A 12-Gene Genomic Instability Signature Predicts Clinical Outcomes in Multiple Cancer Types

Abstract

Background and aims

Genomic instability, as reflected in specific chromosomal aneuploidies and variation in the nuclear DNA content, is a defining feature of human carcinomas. It is solidly established that the degree of genomic instability influences clinical outcome. We have recently identified a 12-gene expression signature that discerned genomically stable from unstable breast carcinomas. This gene expression signature was also useful to predict, with high accuracy, the clinical course in independent multiple published breast cancer cohorts. From a biological point of view, this result confirmed the central role of genomic instability for a tumor's ability to adapt to external challenges and selective pressure, and hence for continued survival fitness. This prompted us to investigate whether this genomic instability signature could also predict clinical outcome in other cancer types of epithelial origin, including colorectal tumors, non-small cell lung carcinomas, and ovarian cancer.

Results

The results show that the gene expression signature that defines genomic instability and poor outcome in breast cancer contributes significantly more accurate (p<0.05 compared with random prediction) prognostic information in multiple cancer types independent of established clinical parameters. The 12-gene genomic instability signature stratified patients into high- and low-risk groups with distinct postoperative survival in three non-small cell lung cancer cohorts (n=637) in KaplanMeier analyses (log-rank p<0.05). It predicted recurrence in colon cancer patients (n=92) with an overall accuracy greater than 69% (p=0.04) in cross-cohort validation. It quantified relapse-free survival in ovarian cancer (n=124; log-rank p<0.05). Functional pathway analysis revealed interactions between the 12 signature genes and well-known cancer hallmarks.

Conclusion

The degree of genomic instability has diagnostic and prognostic implications. It is tempting to speculate that pursuing genomic instability therapeutically could provide entry points for a target that is unique to cancer cells.

Keywords

Genomic instability Gene expression signatures Breast cancer Ovarian cancer Colon cancer Non-small cell lung cancer

References

Albertson

D.G.

, Collins

, McCormick

, Gray

J.W.

Chromosome aberrations in solid tumors.

Nat Genet 2003; 34: 369–76.

Ried

, Heselmeyer-Haddad

, Blegen

, Schrock

, Auer

Genomic changes defining the genesis, progression, and malignancy potential in solid human tumors: a phenotype/genotype correlation.

Genes Chromosomes Cancer 1999; 25: 195–204.

Auer

, Eriksson

, Azavedo

, Caspersson

, Wallgren

Prognostic significance of nuclear DNA content in mammary adenocarcinomas in humans.

Cancer Res 1984; 44: 394–6.

Kronenwett

, Huwendiek

, Ostring

Improved grading of breast adenocarcinomas based on genomic instability.

Cancer Res 2004; 64: 904–9.

Sorlie

, Perou

C.M.

, Tibshirani

Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications.

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001; 98: 10869–74.

Sotiriou

, Neo

S.Y.

, McShane

L.M.

Breast cancer classification and prognosis based on gene expression profiles from a population-based study.

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003; 100: 10393–8.

van de Vijver

M.J.

, He

Y.D.

, van 't Veer

L.J.

A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer.

N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 1999–2009.

Habermann

J.K.

, Doering

, Hautaniemi

The gene expression signature of genomic instability in breast cancer is an independent predictor of clinical outcome.

Int J Cancer 2009; 124: 1552–64.

Barrier

, Boelle

P.Y.

, Roser

Stage II colon cancer prognosis prediction by tumor gene expression profiling.

J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 4685–91.

10.

Barrier

, Roser

, Boelle

P.Y.

Prognosis of stage II colon cancer by non-neoplastic mucosa gene expression profiling.

Oncogene 2006; 26: 2642–8.

11.

Barrier

, Lemoine

, Boelle

P.Y.

Colon cancer prognosis prediction by gene expression profiling.

Oncogene 2005; 24: 6155–64.

12.

Bild

A.H.

, Yao

, Chang

J.T.

Oncogenic pathway signatures in human cancers as a guide to targeted therapies.

Nature 2006; 439: 353–7.

13.

Bhattacharjee

, Richards

W.G.

, Staunton

Classification of human lung carcinomas by mRNA expression profiling reveals distinct adenocarcinoma subclasses.

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001; 98: 13790–5.

14.

Shedden

, Taylor

J.M.

, Enkemann

S.A.

Gene expression-based survival prediction in lung adenocarcinoma: a multisite, blinded validation study.

Nat Med 2008; 14: 822–7.

15.

Cohen

W.W.

Fast effective rule induction. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Machine Learning. Lake Tahoe, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers 1995; 115–23.

16.

Witten

I.H.

, Frank

Data mining: practical machine learning tools and techniques (2nd edition). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 2005.

17.

Everitt

, Hothorn

A handbook of statistical analyses using R. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2006.

18.

Ewart-Toland

, Briassouli

, de Koning

J.P.

Identification of Stk6/STK15 as a candidate low-penetrance tumor-susceptibility gene in mouse and human.

Nat Genet 2003; 34: 403–12.

19.

Briassouli

, Chan

, Linardopoulos

The N-terminal domain of the Aurora-A Phe-31 variant encodes an E3 ubiquitin ligase and mediates ubiquitination of IkappaBalpha.

Hum Mol Genet 2006; 15: 3343–50.

20.

Eymin

, Leduc

, Coll

J.L.

, Brambilla

, Gazzeri

p14ARF induces G2 arrest and apoptosis independently of p53 leading to regression of tumours established in nude mice.

Oncogene 2003; 22: 1822–35.

21.

Hemmati

P.G.

, Normand

, Verdoodt

Loss of p21 disrupts p14 ARF-induced G1 cell cycle arrest but augments p14 ARF-induced apoptosis in human carcinoma cells.

Oncogene 2005; 24: 4114–28.

22.

Sarsour

E.H.

, Agarwal

, Pandita

T.K.

, Oberley

L.W.

, Goswami

P.C.

Manganese superoxide dismutase protects the proliferative capacity of confluent normal human fibroblasts.

J Biol Chem 2005; 280: 18033–41.

23.

Salomoni

, Perrotti

, Martinez

, Franceschi

, Calabretta

Resistance to apoptosis in CTLL-2 cells constitutively expressing c-Myb is associated with induction of BCL-2 expression and Myb-dependent regulation of bcl-2 promoter activity.

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997; 94: 3296–301.

24.

Campanero

M.R.

, Armstrong

M.I.

, Flemington

E.K.

CpG methylation as a mechanism for the regulation of E2F activity.

Proc.Natl.Acad.Sci.U.S.A 2000 Jun 6; 97(12): 6481–6.

25.

Vulcano

, Struyf

, Scapini

Unique regulation of CCL18 production by maturing dendritic cells.

J Immunol. 2003; 170: 3843–9.

26.

Carter

S.L.

, Eklund

A.C.

, Kohane

I.S.

, Harris

L.N.

, Szallasi

A signature of chromosomal instability inferred from gene expression profiles predicts clinical outcome in multiple human cancers.

Nat Genet 2006; 38: 1043–8.

27.

Kronenwett

, Ploner

, Zetterberg

, Bergh

, Hall

, Auer

, Pawitan

Genomic instability and prognosis in breast carcinomas.

Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006; 15: 1630–5.

28.

Ried

Homage to Theodor Boveri (1862–1915): Boveri's theory of cancer as a disease of the chromosomes, and the landscape of genomic imbalances in human carcinomas.

Environ Mol Mutagen 2009; 50: 593–601.

29.

Eshleman

J.R.

, Casey

, Kochera

M.E.

Chromosome number and structure both are markedly stable in RER colorectal cancers and are not destabilized by mutation of p53.

Oncogene 1998; 17: 719–25.

30.

Ghadimi

B.M.

, Sackett

D.L.

, Difilippantonio

M.J.

Centrosome amplification and instability occurs exclusively in aneuploid, but not in diploid colorectal cancer cell lines, and correlates with numerical chromosomal aberrations.

Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2000; 27: 183–90.

31.

Schlegel

, Stumm

, Scherthan

Comparative genomic in situ hybridization of colon carcinomas with replication error.

Cancer Res 1995; 55: 6002–5.

32.

Sorlie

, Tibshirani

, Parker

Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets.

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003; 100: 8418–23.

33.

Paik

, Shak

, Tang

A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer.

N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 2817–26.

34.

Chang

H.Y.

, Nuyten

D.S.

, Sneddon

J.B.

Robustness, scalability, and integration of a wound-response gene expression signature in predicting breast cancer survival.

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005; 102: 3738–43.

35.

Massague

Sorting out breast-cancer gene signatures.

N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 294–7.

36.

Chi

J.T.

, Wang

, Nuyten

D.S.

Gene expression programs in response to hypoxia: cell type specificity and prognostic significance in human cancers.

PLoS Med 2006; 3: e47.

37.

Liu

, Wang

, Chen

G.Y.

The prognostic role of a gene signature from tumorigenic breast-cancer cells.

N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 217–26.

38.

Minn

A.J.

, Gupta

G.P.

, Siegel

P.M.

Genes that mediate breast cancer metastasis to lung.

Nature 2005; 436: 518–24.