Frequent mutations in the RPL22 gene and its clinical and functional implications
- PMID: 23127973
- PMCID: PMC3845021
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.10.026
Frequent mutations in the RPL22 gene and its clinical and functional implications
Abstract
Objective: To determine the frequency and spectrum of mutations in RPL22 a gene identified by The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) as mutated in endometrioid endometrial cancer, and determine the relationship between RPL22 defects and clinicopathologic features.
Methods: Direct sequencing of the entire coding region of the RPL22 cDNA and exons 2/4 was performed in tumors with/without microsatellite instability (MSI). RPL22 expression was assessed by immunofluorescence microscopy in the KLE, RL952 and AN3CA cell lines, wildtype, heterozygous and homozygous mutants, respectively. Relationships between RPL22 mutation and clinicopathological features were assessed using Chi-squared analysis and Student's t test. Progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated from the date of diagnosis to the date of recurrence.
Results: A single nucleotide deletion in an A8 coding repeat was identified in exon 2 of the RPL22 gene in 116/226 (52%) of MSI-high tumors. No mutations were identified in MSI-stable tumors. Only 2% of the tumors expressed a homozygous A deletion. RPL22 mutation was not associated with stage, grade, race and lymphovascular space invasion. Women whose tumors harbored RPL22 mutations were significantly older (67 vs. 63years, p=0.005). There was no difference in PFS between patients with the wildtype and mutant genotypes.
Conclusions: RPL22 is frequently mutated in MSI-high endometrioid endometrial cancers. The A8 mutation identified was not reported in the whole exome sequences analyzed by the TCGA. The demonstration of frequent mutation in RPL22 may point to a limitation of the exome capture and next generation sequencing analysis methods for some mononucleotide string mutations. Functional assessment of the RPL22 knockdown may be warranted.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of Interest Statement
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
Figures


References
-
- Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012 Jan;62(1):10–29. - PubMed
-
- Howlader N, Noone A, Krapcho M, Neyman N, Aminou R, Altekruse S, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2009 (Vintage 2009 Populations) [Internet] Available from: http://seer.cancer.goc/vsr/1975_2009_pops09.
-
- Lewin SN, Herzog TJ, Barrena Medel NI, Deutsch I, Burke WM, Sun X, et al. Comparative performance of the 2009 international Federation of gynecology and obstetrics' staging system for uterine corpus cancer. Obstetrics & …. 2010 Nov;116(5):1141–1149. - PubMed
-
- The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) Pilot Project [Internet] cancergenome.nih.gov. [cited 2012 Jun. 13]. Available from: http://cancergenome.nih.gov/PublishedContent/Files/pdfs/6.5.2.1_TCGA_Pil....
-
- Anderson SJ, Lauritsen JPH, Hartman MG, Foushee AMD, Lefebvre JM, Shinton SA, et al. Ablation of ribosomal protein L22 selectively impairs alphabeta T cell development by activation of a p53-dependent checkpoint. Immunity. 2007 Jun;26(6):759–772. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources