Peter Zauber1, Stephen Marotta2, Marlene Sabbath-Solitare2. 1. Department of Medicine, Saint Barnabas Medical Center100 Old Short Hills Road, Livingston 07039, NJ, USA. 2. Department of Pathology, Saint Barnabas Medical Center100 Old Short Hills Road, Livingston 07039, NJ, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A colorectal cancer may develop through a particular molecular genetic pathway, raising the question of whether the particular molecular changes are random, or are unique to the particular segment of colon. We wanted to determine whether molecular changes found within a colorectal cancer might also be detected in separate adenomas and polyps removed from the same area of colon at surgery. Microsatellite instability was chosen as a marker for a pathway of colon carcinogenesis. METHODS: We studied a total of 46 primary colorectal cancers with microsatellite instability and 77 synchronous adenomas and polyps. All tumors were evaluated for microsatellite instability, BRAF and KRAS mutations, and methylation using standard polymerase chain reaction based methods. RESULTS: Forty-nine benign tumors did not follow a pathway similar to that of their 31 synchronous primary cancers. For two distinct subsets of the microsatellite unstable colorectal cancers, those with acquired methylation and BRAF mutation, and those without methylation suggestive of an underlying germ line mutation, the molecular changes in the majority of their synchronous benign tumors were different from the colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: These differences suggest a stochastic process within the colon regarding the particular molecular carcinogenic pathways followed by the synchronous tumors, rather than a 'field defect' within the colon segments. Variability in molecular findings was present for colorectal cancers arising from acquired methylation, as well as those cancers suggestive of a germ line origin.
BACKGROUND: A colorectal cancer may develop through a particular molecular genetic pathway, raising the question of whether the particular molecular changes are random, or are unique to the particular segment of colon. We wanted to determine whether molecular changes found within a colorectal cancer might also be detected in separate adenomas and polyps removed from the same area of colon at surgery. Microsatellite instability was chosen as a marker for a pathway of colon carcinogenesis. METHODS: We studied a total of 46 primary colorectal cancers with microsatellite instability and 77 synchronous adenomas and polyps. All tumors were evaluated for microsatellite instability, BRAF and KRAS mutations, and methylation using standard polymerase chain reaction based methods. RESULTS: Forty-nine benign tumors did not follow a pathway similar to that of their 31 synchronous primary cancers. For two distinct subsets of the microsatellite unstable colorectal cancers, those with acquired methylation and BRAF mutation, and those without methylation suggestive of an underlying germ line mutation, the molecular changes in the majority of their synchronous benign tumors were different from the colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: These differences suggest a stochastic process within the colon regarding the particular molecular carcinogenic pathways followed by the synchronous tumors, rather than a 'field defect' within the colon segments. Variability in molecular findings was present for colorectal cancers arising from acquired methylation, as well as those cancers suggestive of a germ line origin.
Authors: J M Cunningham; C Y Kim; E R Christensen; D J Tester; Y Parc; L J Burgart; K C Halling; S K McDonnell; D J Schaid; C Walsh Vockley; V Kubly; H Nelson; V V Michels; S N Thibodeau Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2001-08-24 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Douglas K Rex; Dennis J Ahnen; John A Baron; Kenneth P Batts; Carol A Burke; Randall W Burt; John R Goldblum; José G Guillem; Charles J Kahi; Matthew F Kalady; Michael J O'Brien; Robert D Odze; Shuji Ogino; Susan Parry; Dale C Snover; Emina Emilia Torlakovic; Paul E Wise; Joanne Young; James Church Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2012-06-19 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Luigi Ricciardiello; Ajay Goel; Vilma Mantovani; Tania Fiorini; Stefania Fossi; Dong K Chang; Veronica Lunedei; Paolo Pozzato; Rocco M Zagari; Luca De Luca; Lorenzo Fuccio; Giuseppe N Martinelli; Enrico Roda; C Richard Boland; Franco Bazzoli Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2003-02-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Jenny N Poynter; Kimberly D Siegmund; Daniel J Weisenberger; Tiffany I Long; Stephen N Thibodeau; Noralane Lindor; Joanne Young; Mark A Jenkins; John L Hopper; John A Baron; Dan Buchanan; Graham Casey; A Joan Levine; Loïc Le Marchand; Steven Gallinger; Bharati Bapat; John D Potter; Polly A Newcomb; Robert W Haile; Peter W Laird Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: W M Grady; R K Parkin; P S Mitchell; J H Lee; Y-H Kim; K D Tsuchiya; M K Washington; C Paraskeva; J K V Willson; A M Kaz; E M Kroh; A Allen; B R Fritz; S D Markowitz; M Tewari Journal: Oncogene Date: 2008-02-11 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Andrea Sottoriva; Haeyoun Kang; Zhicheng Ma; Trevor A Graham; Matthew P Salomon; Junsong Zhao; Paul Marjoram; Kimberly Siegmund; Michael F Press; Darryl Shibata; Christina Curtis Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2015-02-09 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: José P Vaqué; Nerea Martínez; Ignacio Varela; Fidel Fernández; Marta Mayorga; Sophia Derdak; Sergi Beltrán; Thaidy Moreno; Carmen Almaraz; Gonzalo De Las Heras; Mónica Bayés; Ivo Gut; Javier Crespo; Miguel A Piris Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-03-16 Impact factor: 3.240