4.8 Article

Whole-exome and targeted gene sequencing of gallbladder carcinoma identifies recurrent mutations in the ErbB pathway

Journal

NATURE GENETICS
Volume 46, Issue 8, Pages 872-876

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ng.3030

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81172026, 81272402, 81301816, 81172029, 81370728, 81125020, 81328022, 81302507]
  2. National High-Technology Research and Development Program (863 Program) [2012AA022606, 2012BAK01B00]
  3. Foundation for Interdisciplinary Research of Shanghai Jiao Tong University [YG2011ZD07]
  4. Shanghai Science and Technology Commission Intergovernmental International Cooperation Project [12410705900]
  5. Shanghai Science and Technology Commission Medical-Guiding Project [12401905800]
  6. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2013M541513]
  7. Program for Changjiang Scholars
  8. Leading Talent program of Shanghai

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Individuals with gallbladder carcinoma (GBC), the most aggressive malignancy of the biliary tract, have a poor prognosis. Here we report the identification of somatic mutations for GBC in 57 tumor-normal pairs through a combination of exome sequencing and ultra-deep sequencing of cancer-related genes. The mutation pattern is defined by a dominant prevalence of C>T mutations at TCN sites. Genes with a significant frequency (false discovery rate (FDR) <0.05) of non-silent mutations include TP53 (47.1%), KRAS (7.8%) and ERBB3 (11.8%). Moreover, ErbB signaling (including EGFR, ERBB2, ERBB3, ERBB4 and their downstream genes) is the most extensively mutated pathway, affecting 36.8% (21/57) of the GBC samples. Multivariate analyses further show that cases with ErbB pathway mutations have a worse outcome (P = 0.001). These findings provide insight into the somatic mutational landscape in GBC and highlight the key role of the ErbB signaling pathway in GBC pathogenesis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available