|
Sub-category:
Translational research
Category:
Colon and Rectum
Meeting:
2009 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium
Session Type and Session Title:
General Session II: Cancers of the Colon and Rectum: Translational Research
General Poster Session F
Abstract No:
288
Author(s):
A. D. Roth, S. Tejpar, P. Yan, R. Fiocca, D. Klingbiel, M. Delorenzi, R. Labianca, D. Cunningham, E. Van Cutsem, F. Bosman
Abstract:
Background: We compared the incidence of molecular markers in stage II (SII) and III (SIII) colon cancer and tested their prognostic value per stage, using PETACC 3, an adjuvant trial with 3278 patients. We included expression of P53, SMAD4, thymidylate synthetase (TS) and hTERT, mutations of KRAS and BRAF, microsatellite instability (MSI) and 18qLOH. Methods: 1,564 formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue blocks were prospectively collected and DNA from normal and tumor tissue was extracted after macrodissection. High P53, TS and hTERT expression and SMAD4 loss were assessed by immunohistochemistry. MSI was studied with 10 markers. KRAS exon 2 and BRAF exon 15 mutations were analyzed by allele specific real time PCR. 18qLOH was studied by pyrosequencing 7 SNPs. Prognostic value of the markers was analysed per stage by Cox regression for Relapse Free Survival (RFS). Results: Marker frequencies and stage specific p-values in prognostic models in 420 SII and 984 SIII patients are listed in the table. Significant differences in frequency per stage were found for all markers except KRAS and BRAF. An interaction test for differences between marker prognostic value for SII and SIII was significant for MSI (p=0.04) and 18qLOH (p=0.04) in SII. Multivariate analysis including markers, T stage, N stage (for SIII), Tu grade, age <60, sex, treatment arm, and Tu site found T stage (p=0.0001) and MSI (p=0.02) as independently significant clinical predictors in SII; N stage (p<0.0001), T stage (p<0.0001), SMAD4 (p<0.0001) and P53 (p=0.01) in SIII. Conclusion:
Molecular markers in colon cancer have a stage specific prognostic value. The
possibility that the stages represent different diseases, rather than sequential
steps in the evolution of a single disease, needs to be considered.
|
Marker alteration frequency (%) |
Prognostic value1 | |
S II | S III |
p value | S II |
S III | | MSI-H | 22 | 12 | <0.0001 | 0.004 | 0.06 | |
P53 | 30 | 37 | 0.009 | 0.99 | 0.02 | |
TS | 43 | 29 | <0.0001 | 0.02 | 0.03 | |
SMAD4 | 9 | 13 | 0.02 | 0.73 | <0.0001 | |
18qLOH | 63 | 70 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.91 | |
hTERT | 40 | 48 | 0.06 | 0.32 | 0.006 | |
KRAS | 36 | 37 | n.s. | 0.79 | 0.69 | |
BRAF | 8 | 8 | n.s. | 0.89 | 0.26 |
1. Univariate regression analysis for RFS, p values.
Faculty Disclosures
Abstract Disclosures
Abstracts that were granted an exception in accordance with ASCO's Conflict of Interest Policy
and are designated with a caret symbol (^) here and in the print version.
 Associated Presentation(s):
Other Abstracts in this Sub-Category:
Abstracts by A. D. Roth:
Presentations by A. D. Roth:
Educational Book Manuscripts by A. D. Roth:
|
