Driver mutations in TP53 are ubiquitous in high grade serous carcinoma of the ovary

Ahmed Ashour Ahmed, Dariush Etemadmoghadam, Jillian Temple, Andy G Lynch, Mohamed Riad, Raghwa Sharma, Colin Stewart, Sian Fereday, Carlos Caldas, Anna Defazio, David Bowtell, James D Brenton, Ahmed Ashour Ahmed, Dariush Etemadmoghadam, Jillian Temple, Andy G Lynch, Mohamed Riad, Raghwa Sharma, Colin Stewart, Sian Fereday, Carlos Caldas, Anna Defazio, David Bowtell, James D Brenton

Abstract

Numerous studies have tested the association between TP53 mutations in ovarian cancer and prognosis but these have been consistently confounded by limitations in study design, methodology, and/or heterogeneity in the sample cohort. High-grade serous (HGS) carcinoma is the most clinically important histological subtype of ovarian cancer. As these tumours may arise from the ovary, Fallopian tube or peritoneum, they are collectively referred to as high-grade pelvic serous carcinoma (HGPSC). To identify the true prevalence of TP53 mutations in HGPSC, we sequenced exons 2-11 and intron-exon boundaries in tumour DNA from 145 patients. HGPSC cases were defined as having histological grade 2 or 3 and FIGO stage III or IV. Surprisingly, pathogenic TP53 mutations were identified in 96.7% (n = 119/123) of HGPSC cases. Molecular and pathological review of mutation-negative cases showed evidence of p53 dysfunction associated with copy number gain of MDM2 or MDM4, or indicated the exclusion of samples as being low-grade serous tumours or carcinoma of uncertain primary site. Overall, p53 dysfunction rate approached 100% of confirmed HGPSCs. No association between TP53 mutation and progression-free or overall survival was found. From this first comprehensive mapping of TP53 mutation rate in a homogeneous group of HGPSC patients, we conclude that mutant TP53 is a driver mutation in the pathogenesis of HGPSC cancers. Because TP53 mutation is almost invariably present in HGPSC, it is not of substantial prognostic or predictive significance.

Copyright (c) 2010 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Characterization of TP53 mutation-negative cancer samples. (A) Summary plots of whole genome DNA copy number data for seven mutation-negative samples. Red indicates chromosomal gain and blue shows regions of chromosomal loss. (B) High-resolution DNA copy number analysis of MDM2, MDM4, and TP53 loci in each sample. The dotted line indicates the position of the gene within the region. Samples with chromosomal gain or loss are marked with a red or blue asterisk, respectively. (C) Confirmation of MDM2 and MDM4 copy number gain using quantitative PCR of tumour DNA. Samples with gain are indicated in red. (D) Immunohistochemical staining of p53 protein in the following selected mutation-negative cases: case 41358; case 60258 (MDM2 gain); case 22029 (MDM4 gain); and case 60049 (MDM4 gain).

References

    1. Brosh R, Rotter V. When mutants gain new powers: news from the mutant p53 field. Nature Rev Cancer. 2009;9:701–713.
    1. Marks JR, Davidoff AM, Kerns BJ, Humphrey PA, Pence JC, Dodge RK, et al. Overexpression and mutation of p53 in epithelial ovarian cancer. Cancer Res. 1991;51:2979–2984.
    1. Okamoto A, Sameshima Y, Yokoyama S, Terashima Y, Sugimura T, Terada M, et al. Frequent allelic losses and mutations of the p53 gene in human ovarian cancer. Cancer Res. 1991;51:5171–5176.
    1. de Graeff P, Crijns AP, de Jong S, Boezen M, Post WJ, de Vries EG, et al. Modest effect of p53, EGFR and HER-2/neu on prognosis in epithelial ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2009;101:149–159.
    1. Hall J, Paul J, Brown R. Critical evaluation of p53 as a prognostic marker in ovarian cancer. Expert Rev Mol Med. 2004;6:1–20.
    1. Soussi T, Ishioka C, Claustres M, Beroud C. Locus-specific mutation databases: pitfalls and good practice based on the p53 experience. Nature Rev Cancer. 2006;6:83–90.
    1. Lee Y, Miron A, Drapkin R, Nucci MR, Medeiros F, Saleemuddin A, et al. A candidate precursor to serous carcinoma that originates in the distal Fallopian tube. J Pathol. 2007;211:26–35.
    1. Crum CP, Drapkin R, Miron A, Ince TA, Muto M, Kindelberger DW, et al. The distal Fallopian tube: a new model for pelvic serous carcinogenesis. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2007;19:3–9.
    1. Jordan SJ, Green AC, Whiteman DC, Moore SP, Bain CJ, Gertig DM, et al. Serous ovarian, Fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancers: a comparative epidemiological analysis. Int J Cancer. 2008;122:1598–1603.
    1. Herrington CS, McCluggage WG. The emerging role of the distal Fallopian tube and p53 in pelvic serous carcinogenesis. J Pathol. 2007;220:5–6.
    1. McShane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, Taube SE, Gion M, Clark GM. Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK) J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:1180–1184.
    1. Olivier M, Petitjean A, Marcel V, Petre A, Mounawar M, Plymoth A, et al. Recent advances in p53 research: an interdisciplinary perspective. Cancer Gene Ther. 2009;16:1–12.
    1. Montes de Oca Luna R, Wagner DS, Lozano G. Rescue of early embryonic lethality in mdm2-deficient mice by deletion of p53. Nature. 1995;378:203–206.
    1. Parant J, Chavez-Reyes A, Little NA, Yan W, Reinke V, Jochemsen AG, et al. Rescue of embryonic lethality in Mdm4-null mice by loss of Trp53 suggests a nonoverlapping pathway with MDM2 to regulate p53. Nature Genet. 2001;29:92–95.
    1. Oliner JD, Kinzler KW, Meltzer PS, George DL, Vogelstein B. Amplification of a gene encoding a p53-associated protein in human sarcomas. Nature. 1992;358:80–83.
    1. McCann AH, Kirley A, Carney DN, Corbally N, Magee HM, Keating G, et al. Amplification of the MDM2 gene in human breast cancer and its association with MDM2 and p53 protein status. Br J Cancer. 1995;71:981–985.
    1. Shahin MS, Hughes JH, Sood AK, Buller RE. The prognostic significance of p53 tumor suppressor gene alterations in ovarian carcinoma. Cancer. 2000;89:2006–2017.
    1. Olivier M, Langerod A, Carrieri P, Bergh J, Klaar S, Eyfjord J, et al. The clinical value of somatic TP53 gene mutations in 1794 patients with breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:1157–1167.
    1. Muscolini M, Montagni E, Caristi S, Nomura T, Kamada R, Di Agostino S, et al. Characterization of a new cancer-associated mutant of p53 with a missense mutation (K351N) in the tetramerization domain. Cell Cycle. 2009;8:3396–3405.
    1. Vang R, Shih Ie M, Kurman RJ. Ovarian low-grade and high-grade serous carcinoma: pathogenesis, clinicopathologic and molecular biologic features, and diagnostic problems. Adv Anat Pathol. 2009;16:267–282.
    1. Shih Ie M, Kurman RJ. Molecular pathogenesis of ovarian borderline tumors: new insights and old challenges. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:7273–7279.
    1. Meinhold-Heerlein I, Bauerschlag D, Hilpert F, Dimitrov P, Sapinoso LM, Orlowska-Volk M, et al. Molecular and prognostic distinction between serous ovarian carcinomas of varying grade and malignant potential. Oncogene. 2005;24:1053–1065.
    1. Salani R, Kurman RJ, Giuntoli R, 2nd, Gardner G, Bristow R, Wang TL, et al. Assessment of TP53 mutation using purified tissue samples of ovarian serous carcinomas reveals a higher mutation rate than previously reported and does not correlate with drug resistance. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008;18:487–491.
    1. Dehari R, Kurman RJ, Logani S, Shih IeM. The development of high-grade serous carcinoma from atypical proliferative (borderline) serous tumors and low-grade micropapillary serous carcinoma: a morphologic and molecular genetic analysis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31:1007–1012.
    1. Leng RP, Lin Y, Ma W, Wu H, Lemmers B, Chung S, et al. Pirh2, a p53-induced ubiquitin-protein ligase, promotes p53 degradation. Cell. 2003;112:779–791.
    1. Dornan D, Wertz I, Shimizu H, Arnott D, Frantz GD, Dowd P, et al. The ubiquitin ligase COP1 is a critical negative regulator of p53. Nature. 2004;429:86–92.
    1. Bartel F, Jung J, Bohnke A, Gradhand E, Zeng K, Thomssen C, et al. Both germ line and somatic genetics of the p53 pathway affect ovarian cancer incidence and survival. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:89–96.
    1. Darcy KM, Brady WE, McBroom JW, Bell JG, Young RC, McGuire WP, et al. Associations between p53 overexpression and multiple measures of clinical outcome in high-risk, early stage or suboptimally-resected, advanced stage epithelial ovarian cancers. A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;111:487–495.
    1. Hogdall EV, Christensen L, Hogdall CK, Frederiksen K, Gayther S, Blaakaer J, et al. Distribution of p53 expression in tissue from 774 Danish ovarian tumour patients and its prognostic significance in ovarian carcinomas. APMIS. 2008;116:400–409.
    1. Kupryjanczyk J, Kraszewska E, Ziolkowska-Seta I, Madry R, Timorek A, Markowska J, et al. TP53 status and taxane–platinum versus platinum-based therapy in ovarian cancer patients: a non-randomized retrospective study. BMC Cancer. 2008;8:27.
    1. Donehower LA, Harvey M, Slagle BL, McArthur MJ, Montgomery CA, Jr, Butel JS, et al. Mice deficient for p53 are developmentally normal but susceptible to spontaneous tumours. Nature. 1992;356:215–221.
    1. Terzian T, Suh YA, Iwakuma T, Post SM, Neumann M, Lang GA, et al. The inherent instability of mutant p53 is alleviated by Mdm2 or p16INK4a loss. Genes Dev. 2008;22:1337–1344.
    1. Li Y, Guessous F, Kwon S, Kumar M, Ibidapo O, Fuller L, et al. PTEN has tumor-promoting properties in the setting of gain-of-function p53 mutations. Cancer Res. 2008;68:1723–1731.
    1. Phillips KA, Nichol K, Ozcelik H, Knight J, Done SJ, Goodwin PJ, et al. Frequency of p53 mutations in breast carcinomas from Ashkenazi Jewish carriers of BRCA1 mutations. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91:469–473.
    1. Holstege H, Joosse SA, van Oostrom CT, Nederlof PM, de Vries A, Jonkers J. High incidence of protein-truncating TP53 mutations in BRCA1-related breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2009;69:3625–3633.
    1. Turner N, Tutt A, Ashworth A. Hallmarks of ‘BRCAness’ in sporadic cancers. Nature Rev Cancer. 2004;4:814–819.
    1. Zorn KK, Bonome T, Gangi L, Chandramouli GV, Awtrey CS, Gardner GJ, et al. Gene expression profiles of serous, endometrioid, and clear cell subtypes of ovarian and endometrial cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:6422–6430.
    1. Kobel M, Kalloger SE, Boyd N, McKinney S, Mehl E, Palmer C, et al. Ovarian carcinoma subtypes are different diseases: implications for biomarker studies. PLoS Med. 2008;5:e232.
    1. ICON. Paclitaxel plus carboplatin versus standard chemotherapy with either single-agent carboplatin or cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in women with ovarian cancer: the ICON3 randomised trial. Lancet. 2002;360:505–515.
    1. Etemadmoghadam D, de Fazio A, Beroukhim R, Mermel C, George J, Getz G, et al. Integrated genome-wide DNA copy number and expression analysis identifies distinct mechanisms of primary chemoresistance in ovarian carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:1417–1427.
    1. Rustin GJ, Nelstrop AE, McClean P, Brady MF, McGuire WP, Hoskins WJ, et al. Defining response of ovarian carcinoma to initial chemotherapy according to serum CA 125. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:1545–1551.
    1. Vergote I, Rustin GJ, Eisenhauer EA, Kristensen GB, Pujade-Lauraine E, Parmar MK, et al. Re: new guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors [ovarian cancer]. Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:1534–1535.
    1. Kupryjanczyk J, Thor AD, Beauchamp R, Merritt V, Edgerton SM, Bell DA, et al. p53 gene mutations and protein accumulation in human ovarian cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993;90:4961–4965.
    1. Shimizu Y, Kamoi S, Amada S, Akiyama F, Silverberg SG. Toward the development of a universal grading system for ovarian epithelial carcinoma: testing of a proposed system in a series of 461 patients with uniform treatment and follow-up. Cancer. 1998;82:893–901.
    1. Parsons DW, Jones S, Zhang X, Lin JC, Leary RJ, Angenendt P, et al. An integrated genomic analysis of human glioblastoma multiforme. Science. 2008;321:1807–1812.
    1. Kuo KT, Mao TL, Jones S, Veras E, Ayhan A, Wang TL, et al. Frequent activating mutations of PIK3CA in ovarian clear cell carcinoma. Am J Pathol. 2009;174:1597–1601.
    1. Bengtsson H, Irizarry R, Carvalho B, Speed TP. Estimation and assessment of raw copy numbers at the single locus level. Bioinformatics. 2008;24:759–767.
    1. Rozen S, Skaletsky H. Primer3 on the WWW for general users and for biologist programmers. Methods Mol Biol. 2000;132:365–386.
    1. Riemenschneider MJ, Buschges R, Wolter M, Reifenberger J, Bostrom J, Kraus JA, et al. Amplification and overexpression of the MDM4 (MDMX) gene from 1q32 in a subset of malignant gliomas without TP53 mutation or MDM2 amplification. Cancer Res. 1999;59:6091–6096.
    1. Wang TL, Maierhofer C, Speicher MR, Lengauer C, Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW, et al. Digital karyotyping. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002;99:16156–16161.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever