Cargando…

Loss of heterozygosity: what is it good for?

BACKGROUND: Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) is a common genetic event in cancer development, and is known to be involved in the somatic loss of wild-type alleles in many inherited cancer syndromes. The wider involvement of LOH in cancer is assumed to relate to unmasking a somatically mutated tumour sup...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ryland, Georgina L., Doyle, Maria A., Goode, David, Boyle, Samantha E., Choong, David Y.H., Rowley, Simone M., Li, Jason, Bowtell, David DL, Tothill, Richard W., Campbell, Ian G., Gorringe, Kylie L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4522148/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26231170
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12920-015-0123-z
_version_ 1782383925210906624
author Ryland, Georgina L.
Doyle, Maria A.
Goode, David
Boyle, Samantha E.
Choong, David Y.H.
Rowley, Simone M.
Li, Jason
Bowtell, David DL
Tothill, Richard W.
Campbell, Ian G.
Gorringe, Kylie L.
author_facet Ryland, Georgina L.
Doyle, Maria A.
Goode, David
Boyle, Samantha E.
Choong, David Y.H.
Rowley, Simone M.
Li, Jason
Bowtell, David DL
Tothill, Richard W.
Campbell, Ian G.
Gorringe, Kylie L.
author_sort Ryland, Georgina L.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) is a common genetic event in cancer development, and is known to be involved in the somatic loss of wild-type alleles in many inherited cancer syndromes. The wider involvement of LOH in cancer is assumed to relate to unmasking a somatically mutated tumour suppressor gene through loss of the wild type allele. METHODS: We analysed 86 ovarian carcinomas for mutations in 980 genes selected on the basis of their location in common regions of LOH. RESULTS: We identified 36 significantly mutated genes, but these could only partly account for the quanta of LOH in the samples. Using our own and TCGA data we then evaluated five possible models to explain the selection for non-random accumulation of LOH in ovarian cancer genomes: 1. Classic two-hit hypothesis: high frequency biallelic genetic inactivation of tumour suppressor genes. 2. Epigenetic two-hit hypothesis: biallelic inactivation through methylation and LOH. 3. Multiple alternate-gene biallelic inactivation: low frequency gene disruption. 4. Haplo-insufficiency: Single copy gene disruption. 5. Modified two-hit hypothesis: reduction to homozygosity of low penetrance germline predisposition alleles. We determined that while high-frequency biallelic gene inactivation under model 1 is rare, regions of LOH (particularly copy-number neutral LOH) are enriched for deleterious mutations and increased promoter methylation, while copy-number loss LOH regions are likely to contain under-expressed genes suggestive of haploinsufficiency. Reduction to homozygosity of cancer predisposition SNPs may also play a minor role. CONCLUSION: It is likely that selection for regions of LOH depends on its effect on multiple genes. Selection for copy number neutral LOH may better fit the classic two-hit model whereas selection for copy number loss may be attributed to its effect on multi-gene haploinsufficiency. LOH mapping alone is unlikely to be successful in identifying novel tumour suppressor genes; a combined approach may be more effective. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12920-015-0123-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4522148
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45221482015-08-02 Loss of heterozygosity: what is it good for? Ryland, Georgina L. Doyle, Maria A. Goode, David Boyle, Samantha E. Choong, David Y.H. Rowley, Simone M. Li, Jason Bowtell, David DL Tothill, Richard W. Campbell, Ian G. Gorringe, Kylie L. BMC Med Genomics Research Article BACKGROUND: Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) is a common genetic event in cancer development, and is known to be involved in the somatic loss of wild-type alleles in many inherited cancer syndromes. The wider involvement of LOH in cancer is assumed to relate to unmasking a somatically mutated tumour suppressor gene through loss of the wild type allele. METHODS: We analysed 86 ovarian carcinomas for mutations in 980 genes selected on the basis of their location in common regions of LOH. RESULTS: We identified 36 significantly mutated genes, but these could only partly account for the quanta of LOH in the samples. Using our own and TCGA data we then evaluated five possible models to explain the selection for non-random accumulation of LOH in ovarian cancer genomes: 1. Classic two-hit hypothesis: high frequency biallelic genetic inactivation of tumour suppressor genes. 2. Epigenetic two-hit hypothesis: biallelic inactivation through methylation and LOH. 3. Multiple alternate-gene biallelic inactivation: low frequency gene disruption. 4. Haplo-insufficiency: Single copy gene disruption. 5. Modified two-hit hypothesis: reduction to homozygosity of low penetrance germline predisposition alleles. We determined that while high-frequency biallelic gene inactivation under model 1 is rare, regions of LOH (particularly copy-number neutral LOH) are enriched for deleterious mutations and increased promoter methylation, while copy-number loss LOH regions are likely to contain under-expressed genes suggestive of haploinsufficiency. Reduction to homozygosity of cancer predisposition SNPs may also play a minor role. CONCLUSION: It is likely that selection for regions of LOH depends on its effect on multiple genes. Selection for copy number neutral LOH may better fit the classic two-hit model whereas selection for copy number loss may be attributed to its effect on multi-gene haploinsufficiency. LOH mapping alone is unlikely to be successful in identifying novel tumour suppressor genes; a combined approach may be more effective. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12920-015-0123-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-08-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4522148/ /pubmed/26231170 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12920-015-0123-z Text en © Ryland et al. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Ryland, Georgina L.
Doyle, Maria A.
Goode, David
Boyle, Samantha E.
Choong, David Y.H.
Rowley, Simone M.
Li, Jason
Bowtell, David DL
Tothill, Richard W.
Campbell, Ian G.
Gorringe, Kylie L.
Loss of heterozygosity: what is it good for?
title Loss of heterozygosity: what is it good for?
title_full Loss of heterozygosity: what is it good for?
title_fullStr Loss of heterozygosity: what is it good for?
title_full_unstemmed Loss of heterozygosity: what is it good for?
title_short Loss of heterozygosity: what is it good for?
title_sort loss of heterozygosity: what is it good for?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4522148/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26231170
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12920-015-0123-z
work_keys_str_mv AT rylandgeorginal lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT doylemariaa lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT goodedavid lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT boylesamanthae lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT choongdavidyh lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT rowleysimonem lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT lijason lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT bowtelldaviddl lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT tothillrichardw lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT campbelliang lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor
AT gorringekyliel lossofheterozygositywhatisitgoodfor