Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Aug;145(2):348-56.e1-2.
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.05.001. Epub 2013 May 7.

Associations between colorectal cancer molecular markers and pathways with clinicopathologic features in older women

Affiliations

Associations between colorectal cancer molecular markers and pathways with clinicopathologic features in older women

N Jewel Samadder et al. Gastroenterology. 2013 Aug.

Abstract

Background & aims: Colorectal tumors have a large degree of molecular heterogeneity. Three integrated pathways of carcinogenesis (ie, traditional, alternate, and serrated) have been proposed, based on specific combinations of microsatellite instability (MSI), CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), and mutations in BRAF and KRAS. We used resources from the population-based Iowa Women's Health Study (n = 41,836) to associate markers of colorectal tumors, integrated pathways, and clinical and pathology characteristics, including survival times.

Methods: We assessed archived specimens from 732 incident colorectal tumors and characterized them as microsatellite stable (MSS), MSI high or MSI low, CIMP high or CIMP low, CIMP negative, and positive or negative for BRAF and/or KRAS mutations. Informative marker data were collected from 563 tumors (77%), which were assigned to the following integrated pathways: traditional (MSS, CIMP negative, BRAF mutation negative, and KRAS mutation negative; n = 170), alternate (MSS, CIMP low, BRAF mutation negative, and KRAS mutation positive; n = 58), serrated (any MSI, CIMP high, BRAF mutation positive, and KRAS mutation negative; n = 142), or unassigned (n = 193). Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the associations of interest.

Results: Patients' mean age (P = .03) and tumors' anatomic subsite (P = .0001) and grade (P = .0001) were significantly associated with integrated pathway assignment. Colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality was not associated with the traditional, alternate, or serrated pathways, but was associated with a subset of pathway-unassigned tumors (MSS or MSI low, CIMP negative, BRAF mutation negative, and KRAS mutation positive) (n = 96 cases; relative risk = 1.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.89, compared with the traditional pathway).

Conclusions: We identified clinical and pathology features associated with molecularly defined CRC subtypes. However, additional studies are needed to determine how these features might influence prognosis.

Keywords: CI; CIMP; CRC; Colon Cancer; CpG island methylator phenotype; IWHS; Integrated Pathways; Iowa Women’s Health Study; MSI; Molecular Epidemiology; PCR; Prognostic Factor; RR; SEER; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results; colorectal cancer; confidence interval; microsatellite instability; polymerase chain reaction; relative risk.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Kaplan–Meier curves. All-cause mortality by independent marker status. (A) MSI; (B) CIMP; (C) BRAF mutation; and (D) KRAS mutation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Kaplan–Meier curves. CRC mortality by independent marker status. (A) MSI; (B) CIMP; (C)BRAFmutation;and(D)KRAS mutation.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Kaplan–Meier curves. All-cause and CRC mortality by integrated pathway assignments. (A) All-cause mortality by traditional, alternate, serrated, or other (unassigned) pathways. (B) CRC mortality by traditional, alternate, serrated, or other (unassigned) pathways. (C) All-cause mortality in pathway unassigned cases (cluster A, cluster B, or other). (D) CRC mortality in pathway unassigned cases (cluster A, cluster B, or other).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:69–90. - PubMed
    1. Toyota M, Issa JP. CpG island methylator phenotypes in aging and cancer. Semin Cancer Biol. 1999;9:349–357. - PubMed
    1. Weisenberger DJ, Siegmund KD, Campan M, et al. CpG island methylator phenotype underlies sporadic microsatellite instability and is tightly associated with BRAF mutation in colorectal cancer. Nat Genet. 2006;38:787–793. - PubMed
    1. Samowitz WS, Albertsen H, Sweeney C, et al. Association of smoking, CpG island methylator phenotype, and V600E BRAF mutations in colon cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:1731–1738. - PubMed
    1. Lee S, Cho NY, Yoo EJ, et al. CpG island methylator phenotype in colorectal cancers: comparison of the new and classic CpG island methylator phenotype marker panels. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008;132:1657–1665. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms