Je-Keun Rhee1, Tae-Min Kim2,3. 1. Cancer Research Institute, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea. 2. Cancer Research Institute, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea. tmkim@catholic.ac.kr. 3. Department of Medical Informatics, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea. tmkim@catholic.ac.kr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is well recognized that accumulation of somatic mutations in cancer genomes plays a role in carcinogenesis; however, the temporal sequence and evolutionary relationship of somatic mutations remain largely unknown. METHODS: In this study, we built a population-based statistical framework to infer the temporal sequence of acquisition of somatic mutations. Using the model, we analyzed the mutation profiles of 1954 tumor specimens across eight tumor types. RESULTS: As a result, we identified tumor type-specific directed networks composed of 2-15 cancer-related genes (nodes) and their mutational orders (edges). The most common ancestors identified in pairwise comparison of somatic mutations were TP53 mutations in breast, head/neck, and lung cancers. The known relationship of KRAS to TP53 mutations in colorectal cancers was identified, as well as potential ancestors of TP53 mutation such as NOTCH1, EGFR, and PTEN mutations in head/neck, lung and endometrial cancers, respectively. We also identified apoptosis-related genes enriched with ancestor mutations in lung cancers and a relationship between APC hotspot mutations and TP53 mutations in colorectal cancers. CONCLUSION: While evolutionary analysis of cancers has focused on clonal versus subclonal mutations identified in individual genomes, our analysis aims to further discriminate ancestor versus descendant mutations in population-scale mutation profiles that may help select cancer drivers with clinical relevance.
BACKGROUND: It is well recognized that accumulation of somatic mutations in cancer genomes plays a role in carcinogenesis; however, the temporal sequence and evolutionary relationship of somatic mutations remain largely unknown. METHODS: In this study, we built a population-based statistical framework to infer the temporal sequence of acquisition of somatic mutations. Using the model, we analyzed the mutation profiles of 1954 tumor specimens across eight tumor types. RESULTS: As a result, we identified tumor type-specific directed networks composed of 2-15 cancer-related genes (nodes) and their mutational orders (edges). The most common ancestors identified in pairwise comparison of somatic mutations were TP53 mutations in breast, head/neck, and lung cancers. The known relationship of KRAS to TP53 mutations in colorectal cancers was identified, as well as potential ancestors of TP53 mutation such as NOTCH1, EGFR, and PTEN mutations in head/neck, lung and endometrial cancers, respectively. We also identified apoptosis-related genes enriched with ancestor mutations in lung cancers and a relationship between APC hotspot mutations and TP53 mutations in colorectal cancers. CONCLUSION: While evolutionary analysis of cancers has focused on clonal versus subclonal mutations identified in individual genomes, our analysis aims to further discriminate ancestor versus descendant mutations in population-scale mutation profiles that may help select cancer drivers with clinical relevance.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer genome; Mutation accumulation; Somatic mutation
Authors: Aravind Subramanian; Pablo Tamayo; Vamsi K Mootha; Sayan Mukherjee; Benjamin L Ebert; Michael A Gillette; Amanda Paulovich; Scott L Pomeroy; Todd R Golub; Eric S Lander; Jill P Mesirov Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-09-30 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Gillian Smith; Francis A Carey; Julie Beattie; Murray J V Wilkie; Tracy J Lightfoot; Jonathan Coxhead; R Colin Garner; Robert J C Steele; C Roland Wolf Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2002-07-01 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Christina A Ortmann; David G Kent; Jyoti Nangalia; Yvonne Silber; David C Wedge; Jacob Grinfeld; E Joanna Baxter; Charles E Massie; Elli Papaemmanuil; Suraj Menon; Anna L Godfrey; Danai Dimitropoulou; Paola Guglielmelli; Beatriz Bellosillo; Carles Besses; Konstanze Döhner; Claire N Harrison; George S Vassiliou; Alessandro Vannucchi; Peter J Campbell; Anthony R Green Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jasmine Foo; Lin L Liu; Kevin Leder; Markus Riester; Yoh Iwasa; Christoph Lengauer; Franziska Michor Journal: PLoS Comput Biol Date: 2015-09-17 Impact factor: 4.475
Authors: Matthew T Chang; Saurabh Asthana; Sizhi Paul Gao; Byron H Lee; Jocelyn S Chapman; Cyriac Kandoth; JianJiong Gao; Nicholas D Socci; David B Solit; Adam B Olshen; Nikolaus Schultz; Barry S Taylor Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 54.908