4.8 Article

Phylogenetic analyses of melanoma reveal complex patterns of metastatic dissemination

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1508074112

关键词

metastasis; melanoma; genetics

资金

  1. Well Aging Research Center
  2. Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology under Professor Sang Chul Park
  3. Dermatology Foundation
  4. National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute [K08 CA169865]
  5. Integrative Cancer Biology Program [U54 CA112970]
  6. Oregon Health & Science University Knight Cancer Institute
  7. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Melanoma is difficult to treat once it becomes metastatic. However, the precise ancestral relationship between primary tumors and their metastases is not well understood. We performed whole-exome sequencing of primary melanomas and multiple matched metastases from eight patients to elucidate their phylogenetic relationships. In six of eight patients, we found that genetically distinct cell populations in the primary tumor metastasized in parallel to different anatomic sites, rather than sequentially from one site to the next. In five of these six patients, the metastasizing cells had themselves arisen from a common parental subpopulation in the primary, indicating that the ability to establish metastases is a late-evolving trait. Interestingly, we discovered that individual metastases were sometimes founded by multiple cell populations of the primary that were genetically distinct. Such establishment of metastases by multiple tumor subpopulations could help explain why identical resistance variants are identified in different sites after initial response to systemic therapy. One primary tumor harbored two subclones with different oncogenic mutations in CTNNB1, which were both propagated to the same metastasis, raising the possibility that activation of wingless-type mouse mammary tumor virus integration site (WNT) signaling may be involved, as has been suggested by experimental models.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据