4.5 Article

Clinical impact of c-MET expression and genetic mutational status in colorectal cancer patients after liver resection

Journal

CANCER SCIENCE
Volume 105, Issue 8, Pages 1002-1007

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cas.12453

Keywords

Colorectal cancer; c-MET expression; genetic mutational status; hepatic metastasectomy; relapse-free survival

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

c-MET is implicated in the pathogenesis and growth of a wide variety of human malignancies, including colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of the present study was to clarify the association between c-MET expression and tumor recurrence in CRC patients after curative liver resection, and to evaluate concordance in c-MET expression and various mutations of KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA between primary CRC and paired liver metastases. A cohort of patients was tested for c-MET immunoreactivity (i.e. immunohistochemistry [IHC]) and KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA mutations. Analyses were performed both on primary tumors and paired liver metastases, and the association between IHC and mutations results were assessed. A total of 108 patients were eligible. A total of 53% of patients underwent simultaneous resection of primary tumors and metastases, and the others underwent metachronous resection. Levels of concordance between primary tumors and metastases were 65.7%, 87.7%, 100% and 95.2% for c-MET, KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA, respectively. High levels of c-MET expression (c-MET-high) in the primary tumors were observed in 52% of patients. Relapse-free survival was significantly shorter for patients with c-MET-high primary tumors (9.7months) than for those with c-MET-low primary tumors (21.1months) (P=0.013). These results suggest that a high level of genetic concordance in KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA between primary tumors and liver metastases, and c-MET-high in the primary tumors were associated with shorter relapse-free survival after hepatic metastasectomy.

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