Differences in mutations across tumour sizes in clear‐cell renal cell carcinoma

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Steven M. Monda, Benjamin W. Carney, Allison M. May, Shuchi Gulati, Simpa S. Salami, Thenappan Chandrasekar, Evan T. Keller, Nicolai A. Huebner, Ganesh S. Palapattu, Marc A. Dall'Era
{"title":"Differences in mutations across tumour sizes in clear‐cell renal cell carcinoma","authors":"Steven M. Monda, Benjamin W. Carney, Allison M. May, Shuchi Gulati, Simpa S. Salami, Thenappan Chandrasekar, Evan T. Keller, Nicolai A. Huebner, Ganesh S. Palapattu, Marc A. Dall'Era","doi":"10.1111/bju.16527","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ObjectiveTo assess the distribution of key mutations across tumour sizes in clear‐cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), and secondarily to examine the prognostic impact of aggressive mutations in smaller ccRCCs.Patient and MethodsThe distribution of mutations (<jats:italic>VHL</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>PBRM1</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>SETD2</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>BAP1</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>CDKN2A</jats:italic> loss) across tumour sizes was assessed in 1039 ccRCCs treated with nephrectomy in cohorts obtained from the Tracking Cancer Evolution (TRACERx), The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the Cancer Genomics of the Kidney (CAGEKID) projects. Logistic regression was used to model the presence of each mutation against size. In our secondary analysis, we assessed a subset of ccRCCs ≤7 cm for associations of key aggressive mutations (<jats:italic>SETD2</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>BAP1</jats:italic>, and <jats:italic>CDKN2A</jats:italic> loss) with metastasis, invasive disease and overall survival, while controlling for size. A subset of localised tumours ≤7 cm was also used to assess associations with recurrence after nephrectomy.ResultsOn logistic regression, each 1‐cm increase in tumour size was associated with aggressive mutations, <jats:italic>SETD2</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>BAP1</jats:italic>, and <jats:italic>CDKN2A</jats:italic> loss, at odds ratios (ORs) of 1.09, 1.10 and 1.19 (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001), whereas no significant association was observed between tumour size and <jats:italic>PBRM1</jats:italic> (OR 1.02; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = 0.23). <jats:italic>VHL</jats:italic> was mildly negatively associated with a 1‐cm increase in size (OR 0.95; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = 0.01). Among tumours ≤7 cm, <jats:italic>SETD2</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>CDKN2A</jats:italic> loss were associated with metastatic disease at ORs of 3.86 and 3.84 (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &lt; 0.05) while controlling for tumour size. <jats:italic>CDKN2A</jats:italic> loss was associated with worse overall survival, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.19 (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = 0.03). Among localised tumours ≤7 cm, <jats:italic>SETD2</jats:italic> was associated with worse recurrence‐free survival (HR 2.00; <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = 0.03).ConclusionLarge and small ccRCCs are genomically different. Aggressive mutations, namely, <jats:italic>SETD2</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>BAP1</jats:italic>, and <jats:italic>CDKN2A</jats:italic> loss, are rarely observed in small ccRCCs and are observed more frequently in larger tumours. However, when present in tumours ≤7 cm, <jats:italic>SETD2</jats:italic> mutations and <jats:italic>CDKN2A</jats:italic> loss were still independently associated with invasive disease, metastasis, worse survival, and recurrence after resection, after controlling for size.","PeriodicalId":8985,"journal":{"name":"BJU International","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJU International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.16527","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveTo assess the distribution of key mutations across tumour sizes in clear‐cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), and secondarily to examine the prognostic impact of aggressive mutations in smaller ccRCCs.Patient and MethodsThe distribution of mutations (VHL, PBRM1, SETD2, BAP1 and CDKN2A loss) across tumour sizes was assessed in 1039 ccRCCs treated with nephrectomy in cohorts obtained from the Tracking Cancer Evolution (TRACERx), The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the Cancer Genomics of the Kidney (CAGEKID) projects. Logistic regression was used to model the presence of each mutation against size. In our secondary analysis, we assessed a subset of ccRCCs ≤7 cm for associations of key aggressive mutations (SETD2, BAP1, and CDKN2A loss) with metastasis, invasive disease and overall survival, while controlling for size. A subset of localised tumours ≤7 cm was also used to assess associations with recurrence after nephrectomy.ResultsOn logistic regression, each 1‐cm increase in tumour size was associated with aggressive mutations, SETD2, BAP1, and CDKN2A loss, at odds ratios (ORs) of 1.09, 1.10 and 1.19 (P < 0.001), whereas no significant association was observed between tumour size and PBRM1 (OR 1.02; P = 0.23). VHL was mildly negatively associated with a 1‐cm increase in size (OR 0.95; P = 0.01). Among tumours ≤7 cm, SETD2 and CDKN2A loss were associated with metastatic disease at ORs of 3.86 and 3.84 (P < 0.05) while controlling for tumour size. CDKN2A loss was associated with worse overall survival, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.19 (P = 0.03). Among localised tumours ≤7 cm, SETD2 was associated with worse recurrence‐free survival (HR 2.00; P = 0.03).ConclusionLarge and small ccRCCs are genomically different. Aggressive mutations, namely, SETD2, BAP1, and CDKN2A loss, are rarely observed in small ccRCCs and are observed more frequently in larger tumours. However, when present in tumours ≤7 cm, SETD2 mutations and CDKN2A loss were still independently associated with invasive disease, metastasis, worse survival, and recurrence after resection, after controlling for size.
透明细胞肾细胞癌不同肿瘤大小的突变差异
目的评估透明细胞肾细胞癌(ccRCC)不同大小肿瘤中关键突变的分布情况,其次研究侵袭性突变对较小ccRCC预后的影响。患者和方法在追踪癌症演变(TRACERx)、癌症基因组图谱(TCGA)和肾脏癌症基因组学(CAGEKID)项目获得的队列中,对1039例接受肾切除术治疗的ccRCC进行了肿瘤大小突变(VHL、PBRM1、SETD2、BAP1和CDKN2A缺失)分布评估。我们使用逻辑回归法建立了每个突变存在与大小的模型。在二次分析中,我们对≤7厘米的ccRCC子集进行了评估,以确定关键侵袭性突变(SETD2、BAP1和CDKN2A缺失)与转移、浸润性疾病和总生存的关系,同时控制肿瘤大小。结果在逻辑回归中,肿瘤大小每增加1厘米与侵袭性突变(SETD2、BAP1和CDKN2A缺失)相关的几率比(ORs)分别为1.09、1.10和1.19(P <0.001),而肿瘤大小与PBRM1之间无明显相关性(OR 1.02; P = 0.23)。VHL与肿瘤增大1厘米呈轻度负相关(OR 0.95; P = 0.01)。在≤7厘米的肿瘤中,SETD2和CDKN2A缺失与转移性疾病相关,OR值分别为3.86和3.84(P < 0.05),同时控制肿瘤大小。CDKN2A 缺失与较差的总生存率有关,危险比 (HR) 为 2.19(P = 0.03)。在≤7厘米的局部肿瘤中,SETD2与较差的无复发生存率相关(HR 2.00;P = 0.03)。在小型ccRCC中很少观察到侵袭性突变,即SETD2、BAP1和CDKN2A缺失,而在大型肿瘤中则更常见。然而,当肿瘤≤7厘米时,SETD2突变和CDKN2A缺失仍与侵袭性疾病、转移、生存率降低和切除后复发独立相关,但已控制了肿瘤的大小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BJU International
BJU International 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
4.40%
发文量
262
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: BJUI is one of the most highly respected medical journals in the world, with a truly international range of published papers and appeal. Every issue gives invaluable practical information in the form of original articles, reviews, comments, surgical education articles, and translational science articles in the field of urology. BJUI employs topical sections, and is in full colour, making it easier to browse or search for something specific.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信