4.8 Article

High grade serous ovarian carcinomas originate in the fallopian tube

Journal

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-00962-1

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Dr Miriam and Sheldon G. Adelson Medical Research Foundation
  2. Commonwealth Foundation
  3. US National Institutes of Health [CA121113, CA006973, CA083636, CA152990, CA200469]
  4. US Department of Defense [OCRP-OC-100517]
  5. Honorable Tina Brozman Foundation for Ovarian Cancer Research
  6. SU2C-DCS International Translational Cancer Research Dream Team [SU2C-AACR-DT1415]
  7. Foundation for Women's Wellness
  8. Richard W. TeLinde Gynecologic Pathology Laboratory Endowment
  9. Arthur Sachs/Fulbright/Harvard
  10. La Fondation Philippe
  11. La Fondation de France-Recherche clinique en cancerologie-Aide a la mobilite des chercheurs

Ask authors/readers for more resources

High-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) is the most frequent type of ovarian cancer and has a poor outcome. It has been proposed that fallopian tube cancers may be precursors of HGSOC but evolutionary evidence for this hypothesis has been limited. Here, we perform whole-exome sequence and copy number analyses of laser capture microdissected fallopian tube lesions (p53 signatures, serous tubal intraepithelial carcinomas (STICs), and fallopian tube carcinomas), ovarian cancers, and metastases from nine patients. The majority of tumor-specific alterations in ovarian cancers were present in STICs, including those affecting TP53, BRCA1, BRCA2 or PTEN. Evolutionary analyses reveal that p53 signatures and STICs are precursors of ovarian carcinoma and identify a window of 7 years between development of a STIC and initiation of ovarian carcinoma, with metastases following rapidly thereafter. Our results provide insights into the etiology of ovarian cancer and have implications for prevention, early detection and therapeutic intervention of this disease.

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