Tumor copy number alteration burden is a pan-cancer prognostic factor associated with recurrence and death

  1. Haley Hieronymus
  2. Rajmohan Murali
  3. Amy Tin
  4. Kamlesh Yadav
  5. Wassim Abida
  6. Henrik Moller
  7. Daniel Berney
  8. Howard Scher
  9. Brett Carver
  10. Peter Scardino
  11. Nikolaus Schultz
  12. Barry Taylor
  13. Andrew Vickers
  14. Jack Cuzick
  15. Charles L Sawyers  Is a corresponding author
  1. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, United States
  2. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, United States
  3. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, United States
  4. Kings College London, United Kingdom
  5. Queen Mary University of London, United Kingdom

Abstract

The level of copy number alteration (CNA), termed CNA burden, in the tumor genome is associated with recurrence of primary prostate cancer. Whether CNA burden is associated with prostate cancer survival or outcomes in other cancers is unknown. We analyzed the CNA landscape of conservatively treated prostate cancer in a biopsy and transurethral resection cohort, reflecting an increasingly common treatment approach. We find that CNA burden is prognostic for cancer-specific death, independent of standard clinical prognostic factors. More broadly, we find CNA burden is significantly associated with disease-free and overall survival in primary breast, endometrial, renal clear cell, thyroid, and colorectal cancer in TCGA cohorts. To assess clinical applicability, we validated these findings in an independent pan-cancer cohort of patients whose tumors were sequenced using a clinically-certified next generation sequencing assay (MSK-IMPACT), where prognostic value varied based on cancer type. This prognostic association was affected by incorporating tumor purity in some cohorts. Overall, CNA burden of primary and metastatic tumors is a prognostic factor, potentially modulated by sample purity and measurable by current clinical sequencing.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files and reference materials. The conservative treatment TAPG copy number cohort array data was deposited in NCBI GEO under accession number GSE103665 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE103665, reviewer access token czwruyesnzqbbyn).

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Haley Hieronymus

    Human Oncology and Pathogenesis Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Rajmohan Murali

    Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6988-4295
  3. Amy Tin

    Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Kamlesh Yadav

    Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Wassim Abida

    Human Oncology and Pathogenesis Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Henrik Moller

    Department of Cancer Epidemiology, Population and Global Health, Kings College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Daniel Berney

    Department of Molecular Oncology, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Howard Scher

    Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Brett Carver

    Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. Peter Scardino

    Department of Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Nikolaus Schultz

    Marie-Josée and Henry R Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  12. Barry Taylor

    Human Oncology and Pathogenesis Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  13. Andrew Vickers

    Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  14. Jack Cuzick

    Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  15. Charles L Sawyers

    Human Oncology and Pathogenesis Program, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    sawyersc@mskcc.org
    Competing interests
    Charles L Sawyers, Senior Editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4955-6475

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Charles L Sawyers

National Institutes of Health (CA193837)

  • Charles L Sawyers

Prostate Cancer Foundation

  • Kamlesh Yadav

National Institutes of Health (CA092629)

  • Charles L Sawyers

National Institutes of Health (CA155169)

  • Charles L Sawyers

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2018, Hieronymus et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 8,992
    views
  • 1,085
    downloads
  • 218
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Haley Hieronymus
  2. Rajmohan Murali
  3. Amy Tin
  4. Kamlesh Yadav
  5. Wassim Abida
  6. Henrik Moller
  7. Daniel Berney
  8. Howard Scher
  9. Brett Carver
  10. Peter Scardino
  11. Nikolaus Schultz
  12. Barry Taylor
  13. Andrew Vickers
  14. Jack Cuzick
  15. Charles L Sawyers
(2018)
Tumor copy number alteration burden is a pan-cancer prognostic factor associated with recurrence and death
eLife 7:e37294.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.37294

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.37294

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Immunology and Inflammation
    Sofia V Krasik, Ekaterina A Bryushkova ... Ekaterina O Serebrovskaya
    Research Article

    The current understanding of humoral immune response in cancer patients suggests that tumors may be infiltrated with diffuse B cells of extra-tumoral origin or may develop organized lymphoid structures, where somatic hypermutation and antigen-driven selection occur locally. These processes are believed to be significantly influenced by the tumor microenvironment through secretory factors and biased cell-cell interactions. To explore the manifestation of this influence, we used deep unbiased immunoglobulin profiling and systematically characterized the relationships between B cells in circulation, draining lymph nodes (draining LNs), and tumors in 14 patients with three human cancers. We demonstrated that draining LNs are differentially involved in the interaction with the tumor site, and that significant heterogeneity exists even between different parts of a single lymph node (LN). Next, we confirmed and elaborated upon previous observations regarding intratumoral immunoglobulin heterogeneity. We identified B cell receptor (BCR) clonotypes that were expanded in tumors relative to draining LNs and blood and observed that these tumor-expanded clonotypes were less hypermutated than non-expanded (ubiquitous) clonotypes. Furthermore, we observed a shift in the properties of complementarity-determining region 3 of the BCR heavy chain (CDR-H3) towards less mature and less specific BCR repertoire in tumor-infiltrating B-cells compared to circulating B-cells, which may indicate less stringent control for antibody-producing B cell development in tumor microenvironment (TME). In addition, we found repertoire-level evidence that B-cells may be selected according to their CDR-H3 physicochemical properties before they activate somatic hypermutation (SHM). Altogether, our work outlines a broad picture of the differences in the tumor BCR repertoire relative to non-tumor tissues and points to the unexpected features of the SHM process.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Computational and Systems Biology
    Rosalyn W Sayaman, Masaru Miyano ... Mark A LaBarge
    Research Article Updated

    Effects from aging in single cells are heterogenous, whereas at the organ- and tissue-levels aging phenotypes tend to appear as stereotypical changes. The mammary epithelium is a bilayer of two major phenotypically and functionally distinct cell lineages: luminal epithelial and myoepithelial cells. Mammary luminal epithelia exhibit substantial stereotypical changes with age that merit attention because these cells are the putative cells-of-origin for breast cancers. We hypothesize that effects from aging that impinge upon maintenance of lineage fidelity increase susceptibility to cancer initiation. We generated and analyzed transcriptomes from primary luminal epithelial and myoepithelial cells from younger <30 (y)ears old and older >55 y women. In addition to age-dependent directional changes in gene expression, we observed increased transcriptional variance with age that contributed to genome-wide loss of lineage fidelity. Age-dependent variant responses were common to both lineages, whereas directional changes were almost exclusively detected in luminal epithelia and involved altered regulation of chromatin and genome organizers such as SATB1. Epithelial expression variance of gap junction protein GJB6 increased with age, and modulation of GJB6 expression in heterochronous co-cultures revealed that it provided a communication conduit from myoepithelial cells that drove directional change in luminal cells. Age-dependent luminal transcriptomes comprised a prominent signal that could be detected in bulk tissue during aging and transition into cancers. A machine learning classifier based on luminal-specific aging distinguished normal from cancer tissue and was highly predictive of breast cancer subtype. We speculate that luminal epithelia are the ultimate site of integration of the variant responses to aging in their surrounding tissue, and that their emergent phenotype both endows cells with the ability to become cancer-cells-of-origin and represents a biosensor that presages cancer susceptibility.