4.8 Article

Germ cell tumors and associated hematologic malignancies evolve from a common shared precursor

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 130, 期 12, 页码 6668-6676

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI139682

关键词

-

资金

  1. Conquer Cancer Foundation of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
  2. American Association for Cancer Research
  3. American Society of Hematology
  4. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
  5. NIH/NCI [1K08CA230319-01]
  6. Cycle for Survival grants
  7. Marie-Josee and Henry R. Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology
  8. NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant [P30 CA008748]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Germ cell tumors (GCTs) are the most common cancer in men between the ages of 15 and 40. Although most patients are cured, those with disease arising in the mediastinum have distinctly poor outcomes. One in every 17 patients with primary mediastinal nonseminomatous GCTs develop an incurable hematologic malignancy and prior data intriguingly suggest a clonal relationship exists between hematologic malignancies and GCTs in these cases. To date, however, the precise clonal relationship between GCTs and the diverse additional somatic malignancies arising in such individuals have not been determined. Here, we traced the clonal evolution and characterized the genetic features of each neoplasm from a cohort of 15 patients with GCTs and associated hematologic malignancies. We discovered that GCTs and hematologic malignancies developing in such individuals evolved from a common shared precursor, nearly all of which harbored allelically imbalanced p53 and/or RAS pathway mutations. Hematologic malignancies arising in this setting genetically resembled mediastinal GCTs rather than de novo myeloid neoplasms. Our findings argue that this scenario represents a unique clinical syndrome, distinct from de novo GCTs or hematologic malignancies, initiated by an ancestral precursor that gives rise to the parallel evolution of GCTs and blood cancers in these 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

4.8
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