BACKGROUND: Sex differences in glioma incidence and outcome have been previously reported but remain poorly understood. Many sex differences that affect the cancer risk were thought to be associated with cancer evolution. METHODS: In this study, we used an integrated framework to infer the timing and clonal status of mutations in ~600 diffuse gliomas from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) including glioblastomas (GBMs) and low-grade gliomas (LGGs), and investigated the sex difference of mutation clonality. RESULTS: We observed higher overall and subclonal mutation burden in female patients with different grades of gliomas, which could be largely explained by the mutations of the X chromosome. Some well-established drivers were identified showing sex-biased clonality, such as CDH18 and ATRX. Focusing on glioma subtypes, we further found a higher subclonal mutation burden in females than males in the majority of glioma subtypes, and observed opposite clonal tendency of several drivers between male and female patients in a specific subtype. Moreover, analysis of clinically actionable genes revealed that mutations in genes of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway were more likely to be clonal in female patients with GBM, whereas mutations in genes involved in the receptor tyrosine kinase signaling pathway were more likely to be clonal in male patients with LGG. CONCLUSIONS: The patients with diffuse glioma showed sex-biased mutation clonality (eg, different subclonal mutation number and different clonal tendency of cancer genes), highlighting the need to consider sex as an important variable for improving glioma therapy and clinical care.
BACKGROUND: Sex differences in glioma incidence and outcome have been previously reported but remain poorly understood. Many sex differences that affect the cancer risk were thought to be associated with cancer evolution. METHODS: In this study, we used an integrated framework to infer the timing and clonal status of mutations in ~600 diffuse gliomas from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) including glioblastomas (GBMs) and low-grade gliomas (LGGs), and investigated the sex difference of mutation clonality. RESULTS: We observed higher overall and subclonal mutation burden in female patients with different grades of gliomas, which could be largely explained by the mutations of the X chromosome. Some well-established drivers were identified showing sex-biased clonality, such as CDH18 and ATRX. Focusing on glioma subtypes, we further found a higher subclonal mutation burden in females than males in the majority of glioma subtypes, and observed opposite clonal tendency of several drivers between male and female patients in a specific subtype. Moreover, analysis of clinically actionable genes revealed that mutations in genes of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway were more likely to be clonal in female patients with GBM, whereas mutations in genes involved in the receptor tyrosine kinase signaling pathway were more likely to be clonal in male patients with LGG. CONCLUSIONS: The patients with diffuse glioma showed sex-biased mutation clonality (eg, different subclonal mutation number and different clonal tendency of cancer genes), highlighting the need to consider sex as an important variable for improving glioma therapy and clinical care.
Authors: Cameron W Brennan; Roel G W Verhaak; Aaron McKenna; Benito Campos; Houtan Noushmehr; Sofie R Salama; Siyuan Zheng; Debyani Chakravarty; J Zachary Sanborn; Samuel H Berman; Rameen Beroukhim; Brady Bernard; Chang-Jiun Wu; Giannicola Genovese; Ilya Shmulevich; Jill Barnholtz-Sloan; Lihua Zou; Rahulsimham Vegesna; Sachet A Shukla; Giovanni Ciriello; W K Yung; Wei Zhang; Carrie Sougnez; Tom Mikkelsen; Kenneth Aldape; Darell D Bigner; Erwin G Van Meir; Michael Prados; Andrew Sloan; Keith L Black; Jennifer Eschbacher; Gaetano Finocchiaro; William Friedman; David W Andrews; Abhijit Guha; Mary Iacocca; Brian P O'Neill; Greg Foltz; Jerome Myers; Daniel J Weisenberger; Robert Penny; Raju Kucherlapati; Charles M Perou; D Neil Hayes; Richard Gibbs; Marco Marra; Gordon B Mills; Eric Lander; Paul Spellman; Richard Wilson; Chris Sander; John Weinstein; Matthew Meyerson; Stacey Gabriel; Peter W Laird; David Haussler; Gad Getz; Lynda Chin Journal: Cell Date: 2013-10-10 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Nicole M Warrington; Tao Sun; Jingqin Luo; Robert C McKinstry; Patricia C Parkin; Sara Ganzhorn; Debra Spoljaric; Anne C Albers; Amanda Merkelson; Douglas R Stewart; David A Stevenson; David Viskochil; Todd E Druley; Jason T Forys; Karlyne M Reilly; Michael J Fisher; Uri Tabori; Jeffrey C Allen; Joshua D Schiffman; David H Gutmann; Joshua B Rubin Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2014-11-07 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Tao Sun; Nicole M Warrington; Jingqin Luo; Michael D Brooks; Sonika Dahiya; Steven C Snyder; Rajarshi Sengupta; Joshua B Rubin Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2014-08-01 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Esraa Mohamed; Anupam Kumar; Yalan Zhang; Albert S Wang; Katharine Chen; Yunita Lim; Anny Shai; Jennie W Taylor; Jennifer Clarke; Stephanie Hilz; Mitchel S Berger; David A Solomon; Joseph F Costello; Annette M Molinaro; Joanna J Phillips Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 13.029
Authors: Mario Mischkulnig; Barbara Kiesel; Daniela Lötsch; Thomas Roetzer; Martin Borkovec; Lisa I Wadiura; Karl Roessler; Shawn Hervey-Jumper; Josef M Penninger; Mitchel S Berger; Georg Widhalm; Friedrich Erhart Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-02-07 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Ming Bai; Xiaolong Wang; Huixue Zhang; Jianjian Wang; Gaysina Lyaysan; Si Xu; Kuo Tian; Tianfeng Wang; Jie Li; Na Wang; Xiaoyu Lu; Xiaoming Zhang; Lihua Wang Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2022-04-18 Impact factor: 3.246
Authors: Małgorzata Łysiak; Anja Smits; Kenney Roy Roodakker; Elisabeth Sandberg; Anna Dimberg; Munila Mudaisi; Charlotte Bratthäll; Michael Strandeus; Peter Milos; Martin Hallbeck; Peter Söderkvist; Annika Malmström Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-03-31 Impact factor: 6.639