Dynamics of cancer cell subpopulations in primary and metastatic colorectal tumors

Intratumor heterogeneity—heterogeneity of cancer cells within a single tumor—is considered one of the most problematic factors of treatment. Genetic heterogeneity, such as in somatic mutations and chromosome aberrations, is a common characteristic of human solid tumors and is probably the basis of biological heterogeneity. Using mutations in APC, TP53 and KRAS as markers to identify distinct colorectal cancer subpopulations, we analyzed a total of 42 primary colorectal cancer tissues and six paired liver metastases with multipoint microsampling, which enabled analysis of mutation patterns and allelic imbalances with a resolution of 0.01 mm2 (about 200 cells). There was usually more than one subpopulation in each primary tumor. Only two of 15 (13.3%) cases with three gene mutations and eight of 27 (29.6%) cases with two gene mutations had a single subpopulation. Cells with mutations in all of the examined genes usually constituted the major population. Multipoint microsampling of six primary and metastatic tumor pairs revealed that the majority of discrepancies in mutation patterns found with the bulk tissue analysis were due to loss of subpopulations in the metastatic tissues. In addition, multipoint microsampling uncovered substantial changes in subpopulations that were not detected with bulk tissue analysis. Specifically, the proportion of KRAS mutation-negative subpopulations increased in the metastatic tumors of four cases. Because KRAS mutation status is linked to cetuximab/panitumumab efficacy, subpopulation dynamics could lead to differences in response to cetuximab/panitumumab in primary versus metastatic tumors

Biomarker-based prediction of inflammatory bowel disease-related colorectal cancer: a case–control study

Regular colonoscopic surveillance for detection of dysplasia is recommended in longstanding inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), however, its sensitivity is disputed. Screening accuracy may increase by using a biomarker-based surveillance strategy.A case-control study was performed to determine the prognostic value of DNA ploidy and p53 in IBD-related neoplasia. Cases with IBD-related colorectal cancer (CRC), detected in our surveillance program between 1985-2008, were selected and matched with two controls, for age, gender, disease characteristics, interval of follow-up, PSC, and previous surgery. Biopsies were assessed for DNA ploidy, p53, grade of inflammation and neoplasia. Progression to neoplasia was analyzed with Cox regression analysis, adjusting for potentially confounding variables.Adjusting for age, we found statistically significant Hazard ratios (HR) between development of CRC, and low grade dysplasia (HR5.5; 95%CI 2.6-11.5), abnormal DNA ploidy (DNA index (DI) 1.06-1.34, HR4.7; 95%CI 2.9-7.8 and DI>1.34, HR6.6; 95%CI 3.7-11.7) and p53 immunopositivity (HR3.0; 95%CI 1.9-4.7) over time. When adjusting for all confounders, abnormal DNA ploidy (DI 1.06-1.34, HR4.7; 95%CI 2.7-7.9 and DI>1.34, HR5.0; 95%CI 2.5-10.0) and p53 immunopositivity (HR1.7; 95%CI 1.0-3.1) remained statistically significant predictive of neoplasia. In longstanding IBD, abnormal DNA ploidy and p53 immunopositivity are important risk factors of developing CRC. The yield of surveillance may potentially increase by adding these biomarkers to the routine assessment of biopsies

cDNA sequencing improves the detection of P53 missense mutations in colorectal cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Recently published data showed discrepancies beteween <it>P53 </it>cDNA and DNA sequencing in glioblastomas. We hypothesised that similar discrepancies may be observed in other human cancers.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>To this end, we analyzed 23 colorectal cancers for <it>P53 </it>mutations and gene expression using both DNA and cDNA sequencing, real-time PCR and immunohistochemistry.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found <it>P53 </it>gene mutations in 16 cases (15 missense and 1 nonsense). Two of the 15 cases with missense mutations showed alterations based only on cDNA, and not DNA sequencing. Moreover, in 6 of the 15 cases with a cDNA mutation those mutations were difficult to detect in the DNA sequencing, so the results of DNA analysis alone could be misinterpreted if the cDNA sequencing results had not also been available. In all those 15 cases, we observed a higher ratio of the mutated to the wild type template by cDNA analysis, but not by the DNA analysis. Interestingly, a similar overexpression of <it>P53 </it>mRNA was present in samples with and without <it>P53 </it>mutations.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In terms of colorectal cancer, those discrepancies might be explained under three conditions: 1, overexpression of mutated <it>P53 </it>mRNA in cancer cells as compared with normal cells; 2, a higher content of cells without <it>P53 </it>mutation (normal cells and cells showing <it>K-RAS </it>and/or <it>APC </it>but not <it>P53 </it>mutation) in samples presenting <it>P53 </it>mutation; 3, heterozygous or hemizygous mutations of <it>P53 </it>gene. Additionally, for heterozygous mutations unknown mechanism(s) causing selective overproduction of mutated allele should also be considered. Our data offer new clues for studying discrepancy in <it>P53 </it>cDNA and DNA sequencing analysis.</p