| Literature DB >> 29974407 |
Tamotsu Sugai1, Makoto Eizuka2, Yasuko Fujita2, Keisuke Kawasaki3, Eiichiro Yamamoto4, Kazuyuki Ishida2, Hiroo Yamano5, Hiromu Suzuki4, Takayuki Matsumoto3.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of your study is to characterize serrated lesions according to their molecular patterns, specifically BRAF/KRAS mutation, methylation, and microsatellite statuses. We evaluated the molecular patterns of 163 serrated lesions, including 37 microvesicular hyperplastic polyps, 73 sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps), 31 traditional serrated adenomas, and 22 SSA/Ps with cytological dysplasia/adenocarcinoma.Entities:
Keywords: BRAF mutation; Cluster analysis; KRAS mutation; Methylation; Microsatellite instability; Serrated lesion
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29974407 PMCID: PMC6153566 DOI: 10.1007/s10620-018-5167-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Dig Dis Sci ISSN: 0163-2116 Impact factor: 3.199
Clinicopathological findings in the serrated lesions
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
MVHP, hyperplastic polyp microvesicular variant; SSA/P, sessile serrated adenoma/ polyp; TSA, traditional serrated adenoma; C, cecum; A, ascending colon; T, transverse colon; D, descending colon; S, sigmoid colon; R, rectum; LST, laterally spreading tumor; Is, sessile elevated lesion; Isp, semi-pedunculated lesion; Ip, pedunculated lesion; IIa, superficial elevated lesion
Fig. 1Hierarchical analysis of serrated lesions according to the BRAF/KRAS mutation, microsatellite, and methylation statuses. The vertical lines in Fig. 1 denote genetic alterations and the horizontal lines “relatedness” between samples. The serrated lesions examined were classified into five subgroups. The clinicopathological findings, histological findings, and expression of mucins, mismatch repair proteins, and annexin A10 are indicated in the lower half of figure
Fig. 2Histological and immunohistochemical staining of left-sided colon tissues. a HE staining. b Positive for MUC2 expression. c Positive for MUC5AC expression. d Negative for MUC2 expression. e Positive for MLH1 expression. f Negative for annexin A10 expression. g Staining for the BRAF mutation in codon 600 (GTG → GAG; 20%). h Negative for KRAS expression. i Methylation panel, intermediate methylation epigenotype. j Microsatellite stability
Fig. 3a Histological and immunohistochemical staining of right-sided colon tissues. b Positive for MUC2 expression. c Positive for MUC5AC expression. d Negative for MUC2 expression. e Positive for MLH1 expression. f Positive for annexin A10 expression. g Staining for the BRAF mutation in codon 600 (GTG → GAG; 34%). h Negative for KRAS expression. i Methylation panel, high methylation epigenotype. j Microsatellite stability
Clinicopathological findings between each subgroup
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
C, cecum; A, ascending colon; T, transverse colon; D, descending colon; S, sigmoid colon; R, rectum; LST, laterally spreading tumor
Pathological diagnosis and the histological findings between each subgroup
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
MVHP, hyperplastic polyp microvesicular variant; SSA/P, sessile serrated adenoma/ polyp; TSA, traditional serrated adenoma; Ab, abnormality
Molecular findings between each subgroup
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
MVHP, hyperplastic polyp microvesicular variant; SSA/P, sessile serrated adenoma/polyp; TSA, traditional serrated adenoma; LME, low methylation epigenotype; IME, intermediate methylation; epigenotype; HME, high methylation epigenotype; MSI, microsatellite instability