4.6 Article

p53 is associated with high-risk and pinpointsTP53missense mutations in mantle cell lymphoma

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
Volume 191, Issue 5, Pages 796-805

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bjh.17023

Keywords

immunohistochemistry; p53; TP53; mantle cell lymphoma; digital pathology; targeted sequencing

Categories

Funding

  1. European Community's Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation [EU-H2020-MSCA-COFUND-2016-754299]
  2. Cancerfonden [2016/465, 2019/0309]
  3. Fru Berta Kamprad [FBKS-2018-7-(149)]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Survival for patients diagnosed with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) has improved drastically in recent years. However, patients carrying mutations in tumour protein p53 (TP53) do not benefit from modern chemotherapy-based treatments and have poor prognosis. Thus, there is a clinical need to identify missense mutations through routine analysis to enable patient stratification. Sequencing is not widely implemented in clinical practice for MCL, and immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a feasible alternative to identify high-risk patients. The aim of the present study was to investigate the accuracy of p53 as a tool to identify patients withTP53missense mutations and the prognostic impact of overexpression and mutations in a Swedish population-based cohort. In total, 317 cases were investigated using IHC and 255 cases were sequenced, enabling analysis of p53 andTP53status among 137 cases divided over the two-cohort investigated. The accuracy of predicting missense mutations from protein expression was 82%, with sensitivity at 82% and specificity at 100% in paired samples. We further show the impact of p53 expression andTP53mutations on survival (hazard ratio of 3 center dot 1 in univariate analysis for both), and the association to risk factors, such as high MCL International Prognostic Index, blastoid morphology and proliferation, in a population-based setting.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available