4.7 Article

Identification of a novel FN1-FGFR1 genetic fusion as a frequent event in phosphaturic mesenchymal tumour

期刊

JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
卷 235, 期 4, 页码 539-545

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/path.4465

关键词

phosphaturic mesenchymal tumour; translocation; FN1; FGFR1; RNA sequencing

资金

  1. Department of Medical Research, National Taiwan University Hospital [NTUH 103-N01]
  2. Ministry of Health and Welfare (Taiwan) [MOHW103-TD-B-111-04]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phosphaturic mesenchymal tumours (PMTs) are uncommon soft tissue and bone tumours that typically cause hypophosphataemia and tumour-induced osteomalacia (TIO) through secretion of phosphatonins including fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23). PMT has recently been accepted by the World Health Organization as a formal tumour entity. The genetic basis and oncogenic pathways underlying its tumourigenesis remain obscure. In this study, we identified a novel FN1-FGFR1 fusion gene in three out of four PMTs by next-generation RNA sequencing. The fusion transcripts and proteins were subsequently confirmed with RT-PCR and western blotting. Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis showed six cases with FN1-FGFR1 fusion out of an additional 11 PMTs. Overall, nine out of 15 PMTs (60%) harboured this fusion. The FN1 gene possibly provides its constitutively active promoter and the encoded protein's oligomerization domains to overexpress and facilitate the activation of the FGFR1 kinase domain. Interestingly, unlike the prototypical leukaemia-inducing FGFR1 fusion genes, which are ligand-independent, the FN1-FGFR1 chimeric protein was predicted to preserve its ligand-binding domains, suggesting an advantage of the presence of its ligands (such as FGF23 secreted at high levels by the tumour) in the activation of the chimeric receptor tyrosine kinase, thus effecting an autocrine or a paracrine mechanism of tumourigenesis. Copyright (c) 2014 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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