Jun Qian1,2, Shilin Zhao3, Yong Zou1, S M Jamshedur Rahman1, Maria-Fernanda Senosain1, Thomas Stricker4, Heidi Chen2, Charles A Powell5, Alain C Borczuk6, Pierre P Massion1. 1. Division of Allergy, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Early Cancer Detection and Prevention Initiative, Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center. 2. Center for Pecision Medicine, Department of Biomedical Informatics. 3. Department of Biostatistics, and. 4. Department of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee. 5. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; and. 6. Department of Pathology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
Abstract
Rationale: We have a limited understanding of the molecular underpinnings of early adenocarcinoma (ADC) progression. We hypothesized that the behavior of early ADC can be predicted based on genomic determinants. Objectives: To identify genomic alterations associated with resected indolent and aggressive early lung ADCs. Methods: DNA was extracted from 21 ADCs in situ (AISs), 27 minimally invasive ADCs (MIAs), and 54 fully invasive ADCs. This DNA was subjected to deep next-generation sequencing and tested against a custom panel of 347 cancer genes.Measurements and Main Results: Sequencing data was analyzed for associations among tumor mutation burden, frequency of mutations or copy number alterations, mutation signatures, intratumor heterogeneity, pathway alterations, histology, and overall survival. We found that deleterious mutation burden was significantly greater in invasive ADC, whereas more copy number loss was observed in AIS and MIA. Intratumor heterogeneity establishes early, as in AIS. Twenty-one significantly mutated genes were shared among the groups. Mutation signature profiling did not vary significantly, although the APOBEC signature was associated with ADC and poor survival. Subclonal KRAS mutations and a gene signature consisting of PIK3CG, ATM, EPPK1, EP300, or KMT2C mutations were also associated with poor survival. Mutations of KRAS, TP53, and NF1 were found to increase in frequency from AIS and MIA to ADC. A cancer progression model revealed selective early and late drivers.Conclusions: Our results reveal several genetic driver events, clonality, and mutational signatures associated with poor outcome in early lung ADC, with potential future implications for the detection and management of ADC.
Rationale: We have a limited understanding of the molecular underpinnings of early adenocarcinoma (ADC) progression. We hypothesized that the behavior of early ADC can be predicted based on genomic determinants. Objectives: To identify genomic alterations associated with resected indolent and aggressive early lung ADCs. Methods: DNA was extracted from 21 ADCs in situ (AISs), 27 minimally invasive ADCs (MIAs), and 54 fully invasive ADCs. This DNA was subjected to deep next-generation sequencing and tested against a custom panel of 347 cancer genes.Measurements and Main Results: Sequencing data was analyzed for associations among tumor mutation burden, frequency of mutations or copy number alterations, mutation signatures, intratumor heterogeneity, pathway alterations, histology, and overall survival. We found that deleterious mutation burden was significantly greater in invasive ADC, whereas more copy number loss was observed in AIS and MIA. Intratumor heterogeneity establishes early, as in AIS. Twenty-one significantly mutated genes were shared among the groups. Mutation signature profiling did not vary significantly, although the APOBEC signature was associated with ADC and poor survival. Subclonal KRAS mutations and a gene signature consisting of PIK3CG, ATM, EPPK1, EP300, or KMT2C mutations were also associated with poor survival. Mutations of KRAS, TP53, and NF1 were found to increase in frequency from AIS and MIA to ADC. A cancer progression model revealed selective early and late drivers.Conclusions: Our results reveal several genetic driver events, clonality, and mutational signatures associated with poor outcome in early lung ADC, with potential future implications for the detection and management of ADC.
Authors: Pierre P Massion; Wen-Lin Kuo; David Stokoe; Adam B Olshen; Patrick A Treseler; Koei Chin; Chira Chen; Daniel Polikoff; Ajay N Jain; Daniel Pinkel; Donna G Albertson; David M Jablons; Joe W Gray Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2002-07-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Giulio Caravagna; Alex Graudenzi; Daniele Ramazzotti; Rebeca Sanz-Pamplona; Luca De Sano; Giancarlo Mauri; Victor Moreno; Marco Antoniotti; Bud Mishra Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2016-06-28 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: C M Perou; T Sørlie; M B Eisen; M van de Rijn; S S Jeffrey; C A Rees; J R Pollack; D T Ross; H Johnsen; L A Akslen; O Fluge; A Pergamenschikov; C Williams; S X Zhu; P E Lønning; A L Børresen-Dale; P O Brown; D Botstein Journal: Nature Date: 2000-08-17 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Kathryn C Arbour; Emmett Jordan; Hyunjae Ryan Kim; Jordan Dienstag; Helena A Yu; Francisco Sanchez-Vega; Piro Lito; Michael Berger; David B Solit; Matthew Hellmann; Mark G Kris; Charles M Rudin; Ai Ni; Maria Arcila; Marc Ladanyi; Gregory J Riely Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 13.801
Authors: Edmund A Mroz; Aaron D Tward; Aaron M Tward; Rebecca J Hammon; Yin Ren; James W Rocco Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2015-02-10 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Brian A Walker; Christopher P Wardell; Alex Murison; Eileen M Boyle; Dil B Begum; Nasrin M Dahir; Paula Z Proszek; Lorenzo Melchor; Charlotte Pawlyn; Martin F Kaiser; David C Johnson; Ya-Wei Qiang; John R Jones; David A Cairns; Walter M Gregory; Roger G Owen; Gordon Cook; Mark T Drayson; Graham H Jackson; Faith E Davies; Gareth J Morgan Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Christopher A Miller; Brian S White; Nathan D Dees; Malachi Griffith; John S Welch; Obi L Griffith; Ravi Vij; Michael H Tomasson; Timothy A Graubert; Matthew J Walter; Matthew J Ellis; William Schierding; John F DiPersio; Timothy J Ley; Elaine R Mardis; Richard K Wilson; Li Ding Journal: PLoS Comput Biol Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 4.475
Authors: William N William; Xin Zhao; Joy J Bianchi; Heather Y Lin; Pan Cheng; J Jack Lee; Hannah Carter; Ludmil B Alexandrov; Jim P Abraham; David B Spetzler; Steven M Dubinett; Don W Cleveland; Webster Cavenee; Teresa Davoli; Scott M Lippman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2021-05-11 Impact factor: 12.779
Authors: Subramanian Venkatesan; Mihaela Angelova; Clare Puttick; Haoran Zhai; Deborah R Caswell; Wei-Ting Lu; Michelle Dietzen; Panagiotis Galanos; Konstantinos Evangelou; Roberto Bellelli; Emilia L Lim; Thomas B K Watkins; Andrew Rowan; Vitor H Teixeira; Yue Zhao; Haiquan Chen; Bryan Ngo; Lykourgos-Panagiotis Zalmas; Maise Al Bakir; Sebastijan Hobor; Eva Grönroos; Adam Pennycuick; Ersilia Nigro; Brittany B Campbell; William L Brown; Ayse U Akarca; Teresa Marafioti; Mary Y Wu; Michael Howell; Simon J Boulton; Cosetta Bertoli; Tim R Fenton; Robertus A M de Bruin; Apolinar Maya-Mendoza; Eric Santoni-Rugiu; Robert E Hynds; Vassilis G Gorgoulis; Mariam Jamal-Hanjani; Nicholas McGranahan; Reuben S Harris; Sam M Janes; Jirina Bartkova; Samuel F Bakhoum; Jiri Bartek; Nnennaya Kanu; Charles Swanton Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 38.272
Authors: Rony F Arauz; Jung S Byun; Mayank Tandon; Sanju Sinha; Skyler Kuhn; Sheryse Taylor; Adriana Zingone; Khadijah A Mitchell; Sharon R Pine; Kevin Gardner; Eliseo J Perez-Stable; Anna M Napoles; Bríd M Ryan Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2020-09-12 Impact factor: 15.609