Literature DB >> 30602061

Risk stratification by somatic mutation burden in Ewing sarcoma.

Kevin X Liu1, Nayan Lamba2, William L Hwang3, Andrzej Niemierko4, Steven G DuBois2,5, Daphne A Haas-Kogan2,6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Up to one-third of patients with localized Ewing sarcoma (ES) develop recurrent disease, but current biomarkers do not accurately identify this high-risk group. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the utility of mutational burden in predicting outcomes in patients with localized ES.
METHODS: Clinical and genomic data from 99 patients with ES, of whom 63 had localized disease at diagnosis, were obtained from the cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics. Genomic data included the type and number of somatic mutations using cBioPortal mutation calling. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and the time to progression (TTP).
RESULTS: Patients had a median number of 11 somatic mutations. Patients were stratified according to whether they had a lower or higher mutational burden if they had ≤11 or >11 mutations, respectively. Higher mutational burden was significantly associated with inferior OS and TTP, a finding that was confirmed by univariate and multivariable analyses. In patients who had localized disease at diagnosis, higher mutational burden was the only variable significantly associated with inferior OS and TTP. The presence of a mutation in either stromal antigen 2 (STAG2) or tumor protein 53 (TP53), both of which were correlated previously with shorter OS in patients with ES, were significantly associated with higher mutational burden. Upon stratifying patients who had localized disease based on a standard panel of cancer genes, higher risk stratification was correlated significantly with inferior TTP and trended toward significance with inferior OS.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who have localized ES and a higher mutational burden have inferior OS and TTP compared with those who have lower mutation burden. The current findings suggest that the somatic mutation burden can be used to better risk stratify these patients and to guide clinical decision making.
© 2019 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ewing sarcoma; OncoPanel; somatic mutations; somatic variants; stromal antigen 2 (STAG2); tumor protein 53 (TP53)

Year:  2019        PMID: 30602061     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31919

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  8 in total

1.  A Multiparametric Method Based on Clinical and CT-Based Radiomics to Predict the Expression of p53 and VEGF in Patients With Spinal Giant Cell Tumor of Bone.

Authors:  Qizheng Wang; Yang Zhang; Enlong Zhang; Xiaoying Xing; Yongye Chen; Ke Nie; Huishu Yuan; Min-Ying Su; Ning Lang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-21       Impact factor: 5.738

2.  Ewing sarcoma with FEV gene rearrangements is a rare subset with predilection for extraskeletal locations and aggressive behavior.

Authors:  Yusuke Tsuda; Brendan C Dickson; David Swanson; Yun-Shao Sung; Lei Zhang; Paul Meyers; John H Healey; Cristina R Antonescu
Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer       Date:  2019-12-03       Impact factor: 5.006

3.  Phase 1/2 trial of talazoparib in combination with temozolomide in children and adolescents with refractory/recurrent solid tumors including Ewing sarcoma: A Children's Oncology Group Phase 1 Consortium study (ADVL1411).

Authors:  Eric S Schafer; Rachel E Rau; Stacey L Berg; Xiaowei Liu; Charles G Minard; Alexander J R Bishop; J Carolina Romero; M John Hicks; Marvin D Nelson; Stephan Voss; Joel M Reid; Elizabeth Fox; Brenda J Weigel; Susan M Blaney
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 3.838

4.  Gene expression and immunohistochemical analyses identify SOX2 as major risk factor for overall survival and relapse in Ewing sarcoma patients.

Authors:  Giuseppina Sannino; Aruna Marchetto; Andreas Ranft; Susanne Jabar; Constanze Zacherl; Rebeca Alba-Rubio; Stefanie Stein; Fabienne S Wehweck; Merve M Kiran; Tilman L B Hölting; Julian Musa; Laura Romero-Pérez; Florencia Cidre-Aranaz; Maximilian M L Knott; Jing Li; Heribert Jürgens; Ana Sastre; Javier Alonso; Willian Da Silveira; Gary Hardiman; Julia S Gerke; Martin F Orth; Wolfgang Hartmann; Thomas Kirchner; Shunya Ohmura; Uta Dirksen; Thomas G P Grünewald
Journal:  EBioMedicine       Date:  2019-08-16       Impact factor: 8.143

5.  The Optimal Outcome of Suppressing Ewing Sarcoma Growth in vivo With Biocompatible Bioengineered miR-34a-5p Prodrug.

Authors:  Dai-Feng Li; Ying Yuan; Mei-Juan Tu; Xiang Hu; Yi-Zhou Li; Wan-Rong Yi; Peng-Cheng Li; Yong Zhao; Zhen Cheng; Ai-Ming Yu; Chao Jian; Ai-Xi Yu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 6.244

6.  The Clinical Implications of Tumor Mutational Burden in Osteosarcoma.

Authors:  Lu Xie; Yufei Yang; Wei Guo; Dongxue Che; Jie Xu; Xin Sun; Kuisheng Liu; Tingting Ren; Xingyu Liu; Yi Yang; Tao Ji; Xiaodong Tang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 6.244

7.  Next Generation Sequencing Reveals Pathogenic and Actionable Genetic Alterations of Soft Tissue Sarcoma in Chinese Patients: A Single Center Experience.

Authors:  Gu Jin; Chunyang Wang; Dongdong Jia; Wenkang Qian; Chunming Yin; Danhua Wang; Quanyu Yang; Tao Li; Aiwen Zheng
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec

Review 8.  An international working group consensus report for the prioritization of molecular biomarkers for Ewing sarcoma.

Authors:  David S Shulman; Sarah B Whittle; Didier Surdez; Kelly M Bailey; Enrique de Álava; Jason T Yustein; Adam Shlien; Masanori Hayashi; Alexander J R Bishop; Brian D Crompton; Steven G DuBois; Neerav Shukla; Patrick J Leavey; Stephen L Lessnick; Heinrich Kovar; Olivier Delattre; Thomas G P Grünewald; Cristina R Antonescu; Ryan D Roberts; Jeffrey A Toretsky; Franck Tirode; Richard Gorlick; Katherine A Janeway; Damon Reed; Elizabeth R Lawlor; Patrick J Grohar
Journal:  NPJ Precis Oncol       Date:  2022-09-17
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.