Cargando…

MET amplification in metastatic colorectal cancer: an acquired response to EGFR inhibition, not a de novo phenomenon

BACKGROUND: MET amplification appears to be a predictive biomarker for MET inhibition. Prior studies reported a MET amplification rate of 9–18% in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) but do not differentiate increased gene copy numbers due to chromosomal level aberrations from focal gene amplificati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Raghav, Kanwal, Morris, Van, Tang, Chad, Morelli, Pia, Amin, Hesham M., Chen, Ken, Manyam, Ganiraju C., Broom, Bradley, Overman, Michael J., Shaw, Kenna, Meric-Bernstam, Funda, Maru, Dipen, Menter, David, Ellis, Lee M., Eng, Cathy, Hong, David, Kopetz, Scott
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Impact Journals LLC 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5342368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27421137
http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.10559
_version_ 1782513163273502720
author Raghav, Kanwal
Morris, Van
Tang, Chad
Morelli, Pia
Amin, Hesham M.
Chen, Ken
Manyam, Ganiraju C.
Broom, Bradley
Overman, Michael J.
Shaw, Kenna
Meric-Bernstam, Funda
Maru, Dipen
Menter, David
Ellis, Lee M.
Eng, Cathy
Hong, David
Kopetz, Scott
author_facet Raghav, Kanwal
Morris, Van
Tang, Chad
Morelli, Pia
Amin, Hesham M.
Chen, Ken
Manyam, Ganiraju C.
Broom, Bradley
Overman, Michael J.
Shaw, Kenna
Meric-Bernstam, Funda
Maru, Dipen
Menter, David
Ellis, Lee M.
Eng, Cathy
Hong, David
Kopetz, Scott
author_sort Raghav, Kanwal
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: MET amplification appears to be a predictive biomarker for MET inhibition. Prior studies reported a MET amplification rate of 9–18% in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) but do not differentiate increased gene copy numbers due to chromosomal level aberrations from focal gene amplifications. Validation of MET amplification rate in mCRC is critical to this field. RESULTS: In tumor tissue-based analyses, overall MET amplification rate was 1.7% (10/590). MET amplification was seen in 0/103 (0%), 4/208 (1.9%) and 6/279 (2.2%) cases, in cohorts 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Rate of MET amplification in cfDNA of cohort 4 patients refractory to anti-EGFR therapy (n = 53) was 22.6% (12/53) and was significantly higher compared to patients not exposed to anti-EGFR therapy (p < 0.001). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed MET amplification in mCRC (n = 795) using different methods across multiple cohorts. Cohort 1 (n = 103) and 2 (n = 208) included resected liver metastases and tumor biopsies, respectively, tested for MET amplification using fluorescence in-situ hybridization [amplification: MET/CEP7 ratio ≥ 2.0]. Using another tissue-based approach, cohort 3 (n = 279) included tumor biopsies sequenced with HiSeq (Illumina) with full exome coverage for MET [amplification: ≥ 4 copies identified by an in-house algorithm]. Using a blood-based approach by contrast, cohort 4 (n = 205) included patients in whom the full exome of MET in circulating-free DNA (cfDNA) was sequenced with HiSeq. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to prior reports, in this large cohort, MET amplification was a rare event in mCRC tissues. In plasma by stark contrast, MET amplification identified by cfDNA occurred in a sizable subset of patients that are refractory to anti-EGFR therapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5342368
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Impact Journals LLC
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53423682017-03-22 MET amplification in metastatic colorectal cancer: an acquired response to EGFR inhibition, not a de novo phenomenon Raghav, Kanwal Morris, Van Tang, Chad Morelli, Pia Amin, Hesham M. Chen, Ken Manyam, Ganiraju C. Broom, Bradley Overman, Michael J. Shaw, Kenna Meric-Bernstam, Funda Maru, Dipen Menter, David Ellis, Lee M. Eng, Cathy Hong, David Kopetz, Scott Oncotarget Research Paper BACKGROUND: MET amplification appears to be a predictive biomarker for MET inhibition. Prior studies reported a MET amplification rate of 9–18% in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) but do not differentiate increased gene copy numbers due to chromosomal level aberrations from focal gene amplifications. Validation of MET amplification rate in mCRC is critical to this field. RESULTS: In tumor tissue-based analyses, overall MET amplification rate was 1.7% (10/590). MET amplification was seen in 0/103 (0%), 4/208 (1.9%) and 6/279 (2.2%) cases, in cohorts 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Rate of MET amplification in cfDNA of cohort 4 patients refractory to anti-EGFR therapy (n = 53) was 22.6% (12/53) and was significantly higher compared to patients not exposed to anti-EGFR therapy (p < 0.001). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed MET amplification in mCRC (n = 795) using different methods across multiple cohorts. Cohort 1 (n = 103) and 2 (n = 208) included resected liver metastases and tumor biopsies, respectively, tested for MET amplification using fluorescence in-situ hybridization [amplification: MET/CEP7 ratio ≥ 2.0]. Using another tissue-based approach, cohort 3 (n = 279) included tumor biopsies sequenced with HiSeq (Illumina) with full exome coverage for MET [amplification: ≥ 4 copies identified by an in-house algorithm]. Using a blood-based approach by contrast, cohort 4 (n = 205) included patients in whom the full exome of MET in circulating-free DNA (cfDNA) was sequenced with HiSeq. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to prior reports, in this large cohort, MET amplification was a rare event in mCRC tissues. In plasma by stark contrast, MET amplification identified by cfDNA occurred in a sizable subset of patients that are refractory to anti-EGFR therapy. Impact Journals LLC 2016-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5342368/ /pubmed/27421137 http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.10559 Text en Copyright: © 2016 Raghav et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Paper
Raghav, Kanwal
Morris, Van
Tang, Chad
Morelli, Pia
Amin, Hesham M.
Chen, Ken
Manyam, Ganiraju C.
Broom, Bradley
Overman, Michael J.
Shaw, Kenna
Meric-Bernstam, Funda
Maru, Dipen
Menter, David
Ellis, Lee M.
Eng, Cathy
Hong, David
Kopetz, Scott
MET amplification in metastatic colorectal cancer: an acquired response to EGFR inhibition, not a de novo phenomenon
title MET amplification in metastatic colorectal cancer: an acquired response to EGFR inhibition, not a de novo phenomenon
title_full MET amplification in metastatic colorectal cancer: an acquired response to EGFR inhibition, not a de novo phenomenon
title_fullStr MET amplification in metastatic colorectal cancer: an acquired response to EGFR inhibition, not a de novo phenomenon
title_full_unstemmed MET amplification in metastatic colorectal cancer: an acquired response to EGFR inhibition, not a de novo phenomenon
title_short MET amplification in metastatic colorectal cancer: an acquired response to EGFR inhibition, not a de novo phenomenon
title_sort met amplification in metastatic colorectal cancer: an acquired response to egfr inhibition, not a de novo phenomenon
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5342368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27421137
http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.10559
work_keys_str_mv AT raghavkanwal metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT morrisvan metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT tangchad metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT morellipia metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT aminheshamm metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT chenken metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT manyamganirajuc metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT broombradley metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT overmanmichaelj metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT shawkenna metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT mericbernstamfunda metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT marudipen metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT menterdavid metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT ellisleem metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT engcathy metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT hongdavid metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon
AT kopetzscott metamplificationinmetastaticcolorectalcanceranacquiredresponsetoegfrinhibitionnotadenovophenomenon