| Literature DB >> 32532105 |
Li-Chun Chang1,2,3, Han-Mo Chiu1,2, Bing-Ching Ho4, Min-Hsuan Chen4, Yin-Chen Hsu5, Wei-Tzu Chiu5, Kang-Yi Su5, Chia-Tung Shun6, Jin-Tung Liang7, Sung-Liang Yu3,4,5,8,9,10, Ming-Shiang Wu1.
Abstract
Depressed colorectal neoplasm exhibits high malignant potential and shows rapid invasiveness. We investigated the genomic profile of depressed neoplasms and clarified the survival outcome and treatment response of the cancers arising from them. We examined 20 depressed and 13 polypoid neoplasms by genome-wide copy number analysis. Subsequently, we validated the identified copy number alterations (CNAs) in an independent cohort of 37 depressed and 42 polypoid neoplasms. Finally, the CNAs were tested as biomarkers in 530 colorectal cancers (CRCs) to clarify the clinical outcome of depressed neoplasms. CNAs in MYC, CCNA1, and BIRC7 were significantly enriched in depressed neoplasms and designated as the D-marker panel. CRCs with a D-marker panel have significantly shorter progression-free survival compared with those without (p = 0.012), especially in stage I (p = 0.049), stages T1+2 (p = 0.027), and proximal cancers (p = 0.002). The positivity of the D-marker panel was an independent risk factor of cancer progression (hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) = 1.52 (1.09-2.11)). Furthermore, the proximal CRCs with D-marker panels had worse overall and progression-free survival when taking oxaliplatin as chemotherapy than those that did not. The D-marker panel may help to optimize treatment and surveillance in proximal CRC and develop a molecular test. However, the current result remains preliminary, and further validation in prospective trials is warranted in the future.Entities:
Keywords: BIRC7; CCNA1; CNAs; MYC; chemotherapy; colorectal cancer
Year: 2020 PMID: 32532105 PMCID: PMC7352996 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12061527
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Demographic and clinical information.
| Clinical Information | Discovery Set | Validation Set | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D Type, | P Type, | D Type, | P Type, | |
| Male, | 14 (70.0) | 7 (53.8) | 26 (70.3) | 30 (71.4) |
| Age, years (SD) | 66.5 (9.0) | 58.5 (11.7) | 66.5 (12.5) | 65.7 (12.7) |
| Location, | ||||
| Proximal | 8 (40.0) | 3 (23.1) | 16 (43.2) | 20 (47.6) |
| Distal | 10 (50.0) | 9 (69.2) | 12 (32.4) | 13 (31.0) |
| Rectum | 2 (10.0) | 1 (7.7) | 9 (24.3) | 9 (21.4) |
| Tumor size, mm (SD) | 12.1 (6.1) | 28.1 (9.3) | 24.3 (10.6) | 21.0 (11.3) |
| Histology, | ||||
| Tubular adenoma | 8 (40.0) | 3 (23.1) | 1 (2.7) | 9 (21.4) |
| Tubulovillous adenoma | 2 (10.0) | 8 (61.5) | 0 (0) | 21 (50.0) |
| Advanced histology | 10 (50.0) | 2 (15.4) | 36 (97.3) | 12 (28.6) |
| High-grade dysplasia | 3 (15.0) | 2 (15.4) | 21 (56.8) | 9 (21.4) |
| Invasive cancer | 7 (35.0) | 0 (0) | 15 (40.5) | 3 (7.1) |
| G1/2 | 7 (35.0) | 0 (0) | 15 (40.5) | 3 (7.1) |
| G3/4 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| Morphology, | ||||
| 0-Ip | - | 8 (61.5) | - | 23 (54.8) |
| 0-Is | - | 5 (38.5) | - | 19 (45.2) |
| 0-IIc | 5 (25.0) | - | 2 (5.4) | - |
| 0-IIa+IIc | 10 (50.0) | - | 31 (83.8) | - |
| 0-Is+IIc | 5 (25.0) | - | 4 (10.8) | - |
D type: depressed neoplasm, P type: polypoid neoplasm.
Figure 1Depressed colorectal neoplasms harbor high malignant potential and presents with invasive cancer, even at a small size. The first depressed neoplasm is 8 mm in size and appears as 0-IIa + IIc in morphology (A,B). The adenocarcinoma presents with submucosal invasion (1.8 mm) in the depressed area (C). The second depressed neoplasm is 8 mm in size and harbors invasive cancer with submucosal invasion. Moreover, one of the 22 regional lymph nodes is metastasized, and the pathological stage is T1N1aM0 (D,E,F). The third depressed neoplasm is 1.2 cm in size and 0-IIa + IIc in morphology (G,H). The adenocarcinoma in the depressed area invades into the muscular layer, and thereby its stage is T3N0M0 (I). The central depressed area starts to rise significantly when the cancer keeps growing (J,K), and eventually becomes protruded (0-Is + IIc) (M,N), which as a morphological appearance hints at deep submucosal invasion by cancer. Both the last two lesions are submucosal cancer (L,O), although their size is as small as 10 mm.
Comparison of depressed colorectal cancer (CRC) with conventional CRC.
| Clinical Information | Depressed CRC | Conventional CRC | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age, years (SD) | 70.8 (13.7) | 70.8 (14.3) | 0.00 |
| Male gender, | 55 (47.0) | 220 (53.3) | 0.23 |
| Proximal location, | 26 (22.2) | 151 (36.6) | 0.0037 |
| Cancer stage distribution | |||
| T1, | 13 (11.1) | 61 (14.8) | 0.32 |
| T1+2, | 38 (32.5) | 157 (38.0) | 0.27 |
| Stage I, | 31 (26.5) | 139 (33.7) | 0.14 |
| Stage II, | 32 (27.4) | 102 (24.7) | 0.56 |
| Stage III, | 24 (20.5) | 96 (23.2) | 0.53 |
| Stage IV, | 30 (25.6) | 76 (18.4) | 0.084 |
| Molecular characteristics | |||
| 33 (28.2) | 166 (40.2) | 0.018 | |
| 3 (2.6) | 21 (5.1) | 0.25 | |
| MSI-H, | 0 (0) | 38 (9.2) | 0.0007 |
| CIMP-positivity, | 8 (6.8) | 63 (15.3) | 0.018 |
MSI-H: microsatellite instability-high, CIMP: CpG island methylation phenotype. Depressed CRC: colorectal cancer with positive D-marker panel; conventional CRC: colorectal cancer with negative D-marker panel.
Figure 2Depressed CRC associated with unfavorable survival compared with conventional CRC. The depressed CRC has an unfavorable progression-free survival (PFS) in comparison with the conventional CRC in overall CRC (A), proximal colon (C), early-stage (stage I) CRC (E), and small-sized cancer (T1+2 cancer) (G). The overall survival (OS) is not significantly different between depressed CRC and conventional CRC with regard to overall (B), proximal (D), stage I (F), and T1+2 cancers (H).
Figure 3Comparison of progression-free survival (PFS) among depressed CRCs with various genetic changes. Depressed CRC has an unfavorable PFS compared to conventional CRC. The survival deteriorates further if KRAS or BRAF mutation presents, as well as if the CRC is CIMP-positive. D(−): conventional CRC; D(+): depressed CRC; CIMP(+): CIMP-positivity.
Risk factor for tumor progression in CRC.
| Clinical Information | Univariable | Model 1 | Model 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | aHR | 95%CI | aHR | 95% CI | |
| Age | 0.98 | 0.97 to 0.99 | 0.97 | 0.96 to 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.97 to 1.0 |
| Gender, male vs. female | 1.23 | 0.93 to 1.64 | 1.47 | 1.09 to 1.97 | 1.26 | 0.93 to 1.7 |
| Location, proximal vs. distal | 1.14 | 0.83 to 1.55 | ||||
| Cancer stage | ||||||
| I | 1 | 1 | ||||
| II | 5.35 | 2.20 to 13.0 | 5.07 | 2.08 to 12.38 | ||
| III | 22.23 | 9.61 to 51.39 | 20.26 | 8.73 to 47.04 | ||
| IV | 59.05 | 25.72 to 135.59 | 53.03 | 22.95 to 122.54 | ||
| Positivity of D-marker panel | 1.47 | 1.07 to 2.01 | 1.52 | 1.09 to 2.11 | 1.29 | 0.92 to 1.80 |
| Cancer differentiation | ||||||
| Low-grade | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||
| High-grade | 3.13 | 1.54 to 6.36 | 2.79 | 1.31 to 5.95 | 2.45 | 1.15 to 5.24 |
| Mucinous | 2.86 | 0.71 to 11.60 | 3.58 | 0.87 to 14.72 | 1.06 | 0.26 to 4.38 |
| 1.23 | 0.92 to 1.64 | 1.51 | 1.11 to 2.05 | 1.72 | 1.26 to 2.36 | |
| 0.93 | 0.46 to 1.89 | 1.16 | 0.55 to 2.44 | 1.60 | 0.75 to 3.42 | |
| MSI-H | 0.24 | 0.09 to 0.65 | 0.22 | 0.08 to 0.60 | 0.46 | 0.17 to 1.26 |
| CIMP-positivity | 0.86 | 0.55 to 1.34 | 0.92 | 0.58 to 1.47 | 0.77 | 0.48 to 1.22 |
MSI: microsatellite instability; CIMP: CpG island methylation phenotype; HR: hazard ratio; aHR: adjusted HR.
Risk factors for cancer recurrence in T1+2 cancer.
| Clinical Information | Univariable | Multivariable | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | aHR | 95% CI | |
| Age | 1.00 | 0.95 to 1.06 | 1.01 | 0.96 to 1.06 |
| Gender | 1.14 | 0.29 to 4.56 | 1.44 | 0.34 to 6.07 |
| Location, proximal vs. distal | 1.34 | 0.27 to 6.64 | ||
| Positivity of D-marker panel | 4.22 | 1.05 to 16.90 | 4.37 | 1.05 to 18.26 |
| 1.05 | 0.25 to 4.40 | 1.09 | 0.25 to 4.75 | |
aHR: adjusted HR.
Figure 4Comparison of survival outcome between proximal CRC with and without a positive D-marker panel when using oxaliplatin as first-line chemotherapy. Proximal CRC with a positive D-marker panel had a worse response to chemotherapy with oxaliplatin as a first-line agent. Compared to those without D-marker, proximal CRC with a positive D-marker panel had an unfavorable overall survival (A) and progression-free survival (B). The p-values were 0.045 and 0.0065, respectively.