| Literature DB >> 30188888 |
William P D Hendricks1, Victoria Zismann1, Karthigayini Sivaprakasam1,2, Christophe Legendre1, Kelsey Poorman3,4, Waibhav Tembe1, Nieves Perdigones1, Jeffrey Kiefer1, Winnie Liang1, Valerie DeLuca1,5, Mitchell Stark6, Alison Ruhe7, Roe Froman8, Nicholas S Duesbery9, Megan Washington1, Jessica Aldrich1, Mark W Neff10, Matthew J Huentelman11, Nicholas Hayward12, Kevin Brown13, Douglas Thamm14, Gerald Post15, Chand Khanna1, Barbara Davis16, Matthew Breen3,17, Alexander Sekulic1,4, Jeffrey M Trent1.
Abstract
Canine malignant melanoma, a significant cause of mortality in domestic dogs, is a powerful comparative model for human melanoma, but little is known about its genetic etiology. We mapped the genomic landscape of canine melanoma through multi-platform analysis of 37 tumors (31 mucosal, 3 acral, 2 cutaneous, and 1 uveal) and 17 matching constitutional samples including long- and short-insert whole genome sequencing, RNA sequencing, array comparative genomic hybridization, single nucleotide polymorphism array, and targeted Sanger sequencing analyses. We identified novel predominantly truncating mutations in the putative tumor suppressor gene PTPRJ in 19% of cases. No BRAF mutations were detected, but activating RAS mutations (24% of cases) occurred in conserved hotspots in all cutaneous and acral and 13% of mucosal subtypes. MDM2 amplifications (24%) and TP53 mutations (19%) were mutually exclusive. Additional low-frequency recurrent alterations were observed amidst low point mutation rates, an absence of ultraviolet light mutational signatures, and an abundance of copy number and structural alterations. Mutations that modulate cell proliferation and cell cycle control were common and highlight therapeutic axes such as MEK and MDM2 inhibition. This mutational landscape resembles that seen in BRAF wild-type and sun-shielded human melanoma subtypes. Overall, these data inform biological comparisons between canine and human melanoma while suggesting actionable targets in both species.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30188888 PMCID: PMC6126841 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1007589
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Genet ISSN: 1553-7390 Impact factor: 5.917
Summary of genomic analyses performed in canine melanoma.
| Analysis platform | Type of alteration detected | Samples analyzed |
|---|---|---|
| WGS | Point mutations, copy number, structural alterations | 7 tumor and 6 matching normal samples |
| LI-WGS | Copy number and structural alterations | |
| mRNASeq | Expressed point mutations and transcript abundance | |
| aCGH | Copy number alterations | |
| SNP-A | Copy number alterations | |
| Targeted Sequencing | Point mutations | 27 tumor and 11 matching normal samples, 3 cell lines |
| SNP-A | Copy number alterations | |
| Total distinct samples | 34 tumor samples, 18 matching normals, 3 cell lines |
WGS = whole genome sequencing; LI = long insert mRNASeq = messenger RNA sequencing
aCGH = array comparative genomic hybridization
SNP-A = single nucleotide polymorphism array.
Summary of whole-genome analysis in canine melanoma discovery cohort.
| Sample Information | SNVs | CNVs | SVs | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample | Tumor Type | Breed | Gender | Age at Diagnosis | SNV | Indel | Mut Rate | CNV (n) | CNV% | Amp | Del | SV | CTX(n) | Inv | Del | Dup |
| ND09-345 | Mucosal | ECS | F | 11 | 4223 | 264 | 2.03 | 41 | 0.4% | 33 | 8 | 56 | 15 | 17 | 17 | 7 |
| ND10-370 | Mucosal | LR | M | 10 | 6342 | 655 | 3.14 | 64 | 2.1% | 23 | 41 | 65 | 9 | 22 | 21 | 13 |
| ND10-376 | Mucosal | CS | F | 16 | 5085 | 344 | 2.48 | 4 | 0.3% | 0 | 4 | 25 | 2 | 10 | 5 | 8 |
| ND10-166 | Mucosal | CS | M | 14 | 3395 | 316 | 1.23 | 68 | 0.7% | 61 | 7 | 34 | 2 | 11 | 12 | 9 |
| ND10-361 | Mucosal | CS | M | 15 | 3029 | 88 | 1.42 | 5 | 0.0% | 2 | 3 | 24 | 6 | 10 | 3 | 5 |
| ND10-363 | Acral | CS | M | 15 | 4906 | 323 | 2.45 | 11 | 0.2% | 2 | 9 | 9 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 2 |
| ND10-441 | Cutaneous | CS | F | 11 | 1880 | 203 | 0.97 | 27 | 9.9% | 0 | 27 | 39 | 8 | 12 | 12 | 7 |
SNV = somatic single nucleotide variant; Indel = insertion and deletion; Mut Rate = Mutation Rate (SNVs + Indels / Callable Mb); CNV = somatic copy number variant; CNV% = percentage of genome involved in CNVs; Amp = amplification-log ratio > = 2; Del = deletion-log ratio < = -0.6; SV = somatic structural variant from LI; CTX = inter-chromosomal translocation; Inv = inversion; Del = Deletion; Dup = duplication; ECS = English cocker spaniel; LR = Laborador retriever; CS = Cocker spaniel; F = female; M = male.
Fig 1The mutational landscape of canine melanoma.
(A) A representative Circos plot depicting coding SNVs, CNVs, and SVs in a single mucosal melanoma. Outer circle depicts canine chromosome number. Blue triangles are SNVs located within coding regions. The middle circle denotes CNVs with gains (in red) and losses (in green) according to the aberration amplitude. Blue lines transecting the plot show translocations. (B) Numbers and types of coding mutations identified by SI-WGS and LI-WGS in the discovery cohort. *ND10-361 and ND10-363 are independent primary tumors from the same dog. (C) Integrated genomic data is presented for 34 canine melanomas and 3 canine melanoma cell lines. Each column represents data from a single tumor. Indication of tumor type (mucosal, uveal, acral, and cutaneous) is displayed above annotation of recurrently-mutated and hallmark genes. Mutations identified by WGS, aCGH, SNP array, and targeted sequencing are presented in order of frequency as are recurrent CNV regions identified by SNP array and GISTIC as well as recurrent regions involved in translocations identified by LI-WGS. Genomic analysis annotation, tumor ID, and figure legend are presented at the bottom of the figure.
Fig 2Recurrent somatic alterations in canine melanoma.
(A) Distribution of RAS mutations within the cohort of 37 samples (n = 9). (B) Recurrently amplified region of CFA10 found in nine tumors, which is defined by the minimal region surrounding MDM2. (C) Location of potentially deleterious mutations present in the putative tumor suppressor PTPRJ found through Sanger sequencing of the coding sequence of each tumor. (D) Individual mutations and their locations within TP53.
Fig 3Key deregulated pathways in canine and human melanoma.
(A) Mutation rate in canine and human melanoma subtypes is shown as somatic SNVs per DNA Mb based on WGS in our discovery cohort compared to WGS data from 140 human cutaneous, 35 acral, and 8 mucosal melanomas (Hayward et al., 2017). CM = Canine mucosal, HA = Human acral, HM = Human mucosal, and HC = Human cutaneous melanoma. Orange and blue dots in the CM plot represent the individual acral and cutaneous subtypes, respectively, in our discovery cohort. (B) Fraction of copy-number-altered genome in canine melanoma and human melanoma sequencing cohorts. (C) Total number of structural variants identified in canine and human melanoma sequencing cohorts. (D) Comparison of C>T transitions in the major melanoma types in dipyrimidine versus non-dipyrimidines. (E) Overall frequency of mutations in key melanoma pathways in our full cohort of 31 mucosal tumors compared to WGS in other subtypes from Hayward et al., 2017.