4.7 Article

Whole genome analysis identifies the association of TP53 genomic deletions with lower survival in Stage III colorectal cancer

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-61643-6

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [P01HG000205, 1U01CA15192001-A1, 1U01CA176299, HG006137-07]
  2. Intermountain Healthcare [RSG-13-297-01-TBG]
  3. American Cancer Society [RSG-13-297-01-TBG, PF-18-184-01-TBG]
  4. Clayville Foundation
  5. Innovation in Cancer Informatics Fund
  6. NIH/NCI [5K08CA166512]
  7. Conquer Cancer Foundation
  8. Gastric Cancer Foundation
  9. Carl Kawaja Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

DNA copy number aberrations (CNA) are frequently observed in colorectal cancers (CRC). There is an urgent need for CNA-based biomarkers in clinics,. n For Stage III CRC, if combined with imaging or pathologic evidence, these markers promise more precise care. We conducted this Stage III specific biomarker discovery with a cohort of 134 CRCs, and with a newly developed high-efficiency CNA profiling protocol. Specifically, we developed the profiling protocol for tumor-normal matched tissue samples based on low-coverage clinical whole-genome sequencing (WGS). We demonstrated the protocol's accuracy and robustness by a systematic benchmark with microarray, high-coverage whole-exome and-genome approaches, where the low-coverage WGS-derived CNA segments were highly accordant (PCC >0.95) with those derived from microarray, and they were substantially less variable if compared to exome-derived segments. A lasso-based model and multivariate cox regression analysis identified a chromosome 17p loss, containing the TP53 tumor suppressor gene, that was significantly associated with reduced survival (P = 0.0139, HR = 1.688, 95% CI = [1.112-2.562]), which was validated by an independent cohort of 187 Stage III CRCs. In summary, this low-coverage WGS protocol has high sensitivity, high resolution and low cost and the identified 17p-loss is an effective poor prognosis marker for Stage III patients.

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

4.7
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