4.7 Article

Genetic alterations of the cohesin complex genes in myeloid malignancies

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 124, Issue 11, Pages 1790-1798

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2014-04-567057

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 HL118281-01, R01 CA138858-05, K24 HL077522-07, R01 CA169784]
  2. Robert Duggan Research Fund
  3. Mortimer J. Lacher fellowship of the Lymphoma Foundation
  4. Edward P. Evan's CRC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Somatic cohesin mutations have been reported in myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). To account for the morphologic and cytogenetic diversity of these neoplasms, a well-annotated cohort of 1060 patients with myeloid malignancies including MDS (n=386), myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) (n=55), MDS/MPNs (n=169), and AML (n=450) were analyzed for cohesin gene mutational status, gene expression, and therapeutic and survival outcomes. Somatic cohesin defects were detected in 12% of patients with myeloid malignancies, whereas low expression of these genes was present in an additional 15% of patients. Mutations of cohesin genes were mutually exclusive and mostly resulted in predicted loss of function. Patients with low cohesin gene expression showed similar expression signatures as those with somatic cohesin mutations. Cross-sectional deep-sequencing analysis for clonal hierarchy demonstrated STAG2, SMC3, and RAD21 mutations to be ancestral in 18%, 18%, and 47% of cases, respectively, and each expanded to clonal dominance concordant with disease transformation. Cohesin mutations were significantly associated with RUNX1, Ras-family oncogenes, and BCOR and ASXL1 mutations and were most prevalent in high-risk MDS and secondary AML. Cohesin defects were associated with poor overall survival (27.2 vs 40 months; P=.023), especially in STAG2 mutant MDS patients surviving >12 months (median survival 35 vs 50 months; P=.017).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available