| Literature DB >> 28027320 |
Navya Nair1, Olga Camacho-Vanegas2, Dmitry Rykunov2, Matthew Dashkoff2, Sandra Catalina Camacho2, Cassie A Schumacher3, Jonathan C Irish3, Timothy T Harkins3, Elijah Freeman2, Isaac Garcia2, Elena Pereira1, Sviatoslav Kendall2, Rachel Belfer4, Tamara Kalir5, Robert Sebra2, Boris Reva2, Peter Dottino1, John A Martignetti1,2,6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endometrial cancer is the most common gynecologic malignancy, and its incidence and associated mortality are increasing. Despite the immediate need to detect these cancers at an earlier stage, there is no effective screening methodology or protocol for endometrial cancer. The comprehensive, genomics-based analysis of endometrial cancer by The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) revealed many of the molecular defects that define this cancer. Based on these cancer genome results, and in a prospective study, we hypothesized that the use of ultra-deep, targeted gene sequencing could detect somatic mutations in uterine lavage fluid obtained from women undergoing hysteroscopy as a means of molecular screening and diagnosis. METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 28027320 PMCID: PMC5189938 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002206
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Med ISSN: 1549-1277 Impact factor: 11.069
Fig 1Overview of the study pipeline beginning with collection of uterine lavage fluid at the initiation of hysteroscopy.
Figure designed by Jill Gregory.
Baseline characteristics and pre- and post-hysteroscopy diagnoses of the patient cohort.
| Demographic criteria | Number of patients (percentage) |
|---|---|
| <40 | 16 (5.2) |
| 40–49 | 26 (24.7) |
| 50–59 | 25 (23.8) |
| 60–69 | 23 (21.9) |
| >70 | 17 (16.2) |
| White | 70 (66.0) |
| African-American | 14 (13.2) |
| Asian | 12 (11.3) |
| Hispanic | 5 (4.7) |
| Other | 5 (4.7) |
| Postmenopausal | 59 (57.3) |
| Premenopausal | 44 (42.7) |
| 0 | 43 (42.1) |
| 1–2 | 37 (36.3) |
| 3–5 | 18 (17.7) |
| >5 | 4 (3.9) |
| Never smoker | 85 (80.2) |
| Current everyday smoker | 2 (1.9) |
| Former smoker | 19 (17.9) |
| Abnormal bleeding (including postmenopausal bleeding) | 50 (46.7) |
| Uterine polyp | 30 (28.0) |
| Thickened endometrium seen on ultrasound | 10 (9.3) |
| Uterine fibroid | 6 (5.6) |
| History of endometrial hyperplasia or cancer | 3 (2.8) |
| Pelvic pain | 1 (0.9) |
| Other | 7 (6.5) |
| Polyp or polypoid fragment | 60 (56.1) |
| Normal endometrium | 17 (15.9) |
| Fibroid | 13 (12.1) |
| Endometrial cancer | 7 (6.5) |
| Polyp and fibroid | 5 (4.7) |
| Endometrial hyperplasia | 3 (2.8) |
| Other | 2 (1.9) |
Clinicopathologic correlates of the seven cancer cases diagnosed by histopathology within the patient cohort.
| Patient | Stage | Cancer histology and grade | Preoperative diagnosis | Age | Body Mass Index |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PT398 | IA | Endometrioid, G1 | Endometrial polyp | 72 | 21.3 |
| PT433 | IA | Endometrioid, G1 | History of cancer, on progesterone | 34 | 19.6 |
| PT451 | IA | Endometrioid, G1 | Postmenopausal bleeding | 65 | 45.0 |
| PT468 | IA | Mixed type: Serous, G3 & Endometrioid, G2 | Postmenopausal bleeding | 67 | 38.6 |
| PT484 | IA | Endometrioid, G2 | Endometrial polyp | 54 | 30.0 |
| PT488 | IIIA | Carcinosarcoma, G3 | Postmenopausal bleeding | 85 | 33.6 |
| PT492 | IA | Endometrioid, G1 | Postmenopausal bleeding | 82 | 26.1 |
Fig 2Microscopic views of hematoxylin-eosin stained sections of all seven uterine cancer specimens diagnosed by classic histopathology.
(A) PT398: endometrioid, stage IA/grade 1 cancer. Arrow points to minute (<1 mm) focus of adenocarcinoma, adjacent to benign inactive endometrium (40x). (B) PT433: endometrioid, stage 1A/grade 1 cancer. Malignant glands organized in cribiform architecture. A small area of squamous differentiation is noted by the arrow (200x). (C) PT451: endometrioid, stage 1A/grade 1 cancer. Arrow points to a small focus of adenocarcinoma arising within the endometrial mucosa (40x). (D) PT484: endometrioid, stage 1A/grade 2 cancer arising within a polyp. Noted are cribiformed glands and complex architecture within the carcinoma (100x). (E1) PT468: fragment of high grade serous carcinoma with hyperchromatic nuclei (arrows) arranged in a complex glandular pattern (200x). (E2) PT468: another fragment of this tumor with grade 1–2 endometrioid carcinoma, with back-to-back glands (arrows) and lower-grade nuclei than the serous component presented in E1 (100x). (F) PT488: carcinosarcoma, stage 3A/grade 3 showing the biphasic features of high-grade carcinoma (top arrow pointing to the left of the image) and high-grade sarcoma (bottom arrow pointing to the right of the image) (40x). (G) PT492: endometrioid, stage IA/grade 1 cancer. High-power view of the cribiformed glands composed of malignant cells with atypical nuclei (arrow highlights one of these) depicting a grade 1 endometrioid adenocarcinoma ("L," lumen of the malignant glands) (400x).
Fig 3Flowchart depicting the numbers of patients in each step of the study: enrollment, sample collection, ultra-deep sequencing of samples, and molecular and histopathological classification.
Fig 4Mutation distributions detected by the 12-gene panel among the study cohort.
Patients are represented along the x-axis first by their histopathologic diagnosis (represented in top bar) then by total mutation number. Mutation types were color-coded hierarchically, displaying the most consequential mutation type (driver, potential driver, passenger) detected at each patient/gene intersection, as some genes carried multiple mutations. NGS-defined mutations validated by dPCR or Sanger sequencing are represented by a black dot. Note: a number of genes had multiple mutations validated.
Cancer driver mutations identified in uterine lavage samples and their comparison to TCGA statistics.
| Gene | Number of hotspot mutations in lavage samples (%) | Number of TCGA hotspots per gene (%) | Number of TCGA mutations per gene (% of samples affected) | Mutation frequency in hotspots |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIK3CA | 33 (32%) | 86 (36%) | 137 (57%) | H1047R (8/20); E545K/A (4/14); E542K/A (4/13); R88Q (2/11); Q546K (1/11); R93W/Q (3/6); M1043V (1/6); C420R (1/4); G106V (2/1); V344G(2/3); N345I/T(2/5); K111R(1/4); E453K(1/1); E81K(1/1) |
| KRAS | 23 (23%) | 45 (18%) | 49 (20%) | G12D,V (21/36); G13C (1/9); Q61L (1/3) |
| PTEN | 25 (25%) | 62 (26%) | 163 (67%) | R130G/Q/* (7/57); Y16* (1/3); A72fs (1/1); G132D (1/1); I33S (1/1); I67R (1/1); D92E (1/2); G165E (1/3); R173C (1/2); |
| PIK3R1 | 11 (11%) | 3 (1%) | 81 (34%) | D578H/A (2/5); T576delT (1/2); Y580fs (1/1); Y580D (1/3); R514C (1/1); R461* (1/2); |
| ARID1A | 5 (5%) | 12 (5%) | 82 (34%) | R1989* (1/9); R1722* (2/2); R1446* (1/1); |
| FGFR2 | 4 (4%) | 9 (4%) | 38 (16%) | S252W (4/9) |
| FBXW7 | 8 (8%) | 6 (2%) | 38 (16%) | R505C/G (3/6); R479Q (3/1); R465C (1/7); R441L (1/1) |
| TP53 | 2 (2%) | 0 | 68 (21%) | R273H (1/9); S241F (1/3); |
| CTNNB1 | 6 (6%) | 20 (8%) | 73 (30%) | S37F (1/20); D32Y/A (2/12); S45F (2/3); T41A (1/5) |
| RB1 | 1 (1%) | 0 | 25 (10%) |
Total number of mutations detected in gene hotspots in this study and in endometrial tumors studied by TCGA [26]. The percentage of samples affected are given in parentheses.
**Numbers of mutations in hotspot positions detected, respectively, in lavage and in TCGA tumors are given in parentheses; novel mutations are highlighted in bold. Mutations that result in either a stop codon, in-frame deletion, or frame shift are marked, respectively, by “*,” “del,” and “fs” (e.g., W111*, Y463del, S116fs).
Summary of mutation allele fractions across patient samples by each mutated gene.
Correlation between the total mutations/gene showed R2 = 0.92 (Pearson correlation coefficient) when compared between cell pellet DNA and cfDNA.
| Gene | Cell pellet DNA | Sum of mutations | cfDNA | Sum of mutations | Mutation concordance | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ≤5.00% | 5.01%–10.00% | ≥10.01% | ≤5.00% | 5.01%–10.00% | ≥10.01% | ||||||
| # mut | # mut | # mut | # mut | # mut | # mut | # mut | # unique patients | # cancer-diagnosed patients | |||
| 17 | 1 | 4 | 22 | 20 | 0 | 4 | 24 | 8 | 5 | 3 | |
| 16 | 1 | 2 | 19 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 7 | 6 | 0 | |
| 28 | 6 | 2 | 36 | 31 | 1 | 2 | 34 | 14 | 10 | 2 | |
| 7 | 2 | 0 | 9 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 2 | |
| 7 | 1 | 0 | 8 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 0 | |
| 3 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | |
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | |
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 1 | |
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| # of cancer-diagnosed patients (total patients) | 4 (43) | 3 (11) | 2 (4) | - | 5 (33) | 1 (4) | 3 (4) | - | 5 (19) | - | - |
Fig 5Patients with somatic mutations identified by NGS using the targeted 12-gene panel.
Patients are ordered based on the sum of driver and potential driver mutations. Highlighted cases are those in which cancer was diagnosed by histopathology. Patient 433 is not represented because her samples were sequenced using the 56-gene panel.