4.3 Article

Exomic Sequencing of Four Rare Central Nervous System Tumor Types

Journal

ONCOTARGET
Volume 4, Issue 4, Pages 572-583

Publisher

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.964

Keywords

Central nervous system (CNS) tumors; cancer genetics; exome sequencing; pediatric tumors; brain tumors

Funding

  1. Virginia and D.K. Ludwig Fund for Cancer Research
  2. Pediatric Brain Tumor Foundation
  3. Malia's Cord Foundation
  4. Burroughs Wellcome Career Award for Medical Scientists
  5. Johns Hopkins Clinical Scientist Award [RC2DE020957, 5R01-CA140316, CA057345]
  6. American Cancer Society Research Scholar Award [RSG-10-126-01-CCE]
  7. FAPESP [01/12898-4, 04/12133-6]
  8. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [04/12133-6] Funding Source: FAPESP

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A heterogeneous population of uncommon neoplasms of the central nervous system (CNS) cause significant morbidity and mortality. To explore their genetic origins, we sequenced the exomes of 12 pleomorphic xanthoastrocytomas (PXA), 17 non-brainstem pediatric glioblastomas (PGBM), 8 intracranial ependymomas (IEP) and 8 spinal cord ependymomas (SCEP). Analysis of the mutational spectra revealed that the predominant single base pair substitution was a C: G>T: A transition in each of the four tumor types. Our data confirm the critical roles of several known driver genes within CNS neoplasms, including TP53 and ATRX in PGBM, and NF2 in SCEPs. Additionally, we show that activating BRAF mutations play a central role in both low and high grade glial tumors. Furthermore, alterations in genes coding for members of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway were observed in 33% of PXA. Our study supports the hypothesis that pathologically similar tumors arising in different age groups and from different compartments may represent distinct disease processes with varied genetic composition.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available