| Literature DB >> 33168106 |
Douglas A Mata1, Jamal K Benhamida2, Andrew L Lin3, Chad M Vanderbilt4, Soo-Ryum Yang4, Liliana B Villafania4, Donna C Ferguson4, Philip Jonsson5, Alexandra M Miller3, Viviane Tabar6, Cameron W Brennan6, Nelson S Moss6, Martin Sill7, Ryma Benayed4, Ingo K Mellinghoff3, Marc K Rosenblum4, Maria E Arcila4, Marc Ladanyi4, Tejus A Bale8.
Abstract
A subset of glioblastomas (GBMs) harbors potentially druggable oncogenic FGFR3-TACC3 (F3T3) fusions. However, their associated molecular and clinical features are poorly understood. Here we analyze the frequency of F3T3-fusion positivity, its associated genetic and methylation profiles, and its impact on survival in 906 IDH-wildtype GBM patients. We establish an F3T3 prevalence of 4.1% and delineate its associations with cancer signaling pathway alterations. F3T3-positive GBMs had lower tumor mutational and copy-number alteration burdens than F3T3-wildtype GBMs. Although F3T3 fusions were predominantly mutually exclusive with other oncogenic RTK pathway alterations, they did rarely co-occur with EGFR amplification. They were less likely to harbor TP53 alterations. By methylation profiling, they were more likely to be assigned the mesenchymal or RTK II subclass. Despite being older at diagnosis and having similar frequencies of MGMT promoter hypermethylation, patients with F3T3-positive GBMs lived about 8 months longer than those with F3T3-wildtype tumors. While consistent with IDH-wildtype GBM, F3T3-positive GBMs exhibit distinct biological features, underscoring the importance of pursuing molecular studies prior to clinical trial enrollment and targeted treatment.Entities:
Keywords: F3T3; FGFR3-TACC3 fusion; IDH-wildtype glioblastoma
Year: 2020 PMID: 33168106 PMCID: PMC7653727 DOI: 10.1186/s40478-020-01058-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Neuropathol Commun ISSN: 2051-5960 Impact factor: 7.801
Fig. 1Flow diagram of specimen selection. Note: The two tumors with non-canonical fusions were excluded from further analyses because dimerization domains have not been reported in these 3′ partner genes [44]
Clinical and imaging characteristics of patients with glioblastomas with and without FGFR3-TACC3 fusions
| Present (n = 37) | Absent (n = 867) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.02 | |||
| Mean (IQR) | 63.6 (57.2–72.2) | 59.4 (52.0–68.1) | |
| 1.00 | |||
| Male | 22 (59.5%) | 524 (60.4%) | |
| Female | 15 (40.5%) | 343 (39.6%) | |
| 0.32 | |||
| White | 33 (89.2%) | 718 (89.0%) | |
| Black | 3 (8.1%) | 26 (3.2%) | |
| Asian | 1 (2.7%) | 56 (6.9%) | |
| Hispanic | 0 (0%) | 7 (0.9%) | |
| Unavailable | 0 | 60 | |
| 0.72 | |||
| Left | 14 (45.2%) | 313 (49.1%) | |
| Right | 17 (54.8%) | 325 (50.9%) | |
| Unavailable | 6 | 229 | |
| 0.68 | |||
| Frontal | 13 (35.1%) | 222 (33.9%) | |
| Temporal | 11 (29.7%) | 196 (30.0%) | |
| Parietal | 9 (24.3%) | 153 (23.4%) | |
| Occipital | 2 (5.4%) | 41 (6.3%) | |
| Callosal | 2 (5.4%) | 12 (1.8%) | |
| Cerebellar | 0 (0%) | 4 (0.6%) | |
| Other | 0 (0%) | 26 (4.0%) | |
| Unavailable | 0 | 213 | |
Fig. 2Systematic review and meta-analysis of FGFR3-TACC3 fusion prevalence among IDH-wildtype glioblastomas. Note: The vertical dashed line indicates the pooled summary estimate (95% confidence interval [CI]) for all studies. The area of each square is proportional to the inverse variance of the estimate. Horizontal lines indicate 95% CIs of the estimate. The studies are listed in chronological order of publication
Fig. 3Clinical characteristics, cancer signaling pathway alterations, and methylation profiles of 37 FGFR3-TACC3 fusion-positive glioblastomas. Note: The variants displayed are putative drivers according to OncoKB and/or the Cancer Hotspots database [14, 15]
Fig. 4Tumor mutational burden (a), copy-number burden (b), and FACETS-derived tumor ploidy (c) stratified by FGFR3-TACC3 fusion status. Note: The violin plot is a box plot with a rotated kernel density plot on each side. The plot allows the reader to visualize the median, interquartile range, range, and distribution of the data
Fig. 5Differences in copy-number alterations (a) and mutations (b) among glioblastomas with and without FGFR3-TACC3 fusions. Legend: The scatterplot shows statistical significance (−log10 of p value) versus magnitude of change (log2 of fold change) for copy-number altered (a) and mutated (b) genes. The horizontal dashed line indicates a p value of 0.05. The vertical dashed lines indicate fold changes of 1.5. Positive fold changes indicate that the alterations are more common in FGFR3-TACC3 positive tumors, and vice versa
Fig. 6Dimensionality reduction demonstrated that FGFR3-TACC3 fusion-positive tumors were more likely to be assigned to the mesenchymal and RTK II methylation subclasses. Note: Cases were assigned DNA methylation-based classifications according to the method described by Capper et al. [10]. F3T3-positive GBMs overwhelmingly fell into the GBM, MES and GBM, RTK II clusters
Fig. 7Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival stratified by FGFR3-TACC3 fusion (a) and MGMT promoter hypermethylation (b) status. Note: Overall survival was defined as the time from initial diagnostic biopsy until the time of death due to any cause. Two-sided p values for difference were calculated using the log-rank test