapping procedures [15]. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata 14.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX).

Results

Patients and mutation analyses of the 20 genes by NGS

The clinical and biologic characteristics of the 200 CLL patients are presented in Table 1.
Table 1

Clinical and biological characteristics of the 200 CLL patients

Variable
Age, median yrs (range)67.6 (38.3–89.9)
Sex m/f121/79
Binet stage a/b/c161/25/14
CD38 neg/pos121/79
ZAP-70 neg/pos143/37
IGVH mut/unmut105/91
13q14 deletion yes/no104/96
Trisomy 12 yes/no32/168
11q22 deletion yes/no20/180
17p13 deletion yes/no9/191
FISH fav/int/unfav142/30/28
Complex karyotype no/yes167/28
Mutated patients by NGS no/yes116/84
No. of mutations by NGS 0/1/2/3/4116/48/24/8/4
TP53 mut/WT16/184
TP53 disruption yes/no19/181

f female, fav favorable, int intermediate, m male, mut mutated, neg negative, pos positive, unfav unfavorable, unmut unmutated, yrs years, TP53 disruption 17p13 deletion and/or TP53 mutation

Clinical and biological characteristics of the 200 CLL patients f female, fav favorable, int intermediate, m male, mut mutated, neg negative, pos positive, unfav unfavorable, unmut unmutated, yrs years, TP53 disruption 17p13 deletion and/or TP53 mutation Parallel sequencing of exonic regions from the 20 genes showed somatic mutations in 84/200 (42.0 %) cases. One hundred thirty-six mutations were found in these 84 patients; 114 missense mutations, 7 nonsense mutations, 14 frameshit deletions, and 1 frameshit insertion. Mutations were detected with a frequency ranging from 5.0 to 96.7 % of the reads. Sixteen cases (8.0 %) showed mutations in the TP53 gene, 16 (8.0 %) in the NOTCH1 gene, 15 (7.5 %) in the SF3B1 gene, 10 (5.0 %) in the ATM gene, 8 (4.0 %) in the BIRC3 gene, 7 (3.5 %) in the MYD88 gene, 7 (3.5 %) in the PTEN gene, 6 (3.0 %) in the FBXW7 gene, 5 (2.5 %) in the POT1 gene, 5 (2.5 %) in the BRAF gene, 5 (2.5 %) in the ZMYM3 gene, and 19 (9.5 %) cases in the remaining 9 genes (Additional file 1: Table S1). 36/84 (42.8 %) mutated patients presented 2 or more mutations (Additional file 2: Table S2). TP53 mutations (p = 0.027) were significantly more frequent among patients with 2 or more mutations while a trend was observed for BIRC3 mutations (p = 0.059) and mutations of genes less frequently mutated in CLL (p = 0.057) (Additional file 3: Table S3).

Correlations between mutational status by NGS, molecular cytogenetic findings, and clinico-biological parameters

The presence of somatic mutations did not correlate with sex, age, and Binet stage while the occurrence of mutations by NGS analysis was significantly associated with CD38 positivity (p = 0.010), IGHV unmutated status (p = 0.009), intermediate high-risk cytogenetics by FISH analysis (p < 0.001), and the complex karyotype (p = 0.003; Table 2).
Table 2

Correlations between mutational status by NGS analysis and clinical biological parameters

Mutated (n = 84)Not mutated (n = 116) p
Sex m/f49/3572/440.594
Age <70/≥70 years46/3869/470.505
Binet stage a/b/c66/12/695/13/80.802
CD38 neg/pos42/4279/370.010
IGHV mut/unmut36/4869/430.009
FISH fav/int unfav48/3694/22<0.001
Complex karyotype no/yes63/19104/90.003

f female, fav favorable, int intermediate, m male, mut mutated, neg negative, pos positive, unfav unfavorable, unmut unmutated, yrs years, TP53 disruption 17p13 deletion and/or TP53 mutation

Correlations between mutational status by NGS analysis and clinical biological parameters f female, fav favorable, int intermediate, m male, mut mutated, neg negative, pos positive, unfav unfavorable, unmut unmutated, yrs years, TP53 disruption 17p13 deletion and/or TP53 mutation A higher risk as assessed by FISH analysis was associated with the presence of mutations affecting TP53 (p = 0.012), BIRC3 (p = 0.003), and FBXW7 (p = 0.003) while the complex karyotype was significantly associated with TP53, ATM, and MYD88 mutations (p = 0.003, 0.018, and 0.001, respectively: Table 3; Fig. 1).
Table 3

Correlations between mutations by NGS analysis, FISH results, and karyotype complexity

FISH resultsComplex karyotype
FavInt-unfavNoYes p
No. of mutations by NGS no/1/≥294/28/2022/19/170.001104/36/279/11/80.011
TP53 WT/mut135/749/90.012158/922/60.003
NOTCH1 WT/mut133/951/70.175155/1225/30.517
SF3B1 WT/mut132/1053/50.701156/1125/30.434
ATM WT/mut137/553/50.133161/624/40.018
BIRC3 WT/mut140/252/60.003161/626/20.381
MYD88 WT/mut136/657/10.382164/324/40.001
PTEN WT/mut138/455/30.411161/627/10.996
FBXW7 WT/mut141/153/50.003161/628/00.308
POT1 WT/mut138/457/10.653162/528/00.354
BRAF WT/mut139/356/20.583163/428/00.408
ZMYM3 WT/mut138/457/10.653163/427/10.716
Others WT/mut129/1349/60.192149/1824/40.587

f female, fav favorable, int intermediate, m male, mut mutated, neg negative, pos positive, unfav unfavorable, unmut unmutated

Fig. 1

Gene mutations and correlation with genomic features: circos diagrams illustrating pairwise co-occurrence of gene mutations with IGHV status, FISH results, and complex karyotype

Correlations between mutations by NGS analysis, FISH results, and karyotype complexity f female, fav favorable, int intermediate, m male, mut mutated, neg negative, pos positive, unfav unfavorable, unmut unmutated Gene mutations and correlation with genomic features: circos diagrams illustrating pairwise co-occurrence of gene mutations with IGHV status, FISH results, and complex karyotype The median follow-up for the 200 CLL patients was 52.3 months. In univariate analysis (Table 4), the occurrence of mutations and the presence of 2 or more mutations were significantly associated with a worse TTFT (Fig. 2) along with advanced Binet stage; CD38 positivity; IGHV unmutated status; intermediate unfavorable FISH results; 11q22 deletion, 17p13 deletion, and/or TP53 mutations (here referred to as TP53 disruption); and complex karyotype. A shorter TTFT was also observed for TP53-, NOTCH1-, ATM-, and BRAF-mutated patients. By multivariate analysis (Table 5), we found that the multi-hit profile (≥2 mutations by NGS) predicted a shorter TTFT (p = 0.004) along with TP53 disruption (p = 0.040), IGHV unmutated status (p < 0.001), and advanced stage (p < 0.001).
Table 4

Univariate analysis for TTFT and OS

TTFTOS
Variable N ptsHR (CI 95 %) p HR (CI 95 %) p
Binet stage B–C vs A39 vs 1619.884 (5.939–16.450)<0.00013.174 (1.677–6.007)0.0002
CD38 pos vs neg79 vs 1214.097 (2.564–6.546)<0.00013.123 (1.686–5.783)0.0001
IGVH mut vs unmut105 vs 915.584 (3.326–9.374)<0.00013.667 (1.886–7.127)<0.0001
11q22 deletion yes vs no20 vs 1802.879 (1.528–5.426)0.00061.736 (0.739–4.078)0.2000
TP53 disruption yes/no19 vs 1813.284 (1.867–5.781)<0.00014.246 (2.076–8.687)<0.0001
FISH int-unfav vs fav58 vs 1422.605 (1.670–4.063)<0.00012.432 (1.438–4.454)0.0029
Complex karyotype yes vs no28 vs 1672.979 (1.756–5.056)<0.00013.854 (1.961–7.578)<0.0001
Mutations by NGS no/yes116 vs 842.835 (1.799–4.469)<0.00012.171 (1.176–4.008)0.0130
Number of mutations by NGS
 01161<0.00110.037
 1472.373 (1.369–4.112)0.002a 1.936 (0.930–4.032)0.078a
 ≥2373.418 (2.009–5.759)<0.001a 2.466 (1.187–5.126)0.016a
TP53 mut vs wt16 vs 1842.804 (1.514–5.194)0.00102.793 (1.284–6.098)0.0069
NOTCH1 mut vs wt16 vs 1842.353 (1.164–4.762)0.01412.646 (1.114–6.259)0.0219
SF3B1 mut vs wt15 vs 1851.779 (0.886–3.571)0.10061.170 (0.419–3.268)0.7648
ATM mut vs wt10 vs 1903.623 (1.715–7.633)0.00031.946 (0.686–5.525)0.2023
BIRC3 mut vs wt8 vs 1920.817 (0.254–2.597)0.72461.099 (0.252–4.808)0.8998
MYD88 mut vs WT7 vs 1931.758 (0.642–4.812)0.27241.505 (0.363–6.240)0.5733
PTEN mut vs WT7 vs 1931.573 (0.574–4.310)0.37801.503 (0.363–6.224)0.5742
FBXW7 mut vs WT6 vs 1941.820 (0.664–4.988)0.24411.445 (0.349–5.986)0.6134
POT1 mut vs WT5 vs 1951.059 (0.259–0.321)0.93750.978 (0.352–4.768)0.9973
BRAF mut vs WT5 vs 1957.730 (3.014–19.827)<0.00012.126 (0.286–15.823)0.4610
ZMYM3 mut vs WT5 vs 1950.484 (0.067–3.480)0.47102.336 (0.563–9.693)0.2434
OTHERS mut vs wt 19 vs 1811.036 (0.517–2.075)0.92050.898 (0.320–2.518)0.8381

aCompared with no mutation

f female, fav favorable, int intermediate, m male, mut mutated, neg negative, pos positive, unfav unfavorable, unmut unmutated, yrs years, TP53 disruption 17p13 deletion and/or TP53 mutation

Fig. 2

TTFT according to number of mutations by NGS analysis (p < 0.001)

Table 5

Multivariate analysis for TTFT and OS

TTFTOS
After bootstrappingAfter bootstrapping
VariableHRCI p CI p HRCI p CI p
Binet stage b–c vs a11.2066.384–19.671<0.0015.570–22.545<0.0013.0801.501–6.3190.0021.302–7.2860.010
CD38 pos vs neg1.1410.670–1.9420.6270.663–1.9380.6341.0670.506–2.2490.8640.448–2.3560.883
11q deletion yes vs no1.3060.619–2.7550.4840.532–3.2050.560NaNaNaNaNa
TP53 disruption yes vs no2.2551.168–4.3520.0151.039–4.8910.0404.0551.844–7.917<0.0011.897–8.670<0.001
IGHV unmut vs mut5.0782.599–9.554<0.0012.491–10.354<0.0013.1981.524–6.130.0021.200–8.5220.020
No. of mutations by NGS
 01111
 11.4520.812–2.5940.2080.574–3.6730.4310.9300.417–2.0740.8600.348–2.4840.885
 ≥22.7911.468–5.3060.0021.375–5.6650.0041.1150.492–2.5230.7950.480–2.5890.801
Complex karyotype yes vs no1.6490.896–3.0340.1080.824–3.3010.1583.1731.521–6.6190.0021.369–7.3550.007

f female, fav favorable, int intermediate, m male, mut mutated, neg negative, pos positive, unfav unfavorable, unmut unmutated, yrs years, TP53 disruption 17p13 deletion and/or TP53 mutation

Univariate analysis for TTFT and OS aCompared with no mutation f female, fav favorable, int intermediate, m male, mut mutated, neg negative, pos positive, unfav unfavorable, unmut unmutated, yrs years, TP53 disruption 17p13 deletion and/or TP53 mutation TTFT according to number of mutations by NGS analysis (p < 0.001) Multivariate analysis for TTFT and OS f female, fav favorable, int intermediate, m male, mut mutated, neg negative, pos positive, unfav unfavorable, unmut unmutated, yrs years, TP53 disruption 17p13 deletion and/or TP53 mutation When considering OS (Table 4), a poorer prognosis was associated with the occurrence of mutations by NGS analysis, the presence of 2 or more mutations, with TP53 mutations, and with advanced stage, CD38 positivity, IGHV unmutated status, TP53 disruption, and complex karyotype. In multivariate analysis, advanced stage (p = 0.010), IGHV unmutated status (p = 0.020), TP53 disruption (p < 0.001), and the complex karyotype (p = 0.007) independently predicted a worse outcome (Table 5).

Discussion

CLL is the most frequent leukemia in western countries and has a significant socioeconomic impact. It is therefore important to define which patients are at higher risk of progression and therefore require stricter follow-up and which genetic lesions are associated with risk of relapse and/or chemorefractoriness ultimately determining a shorter survival [22]. Unlike previous reports analyzing prognostic/predictive factors in CLL requiring treatment at the time of progression, we were able to perform an extensive biologic characterization in an unselected prospective series of 200 patients diagnosed over an 8-year span and followed for a median of 52.3 months over the last 10 years. Our center has a >90 % capture of each incident case of CLL in our region of approximately 400,000 inhabitants because the diagnosis of CLL in our province was centralized since 2006. With the exception of frail patients with a significant number of comorbidities precluding any form of specific treatment, whom were not submitted to extensive molecular cytogenetic characterization, the patient population included in this analysis is highly representative of the true nature of CLL and allows meaningful analyses of TTFT and OS in a real-world scenario. The Ion Torrent PGM is a NGS platform that uses semiconductor sequencing technology. In clinical practice, PGM may represent a very sensitive tool for mutational screening of patients with CLL, allowing multiplexing of samples and gene targets in one experimental setup [30] and resulting in higher speed of analysis and lower costs [38]. Parallel sequencing of exonic regions in these 20 CLL-related genes showed somatic mutations in 84/200 (42.0 %) cases by using a 5 % cutoff. Mutations were detected with a frequency ranging from 5.0 to 96.7 % of the reads, clearly showing that both major and minor clonal mutations were present, the former representing early leukemogenetic events and the latter representing late-appearing aberrations possibly associated with disease progression or chemorefractoriness [39, 40]. In this series, the frequency of mutations involving TP53, NOTCH1, SF3B1, ATM, and BIRC3 genes clearly reflects the nature of our patient cohort that included untreated CLL analyzed early during the natural history of the disease and comprising 80.5 % of Binet stage A cases. Approximately, the same incidence for these mutations was reported in a series of CLL patients observed in the general practice and not enrolled in clinical trials [17]. The frequency of mutations involving the other investigated genes was in line with data published in literature using whole exome sequencing [41-44]. Interestingly, we observed that 18.0 % of the cases presented more than one mutation. In the CLL11 trial, 161 patients were evaluated at the time of treatment requirement and NGS analysis revealed mutations in 42 out of 85 analyzed genes, with 76.4 and 42.2 % of the patients presenting at least one or ≥2 genes affected by mutations, respectively [14]. In our series of patients, the occurrence of mutations was associated with adverse molecular and genetic findings including IGVH unmutated status, intermediate high-risk FISH results, and the presence of a complex karyotype. Noteworthy, a higher incidence of concurrent mutations was observed in TP53-mutated patients, while the presence of a complex karyotype was associated with TP53-, ATM-, and MYD88-mutated cases. These results suggest that concurrent mutations, as well as complex karyotype, might represent an aspect of genetic instability correlated to a defective DNA damage response [45]. We then analyzed the correlation between the mutational status and outcome. A shorter TTFT was observed in those patients with mutations by NGS and with mutations involving TP53, NOTCH1, ATM, and BRAF. The prognostic significance of BRAF mutations needs to be confirmed on larger series because it was derived from a limited number of patients, most of whom had concurrent mutations of other genes. By multivariate analysis, we found that the multi-hit profile (≥2 mutations by NGS) was independently associated with a shorter TTFT along with TP53 disruption, IGHV unmutated status, and advanced stage. Given the complexity of CLL genetic landscape, we suggest that not only the presence of clones or subclones [46] but also the concurrent presence of mutations may play a significant role in prognostication. This study, to our knowledge, provides the first demonstration that at diagnosis, in an unselected CLL patient population followed up at one center having a >90 % capture of incident cases, a multi-hit profile derived from an extensive NGS analysis is independently associated with a shorter TTFT. Noteworthy, concurrent gene mutations are also frequent in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL and are associated with a worse outcome [47]. When considering OS, a poorer outcome was associated with the presence of mutations by NGS, with mutations in TP53 and NOTCH1 genes, with the multi-hit profile, with IGHV unmutated status, with TP53 disruption, and with the complex karyotype. However, by multivariate analysis, only TP53 disruption was independently associated with a worse outcome along with advanced stage, IGHV unmutated status, and the complex karyotype. Whereas the strong independent impact on TTFT and OS of IGHV mutational status and TP53 disruption was previously demonstrated [12, 14, 15, 45, 46], the finding of an independent impact on OS of the complex karyotype is noteworthy, especially when considering that an extensive clinic-biologic characterization was performed in this patient cohort. Recently, an independent prognostic relevance on OS of the complex karyotype has emerged in CLL patients investigated at different phases of the disease: at diagnosis [13, 34], before first-line treatment [14], and in refractory relapsed patients treated with ibrutinib [48]. We may assume that the complex karyotype probably reflects a high level of genomic instability that appears to be a better predictor of worse OS in comparison to single and multiple concurrent mutations, with the only exception of TP53 mutations. Thus, karyotyping seems to substantially contribute to the identification of CLL patients with most adverse prognosis and should be considered in an extensive diagnostic work-up in future CLL trials [49, 50].

Conclusions

Altogether, our data suggests that NGS may play an important role in the definition of the risk of disease progression and therefore could be useful in the diagnostic work-up of CLL patients as an efficient, sensitive, and affordable technique for routine screening of mutations. Indeed, NGS analysis, in combination with clinical stage, TP53 disruption, and IGHV assessment, may identify those patients that are at higher risk of progression and therefore need a stricter follow-up whereas karyotyping could represent along with TP53 disruption the best genetic predictor of OS. However, some issues need to be better defined before the introduction of the extensive NGS approach into the routine clinical practice: (i) which genes and how many genes should be included in the work-up panel for an efficient and affordable routine applicability, (ii) what cutoff for mutational analysis should be considered clinically relevant, and (iii) how to develop a standardized methodology ensuring reproducibility of the results [51].
  51 in total

1.  Presence of multiple recurrent mutations confers poor trial outcome of relapsed/refractory CLL.

Authors:  Romain Guièze; Pauline Robbe; Ruth Clifford; Sophie de Guibert; Bruno Pereira; Adele Timbs; Marie-Sarah Dilhuydy; Maite Cabes; Loïc Ysebaert; Adam Burns; Florence Nguyen-Khac; Frédéric Davi; Lauren Véronèse; Patricia Combes; Magali Le Garff-Tavernier; Véronique Leblond; Hélène Merle-Béral; Reem Alsolami; Angela Hamblin; Joanne Mason; Andrew Pettitt; Peter Hillmen; Jenny Taylor; Samantha J L Knight; Olivier Tournilhac; Anna Schuh
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 22.113

Review 2.  Chronic lymphocytic leukemia: 2015 Update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and treatment.

Authors:  Michael Hallek
Journal:  Am J Hematol       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 10.047

Review 3.  Clinical application of amplicon-based next-generation sequencing in cancer.

Authors:  Fengqi Chang; Marilyn M Li
Journal:  Cancer Genet       Date:  2013-10-11

4.  Whole-genome sequencing identifies recurrent mutations in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.

Authors:  Xose S Puente; Magda Pinyol; Víctor Quesada; Laura Conde; Gonzalo R Ordóñez; Neus Villamor; Georgia Escaramis; Pedro Jares; Sílvia Beà; Marcos González-Díaz; Laia Bassaganyas; Tycho Baumann; Manel Juan; Mónica López-Guerra; Dolors Colomer; José M C Tubío; Cristina López; Alba Navarro; Cristian Tornador; Marta Aymerich; María Rozman; Jesús M Hernández; Diana A Puente; José M P Freije; Gloria Velasco; Ana Gutiérrez-Fernández; Dolors Costa; Anna Carrió; Sara Guijarro; Anna Enjuanes; Lluís Hernández; Jordi Yagüe; Pilar Nicolás; Carlos M Romeo-Casabona; Heinz Himmelbauer; Ester Castillo; Juliane C Dohm; Silvia de Sanjosé; Miguel A Piris; Enrique de Alava; Jesús San Miguel; Romina Royo; Josep L Gelpí; David Torrents; Modesto Orozco; David G Pisano; Alfonso Valencia; Roderic Guigó; Mónica Bayés; Simon Heath; Marta Gut; Peter Klatt; John Marshall; Keiran Raine; Lucy A Stebbings; P Andrew Futreal; Michael R Stratton; Peter J Campbell; Ivo Gut; Armando López-Guillermo; Xavier Estivill; Emili Montserrat; Carlos López-Otín; Elías Campo
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-06-05       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 5.  From pathogenesis to treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.

Authors:  Thorsten Zenz; Daniel Mertens; Ralf Küppers; Hartmut Döhner; Stephan Stilgenbauer
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2009-12-03       Impact factor: 60.716

6.  Chromosome 14q32 translocations involving the immunoglobulin heavy chain locus in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia identify a disease subset with poor prognosis.

Authors:  Francesco Cavazzini; Jose Angel Hernandez; Alessandro Gozzetti; Antonella Russo Rossi; Cristiano De Angeli; Ruana Tiseo; Antonella Bardi; Elisa Tammiso; Rosaria Crupi; Maria Pia Lenoci; Francesco Forconi; Francesco Lauria; Roberto Marasca; Rossana Maffei; Giuseppe Torelli; Marcos Gonzalez; Patricia Martin-Jimenez; Jesus Maria Hernandez; Gian Matteo Rigolin; Antonio Cuneo
Journal:  Br J Haematol       Date:  2008-06-28       Impact factor: 6.998

7.  Complex karyotypes and KRAS and POT1 mutations impact outcome in CLL after chlorambucil-based chemotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy.

Authors:  Carmen Diana Herling; Marion Klaumünzer; Cristiano Krings Rocha; Janine Altmüller; Holger Thiele; Jasmin Bahlo; Sandra Kluth; Giuliano Crispatzu; Marco Herling; Joanna Schiller; Anja Engelke; Eugen Tausch; Hartmut Döhner; Kirsten Fischer; Valentin Goede; Peter Nürnberg; Hans Christian Reinhardt; Stephan Stilgenbauer; Michael Hallek; Karl-Anton Kreuzer
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 22.113

8.  The clinical significance of NOTCH1 and SF3B1 mutations in the UK LRF CLL4 trial.

Authors:  David G Oscier; Matthew J J Rose-Zerilli; Nils Winkelmann; David Gonzalez de Castro; Belen Gomez; Jade Forster; Helen Parker; Anton Parker; Anne Gardiner; Andrew Collins; Monica Else; Nicholas C P Cross; Daniel Catovsky; Jonathan C Strefford
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 22.113

9.  The immunological profile of B-cell disorders and proposal of a scoring system for the diagnosis of CLL.

Authors:  E Matutes; K Owusu-Ankomah; R Morilla; J Garcia Marco; A Houlihan; T H Que; D Catovsky
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 11.528

10.  Detailed analysis of therapy-driven clonal evolution of TP53 mutations in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Authors:  J Malcikova; K Stano-Kozubik; B Tichy; B Kantorova; S Pavlova; N Tom; L Radova; J Smardova; F Pardy; M Doubek; Y Brychtova; M Mraz; K Plevova; E Diviskova; A Oltova; J Mayer; S Pospisilova; M Trbusek
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 11.528

View more
  14 in total

1.  Refined karyotype-based prognostic stratification of chronic lymphocytic leukemia with a low- and very-low-risk genetic profile.

Authors:  I Del Giudice; G M Rigolin; S Raponi; L Cafforio; C Ilari; J Wang; M Bordyuh; A Piciocchi; M Marinelli; M Nanni; S Tavolaro; M Filetti; A Bardi; E Tammiso; E Volta; M Negrini; E Saccenti; F R Mauro; D Rossi; G Gaidano; A Guarini; R Rabadan; A Cuneo; R Foà
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 11.528

2.  IGH Translocations in Chinese Patients With Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Clinicopathologic Characteristics and Genetic Profile.

Authors:  Qinlu Li; Shugang Xing; Heng Zhang; Xiao Mao; Min Xiao; Ying Wang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 5.738

3.  Erratum to: Extensive next-generation sequencing analysis in chronic lymphocytic leukemia at diagnosis: clinical and biological correlations.

Authors:  Gian Matteo Rigolin; Elena Saccenti; Cristian Bassi; Laura Lupini; Francesca Maria Quaglia; Maurizio Cavallari; Sara Martinelli; Luca Formigaro; Enrico Lista; Maria Antonella Bardi; Eleonora Volta; Elisa Tammiso; Aurora Melandri; Antonio Urso; Francesco Cavazzini; Massimo Negrini; Antonio Cuneo
Journal:  J Hematol Oncol       Date:  2016-09-30       Impact factor: 17.388

4.  Loss of thyroid hormone receptor interactor 13 inhibits cell proliferation and survival in human chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Authors:  Keshu Zhou; Wentao Zhang; Qing Zhang; Ruirui Gui; Huifang Zhao; Xiaofei Chai; Yufu Li; Xudong Wei; Yongping Song
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-04-11

5.  An extensive molecular cytogenetic characterization in high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia identifies karyotype aberrations and TP53 disruption as predictors of outcome and chemorefractoriness.

Authors:  Gian Matteo Rigolin; Luca Formigaro; Maurizio Cavallari; Francesca Maria Quaglia; Enrico Lista; Antonio Urso; Emanuele Guardalben; Sara Martinelli; Elena Saccenti; Cristian Bassi; Laura Lupini; Maria Antonella Bardi; Eleonora Volta; Elisa Tammiso; Aurora Melandri; Massimo Negrini; Francesco Cavazzini; Antonio Cuneo
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-04-25

Review 6.  TP53 aberrations in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: an overview of the clinical implications of improved diagnostics.

Authors:  Elias Campo; Florence Cymbalista; Paolo Ghia; Ulrich Jäger; Sarka Pospisilova; Richard Rosenquist; Anna Schuh; Stephan Stilgenbauer
Journal:  Haematologica       Date:  2018-11-15       Impact factor: 9.941

Review 7.  Minimal Residual Disease Monitoring with Next-Generation Sequencing Methodologies in Hematological Malignancies.

Authors:  Ricardo Sánchez; Rosa Ayala; Joaquín Martínez-López
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2019-06-10       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 8.  The Evolving Landscape of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia on Diagnosis, Prognosis and Treatment.

Authors:  Claudia Pérez-Carretero; Isabel González-Gascón-Y-Marín; Ana E Rodríguez-Vicente; Miguel Quijada-Álamo; José-Ángel Hernández-Rivas; María Hernández-Sánchez; Jesús María Hernández-Rivas
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-10

Review 9.  Next-generation sequencing in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: recent findings and new horizons.

Authors:  Ana E Rodríguez-Vicente; Vasilis Bikos; María Hernández-Sánchez; Jitka Malcikova; Jesús-María Hernández-Rivas; Sarka Pospisilova
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-07-24

Review 10.  Biological significance and prognostic/predictive impact of complex karyotype in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Authors:  Maurizio Cavallari; Francesco Cavazzini; Antonio Cuneo; Gian Matteo Rigolin; Antonella Bardi; Eleonora Volta; Aurora Melandri; Elisa Tammiso; Elena Saccenti; Enrico Lista; Francesca Maria Quaglia; Antonio Urso; Michele Laudisi; Elisa Menotti; Luca Formigaro; Melissa Dabusti; Maria Ciccone; Paolo Tomasi; Massimo Negrini
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2018-09-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.