Evidence for etiologic field changes in tongue distant from tumor in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral tongue
Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie, Anglie Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
PubMed
36314576
PubMed Central
PMC10108103
DOI
10.1002/path.6025
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- CNV, SCCOT, SNV, chromosome 8, field cancerization,
- MeSH
- jazyk patologie MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory jazyka * genetika MeSH
- nádory úst * patologie MeSH
- spinocelulární karcinom * patologie MeSH
- variabilita počtu kopií segmentů DNA MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
Oral cancer is a paradigm of Slaughter's concept of field cancerization, where tumors are thought to originate within an area of cells containing genetic alterations that predispose to cancer development. The field size is unclear but may represent a large area of tissue, and the origin of mutations is also unclear. Here, we analyzed whole exome and transcriptome features in contralateral tumor-distal tongue (i.e. distant from the tumor, not tumor-adjacent) and corresponding tumor tissues of 15 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oral tongue. The number of point mutations ranged from 41 to 237 in tumors and from one to 78 in tumor-distal samples. Tumor-distal samples showed mainly clock-like (associated with aging) or tobacco smoking mutational signatures. Tumors additionally showed mutations that associate with cytidine deaminase AID/APOBEC enzyme activities or a UV-like signature. Importantly, no point mutations were shared between a tumor and the matched tumor-distal sample in any patient. TP53 was the most frequently mutated gene in tumors (67%), whereas a TP53 mutation was detected in only one tumor-distal sample, and this mutation was not shared with the matched tumor. Arm-level copy number variation (CNV) was found in 12 tumors, with loss of chromosome (Chr) 8p or gain of 8q being the most frequent events. Two tumor-distal samples showed a gain of Chr8, which was associated with increased expression of Chr8-located genes in these samples, although gene ontology did not show a role for these genes in oncogenic processes. In situ hybridization revealed a mixed pattern of Chr8 gain and neutral copy number in both tumor cells and adjacent nontumor epithelium in one patient. We conclude that distant field cancerization exists but does not present as tumor-related mutational events. The data are compatible with etiologic field effects, rather than classical monoclonal field cancerization theory. © 2022 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.
Clinical Genetics Laboratory Medicine Norrlands Universitetssjukhus Umeå Sweden
Department of Clinical Sciences ENT Umeå University Umeå Sweden
Department of Medical Biosciences Pathology Umeå University Umeå Sweden
Research Centre for Applied Molecular Oncology Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute Brno Czech Republic
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Johnson DE, Burtness B, Leemans CR, et al. Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2020; 6: 92. PubMed PMC
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2018; 68: 394–424. PubMed
Chow LQM. Head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med 2020; 382: 60–72. PubMed
Seiwert TY, Zuo Z, Keck MK, et al. Integrative and comparative genomic analysis of HPV‐positive and HPV‐negative head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res 2015; 21: 632–641. PubMed PMC
Rautava J, Luukkaa M, Heikinheimo K, et al. Squamous cell carcinomas arising from different types of oral epithelia differ in their tumor and patient characteristics and survival. Oral Oncol 2007; 43: 911–919. PubMed
Shah JP. Patterns of cervical lymph node metastasis from squamous carcinomas of the upper aerodigestive tract. Am J Surg 1990; 160: 405–409. PubMed
Ziober AF, Patel KR, Alawi F, et al. Identification of a gene signature for rapid screening of oral squamous cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2006; 12: 5960–5971. PubMed
Sano D, Myers JN. Metastasis of squamous cell carcinoma of the oral tongue. Cancer Metastasis Rev 2007; 26: 645–662. PubMed
Ng JH, Iyer NG, Tan MH, et al. Changing epidemiology of oral squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue: a global study. Head Neck 2017; 39: 297–304. PubMed
Deneuve S, Pérol O, Dantony E, et al. Diverging incidence trends of oral tongue cancer compared to other head and neck cancers in young adults in France. Int J Cancer 2022; 150: 1301–1309. PubMed
Slaughter DP, Southwick HW, Smejkal W. Field cancerization in oral stratified squamous epithelium; clinical implications of multicentric origin. Cancer 1953; 6: 963–968. PubMed
Tabor MP, Brakenhoff RH, Ruijter‐Schippers HJ, et al. Multiple head and neck tumors frequently originate from a single preneoplastic lesion. Am J Pathol 2002; 161: 1051–1060. PubMed PMC
Braakhuis BJ, Tabor MP, Kummer JA, et al. A genetic explanation of Slaughter's concept of field cancerization: evidence and clinical implications. Cancer Res 2003; 63: 1727–1730. PubMed
Leemans CR, Braakhuis BJ, Brakenhoff RH. The molecular biology of head and neck cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2011; 11: 9–22. PubMed
Curtius K, Wright NA, Graham TA. An evolutionary perspective on field cancerization. Nat Rev Cancer 2018; 18: 19–32. PubMed
Wu P, Xie C, Yang L, et al. The genomic architectures of tumour‐adjacent tissues, plasma and saliva reveal evolutionary underpinnings of relapse in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Br J Cancer 2021; 125: 854–864. PubMed PMC
Lochhead P, Chan AT, Nishihara R, et al. Etiologic field effect: reappraisal of the field effect concept in cancer predisposition and progression. Mod Pathol 2015; 28: 14–29. PubMed PMC
Dotto GP. Multifocal epithelial tumors and field cancerization: stroma as a primary determinant. J Clin Invest 2014; 124: 1446–1453. PubMed PMC
Gadaleta E, Thorn GJ, Ross‐Adams H, et al. Field cancerization in breast cancer. J Pathol 2022; 257: 561–574. PubMed PMC
Jakubek YA, Chang K, Sivakumar S, et al. Large‐scale analysis of acquired chromosomal alterations in non‐tumor samples from patients with cancer. Nat Biotechnol 2020; 38: 90–96. PubMed PMC
Aran D, Camarda R, Odegaard J, et al. Comprehensive analysis of normal adjacent to tumor transcriptomes. Nat Commun 2017; 8: 1077. PubMed PMC
Boldrup L, Gu X, Coates PJ, et al. Gene expression changes in tumor free tongue tissue adjacent to tongue squamous cell carcinoma. Oncotarget 2017; 8: 19389–19402. PubMed PMC
Cibulskis K, Lawrence MS, Carter SL, et al. Sensitive detection of somatic point mutations in impure and heterogeneous cancer samples. Nat Biotechnol 2013; 31: 213–219. PubMed PMC
Van der Auwera GA, O'connor BD. Genomics in the Cloud: Using Docker, GATK, and WDL in Terra (1st edn). O'Reilly Media, 2020.
Lee J, Lee AJ, Lee JK, et al. Mutalisk: a web‐based somatic MUTation AnaLyIS toolKit for genomic, transcriptional and epigenomic signatures. Nucleic Acids Res 2018; 46: W102–W108. PubMed PMC
McKenna A, Hanna M, Banks E, et al. The genome analysis toolkit: a MapReduce framework for analyzing next‐generation DNA sequencing data. Genome Res 2010; 20: 1297–1303. PubMed PMC
Franch‐Exposito S, Bassaganyas L, Vila‐Casadesús M, et al. CNApp, a tool for the quantification of copy number alterations and integrative analysis revealing clinical implications. Elife 2020: e50267. PubMed PMC
Chen X, Chang CW, Spoerke JM, et al. Low‐pass whole‐genome sequencing of circulating cell‐free DNA demonstrates dynamic changes in genomic copy number in a squamous lung cancer clinical cohort. Clin Cancer Res 2019; 25: 2254–2263. PubMed
Kim D, Langmead B, Salzberg SL. HISAT: a fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements. Nat Methods 2015; 12: 357–360. PubMed PMC
Pertea M, Pertea GM, Antonescu CM, et al. StringTie enables improved reconstruction of a transcriptome from RNA‐seq reads. Nat Biotechnol 2015; 33: 290–295. PubMed PMC
Li B, Dewey CN. RSEM: accurate transcript quantification from RNA‐Seq data with or without a reference genome. BMC Bioinformatics 2011; 12: 323. PubMed PMC
Wang J, Vasaikar S, Shi Z, et al. WebGestalt 2017: a more comprehensive, powerful, flexible and interactive gene set enrichment analysis toolkit. Nucleic Acids Res 2017; 45: W130–W137. PubMed PMC
Huson DH, Beier S, Flade I, et al. MEGAN Community edition ‐ interactive exploration and analysis of large‐scale microbiome sequencing data. PLoS Comput Biol 2016; 12: e1004957. PubMed PMC
Cancer Genome Atlas Network . Comprehensive genomic characterization of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. Nature 2015; 517: 576–582. PubMed PMC
Califano J, van der Riet P, Westra W, et al. Genetic progression model for head and neck cancer: implications for field cancerization. Cancer Res 1996; 56: 2488–2492. PubMed
Martincorena I, Roshan A, Gerstung M, et al. Tumor evolution. High burden and pervasive positive selection of somatic mutations in normal human skin. Science 2015; 348: 880–886. PubMed PMC
Yoshida K, Gowers KHC, Lee‐Six H, et al. Tobacco smoking and somatic mutations in human bronchial epithelium. Nature 2020; 578: 266–272. PubMed PMC
Lee‐Six H, Olafsson S, Ellis P, et al. The landscape of somatic mutation in normal colorectal epithelial cells. Nature 2019; 574: 532–537. PubMed
Wijewardhane N, Dressler L, Ciccarelli FD. Normal somatic mutations in cancer transformation. Cancer Cell 2021; 39: 125–129. PubMed
Yokoyama A, Kakiuchi N, Yoshizato T, et al. Age‐related remodelling of oesophageal epithelia by mutated cancer drivers. Nature 2019; 565: 312–317. PubMed
Lawson ARJ, Abascal F, Coorens THH, et al. Extensive heterogeneity in somatic mutation and selection in the human bladder. Science 2020; 370: 75–82. PubMed
Colom B, Herms A, Hall MWJ, et al. Mutant clones in normal epithelium outcompete and eliminate emerging tumours. Nature 2021; 598: 510–514. PubMed PMC
Ghosh A, Das C, Ghose S, et al. Integrative analysis of genomic and transcriptomic data of normal, tumour, and co‐occurring leukoplakia tissue triads drawn from patients with gingivobuccal oral cancer identifies signatures of tumour initiation and progression. J Pathol 2022; 257: 593–606. PubMed PMC
Luginbuhl AJ, South AP. Understanding precancerous lesions of the oral cavity. J Pathol 2022: 103–105. PubMed PMC
Petljak M, Maciejowski J. Molecular origins of APOBEC‐associated mutations in cancer. DNA Repair 2020; 94: 102905. PubMed PMC
Cho RJ, Alexandrov LB, den Breems NY, et al. APOBEC mutation drives early‐onset squamous cell carcinomas in recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa. Sci Transl Med 2018: 10, eaas9668. PubMed
Kanu N, Cerone MA, Goh G, et al. DNA replication stress mediates APOBEC3 family mutagenesis in breast cancer. Genome Biol 2016; 17: 185. PubMed PMC
Venkatesan S, Angelova M, Puttick C, et al. Induction of APOBEC3 exacerbates DNA replication stress and chromosomal instability in early breast and lung cancer evolution. Cancer Discov 2021; 11: 2456–2473. PubMed PMC
Baker SC, Mason AS, Southgate J. Procarcinogen activation and mutational signatures model the initiation of carcinogenesis in human urothelial tissues In vitro. Eur Urol 2020; 78: 143–147. PubMed PMC
Hölzl‐Armstrong L, Kucab JE, Moody S, et al. Mutagenicity of acrylamide and glycidamide in human TP53 knock‐in (Hupki) mouse embryo fibroblasts. Arch Toxicol 2020; 94: 4173–4196. PubMed PMC
Hölzl‐Armstrong L, Moody S, Kucab JE, et al. Mutagenicity of 2‐hydroxyamino‐1‐methyl‐6‐phenylimidazo[4,5‐b]pyridine (N‐OH‐PhIP) in human TP53 knock‐in (Hupki) mouse embryo fibroblasts. Food Chem Toxicol 2021; 147: 111855. PubMed
He Y, Rivera J, Diossy M, et al. BRCA1/Trp53 heterozygosity and replication stress drive esophageal cancer development in a mouse model. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2021; 118: e2108421118. PubMed PMC
Leemans CR, Snijders PJF, Brakenhoff RH. The molecular landscape of head and neck cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2018; 18: 269–282. PubMed
Veeramachaneni R, Walker T, Revil T, et al. Analysis of head and neck carcinoma progression reveals novel and relevant stage‐specific changes associated with immortalisation and malignancy. Sci Rep 2019; 9: 11992. PubMed PMC
Shukla A, Nguyen THM, Moka SB, et al. Chromosome arm aneuploidies shape tumour evolution and drug response. Nat Commun 2020; 11: 449. PubMed PMC
Wood HM, Conway C, Daly C, et al. The clonal relationships between pre‐cancer and cancer revealed by ultra‐deep sequencing. J Pathol 2015; 237: 296–306. PubMed
Jolly C, Van Loo P. Timing somatic events in the evolution of cancer. Genome Biol 2018; 19: 95. PubMed PMC
Cerami E, Gao J, Dogrusoz U, et al. The cBio cancer genomics portal: an open platform for exploring multidimensional cancer genomics data. Cancer Discov 2012; 2: 401–404. PubMed PMC
Gao J, Aksoy BA, Dogrusoz U, et al. Integrative analysis of complex cancer genomics and clinical profiles using the cBioPortal. Sci Signal 2013; 6: pl1. PubMed PMC
Yasaei H, Gilham E, Pickles JC, et al. Carcinogen‐specific mutational and epigenetic alterations in INK4A, INK4B and p53 tumour‐suppressor genes drive induced senescence bypass in normal diploid mammalian cells. Oncogene 2013; 32: 171–179. PubMed
Zhao R, Choi BY, Lee MH, et al. Implications of genetic and epigenetic alterations of CDKN2A (p16(INK4a)) in cancer. EBioMedicine 2016; 8: 30–39. PubMed PMC