4.8 Article

The acquisition of molecular drivers in pediatric therapy-related myeloid neoplasms

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-21255-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI [1K08HL150282-01]
  2. Alex's Lemonade Stand Foundation Young Investigator Award
  3. American Lebanese and Syrian Associated Charities of St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
  4. US National Institutes of Health [P30 CA021765, R01 HL144653]
  5. Burroughs Wellcome Fund
  6. Edward P. Evans Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pediatric therapy-related myeloid neoplasms have specific somatic drivers at the genomic level, unlike adults, with no evidence of pre-existing minor tMN clones associated with TP53 mutations.
Pediatric therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (tMN) occur in children after exposure to cytotoxic therapy and have a dismal prognosis. The somatic and germline genomic alterations that drive these myeloid neoplasms in children and how they arise have yet to be comprehensively described. We use whole exome, whole genome, and/or RNA sequencing to characterize the genomic profile of 84 pediatric tMN cases (tMDS: n=28, tAML: n=56). Our data show that Ras/MAPK pathway mutations, alterations in RUNX1 or TP53, and KMT2A rearrangements are frequent somatic drivers, and we identify cases with aberrant MECOM expression secondary to enhancer hijacking. Unlike adults with tMN, we find no evidence of pre-existing minor tMN clones (including those with TP53 mutations), but rather the majority of cases are unrelated clones arising as a consequence of cytotoxic therapy. These studies also uncover rare cases of lineage switch disease rather than true secondary neoplasms. Paediatric therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (tMN) have a dismal prognosis and have not been comprehensively profiled. Here the authors characterise the molecular landscape of 84 paediatric tMN patients, and find that, unlike adult tMNs, these do not emerge from pre-existing clones and that MECOM dysregulation is frequent.

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