| Literature DB >> 35418781 |
Michela Roberto1, Giulia Arrivi2, Emanuela Pilozzi3, Andrea Montori3, Genoveffa Balducci4, Paolo Mercantini4, Andrea Laghi5, Debora Ierinò2, Martina Panebianco2, Daniele Marinelli6, Silverio Tomao1, Paolo Marchetti2, Federica Mazzuca2.
Abstract
Purpose: The absolute benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II CRC is only 3-4%. The identification of biomarkers through molecular profiling could identify patients who will more benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients andEntities:
Keywords: NGS; biomarkers; colon cancer; next-generation sequencing; stage II
Year: 2022 PMID: 35418781 PMCID: PMC9000544 DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S342612
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Manag Res ISSN: 1179-1322 Impact factor: 3.989
Figure 1CONSORT 2010 flow diagram.
Figure 2The Cancer Genome Atlas Colon Adenocarcinoma Cohorts (TCGA COAD) stage II CRCs.
Figure 3The Cancer Genome Atlas Colon Adenocarcinoma Cohorts (TCGA COAD) stage II non recurred CRCs.
Figure 4The Cancer Genome Atlas Colon Adenocarcinoma Cohorts (TCGA COAD) stage II recurred CRCs.
Clinicopathologic Features of Patients
| Clinicopathologic Features (Valid Cases and Percentages) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| N. | % | ||
| 17 | 100 | ||
| 60 (4–107) | |||
| 71 (43–84) | |||
| 7 | 41 | ||
| 10 | 59 | ||
| 14 | 82 | ||
| 3 | 18 | ||
| 12 | 71 | ||
| 5 | 29 | ||
| 14 | 82 | ||
| 3 | 17 | ||
| 1 | 6 | ||
| 16 | 94 | ||
| 7 | 67 | ||
| 4 | 35 | ||
| 11 | 65 | ||
| 6 | 35 | ||
| 9 | 53 | ||
| 8 | 47 | ||
| 8 | 47 | ||
| 9 | 53 | ||
| 1 | 6 | ||
| 14 | 82 | ||
| 5 | 36 | ||
| 5 | 36 | ||
| 2 | 14 | ||
| 2 | 14 | ||
| 1 | 7 | ||
| 14 | 82 | ||
| 3 (3) | 18 (100) | ||
| 16 | 94 | ||
| 1 | 6 | ||
| 8 | 50 | ||
| 8 | 50 | ||
| 11 | 65 | ||
| 3 | 18 | ||
| 3 | 18 | ||
Abbreviations: MSS, microsatellite status stable; MSI-H, microsatellite status instable-high; BRAF mut, BRAF mutation; CT, chemotherapy; Nil, not done.
Genomic Profile and Clinicopathological Characteristics of Relapsed CRC Patients
| Patient Number | Sex | Age | Number of Genes | Genes | Sidedness CRC | Site of Recurrance | MMR Status | Risk | Adj CT | mDFS | mOS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | M | 71 | 14 | APC, TP53 | R | Lung | MSI | High | None | 12 | 19 |
| 02 | F | 77 | 10 | APC, TP53 | R | Lung | MSS | High | None | 10 | 65 |
| 03 | F | 75 | 10 | PIK3CA | R | Liver | MSI | Low | Cape | 16 | 46 |
| 04 | M | 69 | 10 | APC, TP53 | R | Liver | MSS | Low | None | 40 | 57 |
| 05 | M | 76 | 7 | APC, TP53 | R | Lung | MSS | Low | None | 4 | 4 |
| 06 | M | 84 | 7 | APC, TP53 | R | Lung | MSS | Low | None | 14 | 49 |
| 07 | M | 69 | 6 | AP, BRAF | R | Lymph-nodes | MSI | Low | Folfox | 11 | 17 |
| 08 | M | 70 | 6 | APC, TP53 | L | Bone | MSS | High | Folfox | 25 | 30 |
| 09 | M | 74 | 6 | APC, TP53 | R | Liver, lymphnodes | MSS | Low | None | 45 | 65 |
| 10 | M | 58 | 6 | KRAS, MLL2 | L | Local | MSI | Low | Cape | 54 | 63 |
| 11 | M | 82 | 5 | APC, KRAS | R | Bone, lymphnodes | MSS | High | None | 14 | 53 |
| 12 | F | 75 | 5 | APC, KRAS | L | Liver | MSS | Low | None | 14 | 77 |
| 13 | M | 68 | 5 | APC, TP53 | L | Lung | MSS | High | Folfox | 23 | 54 |
| 14 | M | 69 | 5 | APC, TP53 | R | Liver | MSS | Low | None | 30 | 37 |
| 15 | M | 62 | 5 | APC, TP53 | R | Abdominal wall | MSS | Low | Cape | 31 | 81 |
| 16 | M | 43 | 3 | APC, KRAS | L | Liver | MSS | Low | None | 10 | 107 |
| 17 | M | 75 | 2 | TP53, KRAS | R | Lung | MSS | High | None | 4 | 21 |
Abbreviations: M, male; F, female; CRC, colorectal cancer; R, right; L, left; MMR, mismatch repair; MSS, microsatellite status stable; MSI, microsatellite status instable; Adj CT, adjuvant chemotherapy; mDFS, median disease-free survival; mOS, median overall survival.
Figure 5Frequency and representation of gene mutations in cohort study. Vertical axis: frequency of mutations. Horizontal axis: genes.
Figure 6STRING network analysis of relevant gene mutations (N=17 patients). *Log10 (observed/expected). This measure describes how large the enrichment effect is. It’s the ratio between i) the number of proteins in your network that are annotated with a term and ii) the number of proteins that we expect to be annotated with this term in a random network of the same size. #This measure describes how significant the enrichment is. Shown are p-values corrected for multiple testing within each category using the Benjamini–Hochberg procedure.
Univariate Analysis for Disease Free Survival (DFS) and Overall Survival (OS)
| Disease Free Survival | Overall Survival | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Median Months | HR (95% CI) | Median Months | HR (95% CI) |
| 14 v 14 | 2.0 (0.5–7.9) | 65 v 81 | 1.0 (0.2–5.3) | |
| 14 v 30 | 2.1 (0.7–6.0) | 46 v 81 | 2.3 (0.5–11.6) | |
| 14 v 23 | 1.5 (0.5–4.8) | 46 v NR | 4.7 (0.6–37.5) | |
| 12 v 16 | 2.4 (0.7–7.6) | 30 v 81 | 2.2 (0.5–9.0) | |
| 10 v 16 v 25 | 3.9 (1.0–14.4) | 21 v NR v 81 | 3.9 (0.6–22.2) | |
| 10 v 14 | 2.8 (0.7–10.7) | 65 v 81 | 1.5 (0.3–7.3) | |
| 10 v 25 | 4.1 (0.8–18.9) | 21v 46 | 1.5 (0.3–6.9) | |
| 14 v 14 | 1.3 (0.4–3.7) | 30 v 81 | 1.7 (0.4–7.5) | |
| 12 v 14 | 1.4 (0.4–5.2 | 19 v 81 | 3.2 (0.7–14.6) | |
| 14 v 14 | 1.7 (0.6–5.1) | 65 v 46 | 1.3 (0.3–4.7) | |
| 14 v 16 | 1.9 (0.4–8.6) | 81 v 46 | 0.6 (0.1–2.8) | |
| 23 v 14 | 1.0 (0.4–3.0) | 65 v NR | 2.3 (0.5–11.3) | |
| 14 v 16 | 1.2 (0.4–3.5) | 81 v 37 | 0.3 (0.1–1.5) | |
| 14 v 14 | 1.9 (0.6–6.0) | 46 v 65 | 1.2 (0.3–4.7) | |
| 11 v 14 | 2.6 (0.7–9.9) | 17 v 81 | 3.7 (0.7–19.9) | |
| 16 v 14 | 0.5 (0.1–2.1) | 46 v 81 | 1.9 (0.4–9.9) | |
| 12 v 14 | 1.0 (0.4–3.2) | 65 v NR | 1.5 (0.4–6.1) | |
| 14 v 14 | 1.5 (0.4–5.6) | 37 v 81 | 2.5 (0.5–12.7) | |
| 4 v 14 | 2.1 (0.4–9.7) | 4 v 65 | 1.9 (0.2–15.8) | |
| 12 v 23 | 1.7 (0.6–4.9) | 46 v 81 | 2.2 (0.5–9.0) | |
Abbreviations: M, male; F, female; mut, mutate; wt, wild type.