4.5 Article

An enhanced genetic model of colorectal cancer progression history

期刊

GENOME BIOLOGY
卷 20, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13059-019-1782-4

关键词

Tumor evolution; Tumor heterogeneity; Aneuploidy; Kataegis

资金

  1. University of Chicago
  2. NCI [K22CA193848]
  3. Cancer Research Foundation Young Investigator Award
  4. American Cancer Society Institutional Research Grant [IRG-16-222-56]
  5. NCI Cancer Center Support Grant [P30CA14599]
  6. Harvard Ludwig Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background The classical genetic model of colorectal cancer presents APC mutations as the earliest genomic alterations, followed by KRAS and TP53 mutations. However, the timing and relative order of clonal expansion and other types of genomic alterations, such as genomic rearrangements, are still unclear. Results Here, we perform comprehensive bioinformatic analysis to dissect the relative timing of somatic genetic alterations in 63 colorectal cancers with whole-genome sequencing data. Utilizing allele fractions of somatic single nucleotide variants as molecular clocks while accounting for the presence of copy number changes and structural alterations, we identify key events in the evolution of colorectal tumors. We find that driver point mutations, gene fusions, and arm-level copy losses typically arise early in tumorigenesis; different mechanisms act on distinct genomic regions to drive DNA copy changes; and chromothripsis-clustered rearrangements previously thought to occur as a single catastrophic event-is frequent and may occur multiple times independently in the same tumor through different mechanisms. Furthermore, our computational approach reveals that, in contrast to recent studies, selection is often present on subclones and that multiple evolutionary models can operate in a single tumor at different stages. Conclusion Combining these results, we present a refined tumor progression model which significantly expands our understanding of the tumorigenic process of human colorectal cancer.

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

4.5
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