Comprehensive analysis of TP53 and SPOP mutations and their impact on survival in metastatic prostate cancer

被引:8
|
作者
Zhou, Jie [1 ,2 ]
Lai, Yiming [1 ,2 ]
Peng, Shengmeng [1 ,2 ]
Tang, Chen [1 ,2 ]
Chen, Yongming [1 ,2 ]
Li, Lingfeng [1 ,2 ]
Huang, Hai [1 ,2 ]
Guo, Zhenghui [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Sun Yat Sen Mem Hosp, Dept Urol, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
[2] Sun Yat Sen Univ, Sun Yat Sen Mem Hosp, Guangdong Prov Clin Res Ctr Urol Dis, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
来源
FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY | 2022年 / 12卷
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
metastatic prostate cancer; TP53; SPOP; prognosis; biomarkers; mutation; GENOMICS;
D O I
10.3389/fonc.2022.957404
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BackgroundAlthough TP53 and SPOP are frequently mutated in metastatic prostate cancer (PCa), their prognostic value is ambiguous, and large sample studies are lacking, especially when they co-occur with other genetic alterations. MethodsGenomic data and patients' clinical characteristics in PCa were downloaded from the cBioPortal database. We extensively analyzed other gene alterations in different mutation status of TP53 and SPOP. We further subdivided TP53 and SPOP mutation into subgroups based on different mutation status, and then evaluated the prognostic value. Two classification systems for TP53 survival analysis were used. ResultsA total of 2,172 patients with PCa were analyzed in our study, of which 1,799 were metastatic PCa patients. The mutual exclusivity analysis showed that TP53 and SPOP mutation has a strong mutual exclusion (p<0.001). In multivariable analysis, truncating TP53 mutations (HR=1.773, 95%CI:1.403-2.239, p<0.001) and other TP53 mutations(HR=1.555, 95%CI:1.267-1.908, p<0.001) were independent negative prognostic markers in metastatic PCa, whereas SPOP mutations(HR=0.592, 95%CI:0.427-0.819, p<0.001) were an independent prognostic factor for better prognosis. Mutations in TP53 were significantly associated with wild-type status for SPOP and CDK12, structural variants/fusions for TMPRSS2 and ERG, AR amplification and PTEN deletion (p<0.001). And truncating TP53 mutations have higher AR amplification rates than other TP53 mutations (p=0.022). Consistently, truncating TP53 mutations had a worse prognosis than other TP53 mutations (p<0.05). Then Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed that Co-occurring TP53 mutations in AR amplification or PTEN deletion tumors significantly reduced survival (p<0.05). Furthermore, those with SPOP-mutant tumors with co-occurring TP53 truncating mutations had shorter overall survival than those with SPOP-mutant tumors with wild-type or other TP53 mutations. ConclusionsThis study found that TP53 and SPOP mutations were mutually exclusive and both were independent prognostic markers for metastatic PCa. Genomic alteration and survival analysis revealed that TP53 and SPOP mutations represented distinct molecular subtypes. Our data suggest that molecular stratification on the basis of TP53 and SPOP mutation status should be implemented for metastatic PCa to optimize and modify clinical decision-making.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Studies of TP53 haplotypes in relation to LOH and TP53 mutations in breast cancer patients
    A Langerød
    TI Andersen
    I Bukholm
    A-L Børresen Dale
    Breast Cancer Research, 2 (Suppl 1)
  • [32] The impact of TP53 and RAS mutations on cerebellar glioblastomas
    Milinkovic, Vedrana P.
    Gazibara, Milica K. Skender
    Gacic, Emilija M. Manojlovic
    Gazibara, Tatjana M.
    Tanic, Nikola T.
    EXPERIMENTAL AND MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY, 2014, 97 (02) : 202 - 207
  • [33] Impact of TP53, RB1, and PTEN mutations on overall survival in metastatic prostate cancer: A multi-center study via the Guardian Research Network.
    Ganiyani, Mohammad Arfat
    Prabhakar, Pushan
    Khosla, Atulya Aman
    Bellur, Shreyas S.
    Avudaiappan, Arjun Pon
    Bond, Liz
    Marada, Suresh
    McCracken, Andrea
    Hurmiz, Charlie
    Bastos, Bruno R.
    Garje, Rohan
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2024, 42 (4_SUPPL) : 82 - 82
  • [34] KEAP1 and TP53 Mutations in Lung Cancer: More Is Better. Reply to: "Survival Analysis of TP53 Co-Mutations Should Be Interpreted More Cautiously"
    Scalera, Stefano
    Mazzotta, Marco
    Cappuzzo, Federico
    Ciliberto, Gennaro
    Maugeri-Sacca, Marcello
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY, 2022, 17 (03) : E40 - E41
  • [35] Clinical impact of mutations in driver oncogenes and TP53/RB1 in advanced prostate cancer.
    Hammer, Liat
    Rebernick, Ryan
    McFarlane, Matthew
    Westbrook, Thomas
    Hazime, Munna
    Hammoud, Tanya
    Chiu, Pin-en
    Xavier, Owens
    Wu, Yi-Mi
    Robinson, Dan R.
    Spratt, Daniel Eidelberg
    Alva, Ajjai Shivaram
    Jackson, William C.
    Reichert, Zachery R.
    Alumkal, Joshi J.
    Chinnaiyan, Arul
    Cieslik, Marcin
    Dess, Robert Timothy
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2023, 41
  • [36] Functional genomics of TP53 mutations and its impact in breast cancer progression
    Pal, Anasuya
    Gonzalez-Malerva, Laura
    Eaton, Seron
    Guzman, Mayra
    Chow, Donald
    Yin, Hongwei
    Park, Jin
    Anderson, Karen
    LaBaer, Joshua
    CANCER RESEARCH, 2015, 75
  • [37] Impact of germline TP53 mutations and polymorphisms in women with premenopausal breast cancer
    Samuel, Nardin
    Novokmet, Ana
    Hudson, Thomas J.
    Malkin, David
    CANCER RESEARCH, 2014, 74 (23)
  • [38] Prognostic Impact of TP53 Mutations and Tumor Mutational Load in Colorectal Cancer
    Ho, Vincent
    Chung, Liping
    Lim, Stephanie H.
    Ma, Yafeng
    Wang, Bin
    Lea, Vivienne
    Abubakar, Askar
    Ng, Weng
    Lee, Mark
    Roberts, Tara L.
    Chua, Wei
    Lee, C. Soon
    GASTROINTESTINAL DISORDERS, 2022, 4 (03): : 165 - 179
  • [39] Coordination of TP53 Abnormalities in Breast Cancer: Data from Analysis of TP53 Polymorphisms, Loss of Heterozygosity, Methylation, and Mutations
    Denisov, Evgeny V.
    Sukhanovskaya, Tatiana V.
    Dultseva, Tatiana S.
    Malinovskaya, Elena A.
    Litviakov, Nicolay V.
    Slonimskaya, Elena M.
    Choinzonov, Evgeny L.
    Cherdyntseva, Nadezhda V.
    GENETIC TESTING AND MOLECULAR BIOMARKERS, 2011, 15 (12) : 901 - 907