Targeted next-generation sequencing reveals high frequency of mutations in epigenetic regulators across treatment-naïve patient melanomas

Background: Recent developments in genomic sequencing have advanced our understanding of the mutations underlying human malignancy. Melanoma is a prototype of an aggressive, genetically heterogeneous cancer notorious for its biologic plasticity and predilection towards developing resistance to targeted therapies. Evidence is rapidly accumulating that dysregulated epigenetic mechanisms (DNA methylation/demethylation, histone modification, non-coding RNAs) may play a central role in the pathogenesis of melanoma. Therefore, we sought to characterize the frequency and nature of mutations in epigenetic regulators in clinical, treatment-naïve, patient melanoma specimens obtained from one academic institution. Results: Targeted next-generation sequencing for 275 known and investigative cancer genes (of which 41 genes, or 14.9 %, encoded an epigenetic regulator) of 38 treatment-naïve patient melanoma samples revealed that 22.3 % (165 of 740) of all non-silent mutations affected an epigenetic regulator. The most frequently mutated genes were BRAF, MECOM, NRAS, TP53, MLL2, and CDKN2A. Of the 40 most commonly mutated genes, 12 (30.0 %) encoded epigenetic regulators, including genes encoding enzymes involved in histone modification (MECOM, MLL2, SETD2), chromatin remodeling (ARID1B, ARID2), and DNA methylation and demethylation (TET2, IDH1). Among the 38 patient melanoma samples, 35 (92.1 %) harbored at least one mutation in an epigenetic regulator. The genes with the highest number of total UVB-signature mutations encoded epigenetic regulators, including MLL2 (100 %, 16 of 16) and MECOM (82.6 %, 19 of 23). Moreover, on average, epigenetic genes harbored a significantly greater number of UVB-signature mutations per gene than non-epigenetic genes (3.7 versus 2.4, respectively; p = 0.01). Bioinformatics analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) melanoma mutation dataset also revealed a frequency of mutations in the 41 epigenetic genes comparable to that found within our cohort of patient melanoma samples. Conclusions: Our study identified a high prevalence of somatic mutations in genes encoding epigenetic regulators, including those involved in DNA demethylation, histone modification, chromatin remodeling, and microRNA processing. Moreover, UVB-signature mutations were found more commonly among epigenetic genes than in non-epigenetic genes. Taken together, these findings further implicate epigenetic mechanisms, particularly those involving the chromatin-remodeling enzyme MECOM/EVI1 and histone-modifying enzyme MLL2, in the pathobiology of melanoma. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13148-015-0091-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

MET Exon 14 Mutations in Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Are Associated With Advanced Age and Stage-Dependent MET Genomic Amplification and c-Met Overexpression

Purpose Non–small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) harboring mutations in MET exon 14 and its flanking introns may respond to c-Met inhibitors. We sought to describe the clinical, pathologic, and genomic characteristics of patients with cancer with MET exon 14 mutations. Patients and Methods We interrogated next-generation sequencing results from 6,376 cancers to identify those harboring MET exon 14 mutations. Clinical characteristics of MET exon 14 mutated NSCLCs were compared with those of NSCLCs with activating mutations in KRAS and EGFR. Co-occurring genomic mutations and copy number alterations were identified. c-Met immunohistochemistry and real-time polymerase chain reaction to detect exon 14 skipping were performed where sufficient tissue was available. Results MET exon 14 mutations were identified in 28 of 933 nonsquamous NSCLCs (3.0%) and were not seen in other cancer types in this study. Patients with MET exon 14–mutated NSCLC were significantly older (median age, 72.5 years) than patients with EGFR-mutant (median age, 61 years; P < .001) or KRAS-mutant NSCLC (median age, 65 years; P < .001). Among patients with MET exon 14 mutations, 68% were women, and 36% were never-smokers. Stage IV MET exon 14–mutated NSCLCs were significantly more likely to have concurrent MET genomic amplification (mean ratio of MET to chromosome 7, 4.3) and strong c-Met immunohistochemical expression (mean H score, 253) than stage IA to IIIB MET exon 14–mutated NSCLCs (mean ratio of MET to chromosome 7, 1.4; P = .007; mean H score, 155; P = .002) and stage IV MET exon 14–wild-type NSCLCs (mean ratio of MET to chromosome 7, 1.2; P < .001; mean H score, 142; P < .001). A patient whose lung cancer harbored a MET exon 14 mutation with concurrent genomic amplification of the mutated MET allele experienced a major partial response to the c-Met inhibitor crizotinib. Conclusion MET exon 14 mutations represent a clinically unique molecular subtype of NSCLC. Prospective clinical trials with c-Met inhibitors will be necessary to validate MET exon 14 mutations as an important therapeutic target in NSCLC