4.6 Article

CDKN2A(p16) and HRAS are frequently mutated in vulvar squamous cell carcinoma

Journal

GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY
Volume 135, Issue 1, Pages 149-155

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.07.094

Keywords

Vulva; Squamous cell carcinoma; Somatic mutation; CDKN2A; HRAS; Survival

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Two etiologic pathways of vulvar cancer are known, a human papillomavirus (HPV)- and a TP53-associated route, respectively, but other genetic changes may also play a role. Studies on somatic mutations in vulvar cancer other than TP53 are limited in number and size. In this study, we investigated the prevalence of genetic mutations in 107 vulvar squamous cell carcinomas (VSCCs). Methods. A total of 107 paraffin-embedded tissue samples of primarily surgically treated VSCCs were tested for HPV infection and screened for mutations in 14 genes (BRAF, CDKN2A(p16), CTNNB1, FBXW7, FGER2, FGFR3, FOXL2, HRAS, KRAS, NRAS, PIK3C4, PPP2R1A, PTEN, and TP53) using Sanger sequencing and mass spectrometry. Results. Mutations were detected in 7 genes. Of 107 VSCCs, 66 tumors (62%) contained at least one mutation (TP53 = 58, CDKN2A(p16) = 14, HRAS = 10, PIK3CA = 7, PPP2R1A = 3, KRAS = 1, PTEN = 1). Mutations occurred most frequently in HPV-negative samples. Five-year survival was significantly worse for patients with a mutation (47% vs 59%, P = .035), with a large effect from patients carrying HRAS-mutations. Conclusion. Somatic mutations were detected in 62% of VSCCs. As expected, HPV infection and TP53-mutations play a key role in the development of VSCC, but CDKN2A(p16), HRAS, and PIK3CA-mutations were also frequently seen in HPV-negative patients. Patients with somatic mutations, especially HRAS-mutations, have a significantly worse prognosis than patients lacking these changes, which could be of importance for the development of targeted therapy. (C) 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available