4.5 Article

Coexistence of MSI with KRAS mutation is associated with worse prognosis in colorectal cancer

Journal

MEDICINE
Volume 95, Issue 50, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000005649

Keywords

clinicopathological features; colorectal cancer; CRC; KRAS; MSI; prognosis

Funding

  1. Nanjing City Committee of Science and Technology [201503013]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20161107]
  3. Nanjing Municipal Health Bureau [zkx13022]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Kristen rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) and microsatellite instability (MSI) are prognostic markers of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the clinical value is still not fully understood, when giving the consideration to both the molecular makers. Five hundred fifty-one patients with CRC were retrospectively assessed by determining their clinicopathological features. KRAS mutations were detected by polymerase chain reaction. MSI, a defect in the mismatch repair (MMR) system, was detected by immunohistochemistry. The prognostic value of KRAS in combination with MSI was studied. Among 551 CRC patients, mutations in KRAS codon 12 and KRAS codon 13 were detected in 34.5% and 10.5% of patients, respectively. Four hundred one tumors were randomly selected to detect for MMR proteins expression. In this analysis, 30 (7.5%) tumors that had at least 1 MMR protein loss were defined as MMR protein-deficient (MMR-D), and the remaining tumors were classed as MMR protein-intact (MMR-I). According to KRAS mutation and MSI status, CRC was classified into 4 groups: Group 1, KRAS-mutated and MMR-I; Group 2, KRAS-mutated and MMR-D; Group 3, KRAS wild and MMR-I; and Group 4, KRAS wild and MMR-D. We found that patients in Group4 had the best prognosis. In conclusion, combination status of KRAS and MSI status may be used as a prognostic biomarker for CRC patient, if validated by larger studies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available