Cyclooxygenase-2 Overexpression is Common in Serrated and Non-Serrated Colorectal Adenoma, but Uncommon in Hyperplastic Polyp and Sessile Serrated Polyp/Adenoma

Background: Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2, PTGS2) plays an important role in colorectal carcinogenesis. COX-2 overexpression in colorectal cancer is inversely associated with microsatellite instability (MSI) and the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP). Evidence suggests that MSI/CIMP+ colorectal cancer may arise through the serrated tumorigenic pathway through various forms of serrated neoplasias. Therefore, we hypothesized that COX-2 may play a less important role in the serrated pathway. Methods: By immunohistochemistry, we assessed COX-2 expression in 24 hyperplastic polyps, 7 sessile serrated polyp/adenomas (SSA), 5 mixed polyps with SSA and adenoma, 27 traditional serrated adenomas, 515 non-serrated adenomas (tubular adenoma, tubulovillous adenoma and villous adenoma), 33 adenomas with intramucosal carcinomas, 96 adenocarcinomas with serration (corkscrew gland) and 111 adenocarcinomas without serration. Results: Strong (2+) COX-2 overexpression was more common in non-serrated adenomas (28% = 143/515) than in hyperplastic polyps (4.2% = 1/24, p = 0.008) and serrated polyps (7 SSAs and 5 mixed polyps) (0% = 0/12, p = 0.04). Furthermore, any (1+/2+) COX-2 overexpression was more frequent in non-serrated adenomas (60% = 307/515) than in hyperplastic polyps (13% = 3/24, p < 0.0001) and serrated polyps (SSAs and mixed polyps) (25% = 3/12, p = 0.03). Traditional serrated adenomas and non-serrated adenomas showed similar frequencies of COX-2 overexpression. Regardless of serration, COX-2 overexpression was frequent (~85%) in colorectal adenocarcinomas. Tumor location was not significantly correlated with COX-2 overexpression, although there was a trend towards higher frequencies of COX-2 overexpression in distal tumors (than proximal tumors) among hyperplastic polyps, SSAs, mixed polyps, traditional serrated adenomas and adenocarcinomas. Conclusion: COX-2 overexpression is infrequent in hyperplastic polyp, SSA and mixed polyp with SSA and adenoma, compared to non-serrated and serrated adenoma. COX-2 overexpression becomes more frequent as tumors progress to higher grade neoplasias. Our observations suggest that COX-2 may play a less significant role in the serrated pathway of tumorigenesis; however, COX-2 may still play a role in later stage of the serrated pathway

Epigenomic Diversity of Colorectal Cancer Indicated by LINE-1 Methylation in a Database of 869 Tumors

Background: Genome-wide DNA hypomethylation plays a role in genomic instability and carcinogenesis. LINE-1 (L1 retrotransposon) constitutes a substantial portion of the human genome, and LINE-1 methylation correlates with global DNA methylation status. LINE-1 hypomethylation in colon cancer has been strongly associated with poor prognosis. However, whether LINE-1 hypomethylators constitute a distinct cancer subtype remains uncertain. Recent evidence for concordant LINE-1 hypomethylation within synchronous colorectal cancer pairs suggests the presence of a non-stochastic mechanism influencing tumor LINE-1 methylation level. Thus, it is of particular interest to examine whether its wide variation can be attributed to clinical, pathologic or molecular features.Design Utilizing a database of 869 colorectal cancers in two prospective cohort studies, we constructed multivariate linear and logistic regression models for LINE-1 methylation (quantified by Pyrosequencing). Variables included age, sex, body mass index, family history of colorectal cancer, smoking status, tumor location, stage, grade, mucinous component, signet ring cells, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes, CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), microsatellite instability, expression of TP53 (p53), CDKN1A (p21), CTNNB1 (β-catenin), PTGS2 (cyclooxygenase-2), and FASN, and mutations in KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA. Results: Tumoral LINE-1 methylation ranged from 23.1 to 90.3 of 0-100 scale (mean 61.4; median 62.3; standard deviation 9.6), and distributed approximately normally except for extreme hypomethylators [LINE-1 methylation < 40; N = 22 (2.5%), which were far more than what could be expected by normal distribution]. LINE-1 extreme hypomethylators were significantly associated with younger patients (p = 0.0058). Residual plot by multivariate linear regression showed that LINE-1 extreme hypomethylators clustered as one distinct group, separate from the main tumor group. The multivariate linear regression model could explain 8.4% of the total variability of LINE-1 methylation (R-square = 0.084). Multivariate logistic regression models for binary LINE-1 hypomethylation outcomes (cutoffs of 40, 50 and 60) showed at most fair predictive ability (area under receiver operator characteristics curve < 0.63). Conclusions: LINE-1 extreme hypomethylators appear to constitute a previously-unrecognized, distinct subtype of colorectal cancers, which needs to be confirmed by additional studies. Our tumor LINE-1 methylation data indicate enormous epigenomic diversity of individual colorectal cancers

Epigenomic diversity of colorectal cancer indicated by LINE-1 methylation in a database of 869 tumors

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Genome-wide DNA hypomethylation plays a role in genomic instability and carcinogenesis. LINE-1 (L1 retrotransposon) constitutes a substantial portion of the human genome, and LINE-1 methylation correlates with global DNA methylation status. LINE-1 hypomethylation in colon cancer has been strongly associated with poor prognosis. However, whether LINE-1 hypomethylators constitute a distinct cancer subtype remains uncertain. Recent evidence for concordant LINE-1 hypomethylation within synchronous colorectal cancer pairs suggests the presence of a non-stochastic mechanism influencing tumor LINE-1 methylation level. Thus, it is of particular interest to examine whether its wide variation can be attributed to clinical, pathologic or molecular features.</p> <p>Design</p> <p>Utilizing a database of 869 colorectal cancers in two prospective cohort studies, we constructed multivariate linear and logistic regression models for LINE-1 methylation (quantified by Pyrosequencing). Variables included age, sex, body mass index, family history of colorectal cancer, smoking status, tumor location, stage, grade, mucinous component, signet ring cells, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes, CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), microsatellite instability, expression of TP53 (p53), CDKN1A (p21), CTNNB1 (β-catenin), PTGS2 (cyclooxygenase-2), and FASN, and mutations in <it>KRAS, BRAF</it>, and <it>PIK3CA</it>.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Tumoral LINE-1 methylation ranged from 23.1 to 90.3 of 0-100 scale (mean 61.4; median 62.3; standard deviation 9.6), and distributed approximately normally except for extreme hypomethylators [LINE-1 methylation < 40; N = 22 (2.5%), which were far more than what could be expected by normal distribution]. LINE-1 extreme hypomethylators were significantly associated with younger patients (p = 0.0058). Residual plot by multivariate linear regression showed that LINE-1 extreme hypomethylators clustered as one distinct group, separate from the main tumor group. The multivariate linear regression model could explain 8.4% of the total variability of LINE-1 methylation (R-square = 0.084). Multivariate logistic regression models for binary LINE-1 hypomethylation outcomes (cutoffs of 40, 50 and 60) showed at most fair predictive ability (area under receiver operator characteristics curve < 0.63).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>LINE-1 extreme hypomethylators appear to constitute a previously-unrecognized, distinct subtype of colorectal cancers, which needs to be confirmed by additional studies. Our tumor LINE-1 methylation data indicate enormous epigenomic diversity of individual colorectal cancers.</p

Analyses of clinicopathological, molecular, and prognostic associations of KRAS codon 61 and codon 146 mutations in colorectal cancer: cohort study and literature review

Background: KRAS mutations in codons 12 and 13 are established predictive biomarkers for anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer. Previous studies suggest that KRAS codon 61 and 146 mutations may also predict resistance to anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer. However, clinicopathological, molecular, and prognostic features of colorectal carcinoma with KRAS codon 61 or 146 mutation remain unclear. Methods: We utilized a molecular pathological epidemiology database of 1267 colon and rectal cancers in the Nurse’s Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. We examined KRAS mutations in codons 12, 13, 61 and 146 (assessed by pyrosequencing), in relation to clinicopathological features, and tumor molecular markers, including BRAF and PIK3CA mutations, CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), LINE-1 methylation, and microsatellite instability (MSI). Survival analyses were performed in 1067 BRAF-wild-type cancers to avoid confounding by BRAF mutation. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compute mortality hazard ratio, adjusting for potential confounders, including disease stage, PIK3CA mutation, CIMP, LINE-1 hypomethylation, and MSI. Results: KRAS codon 61 mutations were detected in 19 cases (1.5%), and codon 146 mutations in 40 cases (3.2%). Overall KRAS mutation prevalence in colorectal cancers was 40% (=505/1267). Of interest, compared to KRAS-wild-type, overall, KRAS-mutated cancers more frequently exhibited cecal location (24% vs. 12% in KRAS-wild-type; P < 0.0001), CIMP-low (49% vs. 32% in KRAS-wild-type; P < 0.0001), and PIK3CA mutations (24% vs. 11% in KRAS-wild-type; P < 0.0001). These trends were evident irrespective of mutated codon, though statistical power was limited for codon 61 mutants. Neither KRAS codon 61 nor codon 146 mutation was significantly associated with clinical outcome or prognosis in univariate or multivariate analysis [colorectal cancer-specific mortality hazard ratio (HR) = 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.29-2.26 for codon 61 mutation; colorectal cancer-specific mortality HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.42-1.78 for codon 146 mutation]. Conclusions: Tumors with KRAS mutations in codons 61 and 146 account for an appreciable proportion (approximately 5%) of colorectal cancers, and their clinicopathological and molecular features appear generally similar to KRAS codon 12 or 13 mutated cancers. To further assess clinical utility of KRAS codon 61 and 146 testing, large-scale trials are warranted

Calcium Intake and Risk of Colorectal Cancer According to Tumor-infiltrating T Cells

Calcium intake has been associated with a lower risk of colorectal cancer. Calcium signaling may enhance T-cell proliferation and differentiation, and contribute to T-cell–mediated antitumor immunity. In this prospective cohort study, we investigated the association between calcium intake and colorectal cancer risk according to tumor immunity status to provide additional insights into the role of calcium in colorectal carcinogenesis. The densities of tumor-infiltrating T-cell subsets [CD3+, CD8+, CD45RO (PTPRC)+, or FOXP3+ cell] were assessed using IHC and computer-assisted image analysis in 736 cancer cases that developed among 136,249 individuals in two cohorts. HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression. Total calcium intake was associated with a multivariable HR of 0.55 (comparing ≥1,200 vs. <600 mg/day; 95% CI, 0.36–0.84; Ptrend = 0.002) for CD8+ T-cell–low but not for CD8+ T-cell–high tumors (HR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.67–1.55; Ptrend = 0.47). Similarly, the corresponding HRs (95% CIs) for calcium for low versus high T-cell–infiltrated tumors were 0.63 (0.42–0.94; Ptrend = 0.01) and 0.89 (0.58–1.35; Ptrend = 0.20) for CD3+; 0.58 (0.39–0.87; Ptrend = 0.006) and 1.04 (0.69–1.58; Ptrend = 0.54) for CD45RO+; and 0.56 (0.36–0.85; Ptrend = 0.006) and 1.10 (0.72–1.67; Ptrend = 0.47) for FOXP3+, although the differences by subtypes defined by T-cell density were not statistically significant. These potential differential associations generally appeared consistent regardless of sex, source of calcium intake, tumor location, and tumor microsatellite instability status. Our findings suggest a possible role of calcium in cancer immunoprevention via modulation of T-cell function

Cyclooxygenase-2 overexpression is common in serrated and non-serrated colorectal adenoma, but uncommon in hyperplastic polyp and sessile serrated polyp/adenoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2, <it>PTGS2</it>) plays an important role in colorectal carcinogenesis. COX-2 overexpression in colorectal cancer is inversely associated with microsatellite instability (MSI) and the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP). Evidence suggests that MSI/CIMP+ colorectal cancer may arise through the serrated tumorigenic pathway through various forms of serrated neoplasias. Therefore, we hypothesized that COX-2 may play a less important role in the serrated pathway.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>By immunohistochemistry, we assessed COX-2 expression in 24 hyperplastic polyps, 7 sessile serrated polyp/adenomas (SSA), 5 mixed polyps with SSA and adenoma, 27 traditional serrated adenomas, 515 non-serrated adenomas (tubular adenoma, tubulovillous adenoma and villous adenoma), 33 adenomas with intramucosal carcinomas, 96 adenocarcinomas with serration (corkscrew gland) and 111 adenocarcinomas without serration.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Strong (2+) COX-2 overexpression was more common in non-serrated adenomas (28% = 143/515) than in hyperplastic polyps (4.2% = 1/24, p = 0.008) and serrated polyps (7 SSAs and 5 mixed polyps) (0% = 0/12, p = 0.04). Furthermore, any (1+/2+) COX-2 overexpression was more frequent in non-serrated adenomas (60% = 307/515) than in hyperplastic polyps (13% = 3/24, p < 0.0001) and serrated polyps (SSAs and mixed polyps) (25% = 3/12, p = 0.03). Traditional serrated adenomas and non-serrated adenomas showed similar frequencies of COX-2 overexpression. Regardless of serration, COX-2 overexpression was frequent (~85%) in colorectal adenocarcinomas. Tumor location was not significantly correlated with COX-2 overexpression, although there was a trend towards higher frequencies of COX-2 overexpression in distal tumors (than proximal tumors) among hyperplastic polyps, SSAs, mixed polyps, traditional serrated adenomas and adenocarcinomas.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>COX-2 overexpression is infrequent in hyperplastic polyp, SSA and mixed polyp with SSA and adenoma, compared to non-serrated and serrated adenoma. COX-2 overexpression becomes more frequent as tumors progress to higher grade neoplasias. Our observations suggest that COX-2 may play a less significant role in the serrated pathway of tumorigenesis; however, COX-2 may still play a role in later stage of the serrated pathway.</p

Comprehensive Biostatistical Analysis of CpG Island Methylator Phenotype in Colorectal Cancer Using a Large Population-Based Sample

The CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) is a distinct phenotype associated with microsatellite instability (MSI) and BRAF mutation in colon cancer. Recent investigations have selected 5 promoters (CACNA1G, IGF2, NEUROG1, RUNX3 and SOCS1) as surrogate markers for CIMP-high. However, no study has comprehensively evaluated an expanded set of methylation markers (including these 5 markers) using a large number of tumors, or deciphered the complex clinical and molecular associations with CIMP-high determined by the validated marker panel. METHOLODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: DNA methylation at 16 CpG islands [the above 5 plus CDKN2A (p16), CHFR, CRABP1, HIC1, IGFBP3, MGMT, MINT1, MINT31, MLH1, p14 (CDKN2A/ARF) and WRN] was quantified in 904 colorectal cancers by real-time PCR (MethyLight). In unsupervised hierarchical clustering analysis, the 5 markers (CACNA1G, IGF2, NEUROG1, RUNX3 and SOCS1), CDKN2A, CRABP1, MINT31, MLH1, p14 and WRN were generally clustered with each other and with MSI and BRAF mutation. KRAS mutation was not clustered with any methylation marker, suggesting its association with a random methylation pattern in CIMP-low tumors. Utilizing the validated CIMP marker panel (including the 5 markers), multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that CIMP-high was independently associated with older age, proximal location, poor differentiation, MSI-high, BRAF mutation, and inversely with LINE-1 hypomethylation and beta-catenin (CTNNB1) activation. Mucinous feature, signet ring cells, and p53-negativity were associated with CIMP-high in only univariate analysis. In stratified analyses, the relations of CIMP-high with poor differentiation, KRAS mutation and LINE-1 hypomethylation significantly differed according to MSI status.Our study provides valuable data for standardization of the use of CIMP-high-specific methylation markers. CIMP-high is independently associated with clinical and key molecular features in colorectal cancer. Our data also suggest that KRAS mutation is related with a random CpG island methylation pattern which may lead to CIMP-low tumors