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
. 2022 Jun 15;13(1):3405.
doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-30453-x.

Clinical sequencing of soft tissue and bone sarcomas delineates diverse genomic landscapes and potential therapeutic targets

Affiliations

Clinical sequencing of soft tissue and bone sarcomas delineates diverse genomic landscapes and potential therapeutic targets

Benjamin A Nacev et al. Nat Commun. .

Abstract

The genetic, biologic, and clinical heterogeneity of sarcomas poses a challenge for the identification of therapeutic targets, clinical research, and advancing patient care. Because there are > 100 sarcoma subtypes, in-depth genetic studies have focused on one or a few subtypes. Herein, we report a comparative genetic analysis of 2,138 sarcomas representing 45 pathological entities. This cohort is prospectively analyzed using targeted sequencing to characterize subtype-specific somatic alterations in targetable pathways, rates of whole genome doubling, mutational signatures, and subtype-agnostic genomic clusters. The most common alterations are in cell cycle control and TP53, receptor tyrosine kinases/PI3K/RAS, and epigenetic regulators. Subtype-specific associations include TERT amplification in intimal sarcoma and SWI/SNF alterations in uterine adenosarcoma. Tumor mutational burden, while low compared to other cancers, varies between and within subtypes. This resource will improve sarcoma models, motivate studies of subtype-specific alterations, and inform investigations of genetic factors and their correlations with treatment response.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

M.M.G. has served on advisory boards for Athenex, Ayala, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Epizyme, Karyopharm, Rain, SpringWorks Therapeutics, Tracon, and TYME Technologies; provides consulting services through Guidepoint, GLG Pharma, Third Bridge, and Flatiron Health; has received speaking honoraria from Medscape, More Health, Physicians Education Resource and touchIME; receives publishing royalties from Wolters Kluwer; holds a patent for a patient-reported outcome tool licensed through the institution; and has performed research without compensation in collaboration with Foundation Medicine. T.G.B. is currently employed by Pfizer. P.C. has served on advisory boards or consulted for Deciphera, Exelixis, NingboNewBay Medical Technology, Novartis, and Zai Lab, and has received institutional research funding from Deciphera, Ningbo NewBay Medical Technology, Novartis, and Pfizer/Array. S.P.D. has received institutional research funding from Amgen, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Deciphera, EMD Serono, Incyte, Merck, and Nektar Therapeutics, has served as a consultant or on advisory boards for Adaptimmune, Amgen, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Immune Design, Immunocore, Incyte, Merck, and Nektar Therapeutics, Pfizer, Servier, and Rain Therapeutics, and has served on data safety monitoring boards for Adaptimmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, and Nektar Therapeutics. M.A.D. has received institutional research funding from Aadi Bioscience and Eli Lilly. C.M.K. has received research funding from Amgen, Exicure, Incyte, Kartos, Merck, Servier, and Xencor; consulted for Chemocentryx and Kartos; served on a data safety review board for Kartos; and served on advisory boards for Immunicum. S.M. has received research funding from Ascentage Pharma and Hutchison Medi Pharma. K.T. has served as a consultant for Epizyme and GlaxoSmithKline. P.A.M. has served on advisory boards or consulted for Margaux Miracle Foundation, Salarius Pharmaceuticals, and Takeda, and has an immediate family member who has served on advisory boards or consulted for Boehringer Ingelheim and Genentech and received honoraria from Eastern Pulmonary Conference. E.K.S. has consulted for Epizyme. J.L.G.B. has received institutional research support from Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Cellectar Biosciences, Eisai, Ignyta, Lilly, Loxo Oncology, Merck, Novartis, and Roche; and served on data safety monitoring boards for Abbvie, Merck, and SpringWorks and on an advisory board for Bristol Myers Squibb. M.L.H. has served on advisory boards and consulted for Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, and Thrive Bioscience, received author royalties from UpToDate, and received speaker honoraria from Research to Practice; her spouse is employed by Sanofi. J.H.H. has consulted for Daiichi Sankyo and Stryker and is a trustee of the Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation and board member for the Make It Better Foundation to Cure Childhood Osteosarcoma. A.M.C. has served on an advisory board for SpringWorks. B.R.U. is co-inventor of intellectual property (H.R.A.S. as a biomarker of tipifarnib efficacy) that has been licensed by MSK to Kura Oncology. S.C. has consulted for AstraZeneca. M.F.B. has served as a consultant for Eli Lilly and PetDx. W.D.T. has consulted for Adcendo, Amgen, AmMax Bio, Ayala Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, Blueprint, C4 Therapeutics, Cogent, Daiichi Sankyo, Deciphera, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Epizyme, Foghorn Therapeutics, Kowa, Medpacto, Mundipharma, and Servier; served on advisory boards for Certis Oncology and Innova Therapeutics; holds two patents for biomarkers of CDK4 inhibitor efficacy in cancer, and is a co-founder of and owns stock in Atropos Therapeutics. D.B.S. has consulted for BridgeBio, FORE Therapeutics, Loxo/Lilly Oncology, Pfizer, Scorpion Therapeutics, and Vividion Therapeutics. All other authors have no competing relationships to disclose.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Analysis of 2138 sarcoma samples reveals variation in patient characteristics among subtypes.
This analysis includes 2138 bone and soft tissue sarcoma samples, each from distinct patients. Subtypes with ≥20 samples in the dataset are displayed. A Distribution of number of samples, survival from time of sequencing, sample type (primary or metastatic site), tumor site, sample purity, age, sex, and self-reported race in each subtype. Retro/IA, retroperitoneal or intrabdominal. NA, not applicable. In the age plot, box boundaries indicate 25th and 75th percentiles, interior lines medians, and whiskers 1.5 times the interquartile range. B Overall distribution of sample number for the entire cohort. C 1, 3, and 5-year survival from the time of sequencing. *, 5-year survival = 0. Vertical lines indicate 95% confidence intervals. DES desmoid tumor, ESS endometrial stromal sarcoma, INT intimal sarcoma, LGFMS low-grade fibromyxoid sarcoma, EMCHS extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma, HGESS high-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma, LGESS low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma, SEF sclerosing epithelioid fibrosarcoma, ASPS alveolar soft part sarcoma, DDCHS dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma, UAS uterine adenosarcoma, SCSRMS spindle cell/sclerosing rhabdomyosarcoma, CCS clear cell sarcoma, EHAE epithelioid hemangioendothelioma.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. Mutation analysis by subtype.
A Alteration type and frequency, fraction of genome altered (FGA) and tumor mutation burden (TMB) by subtype. Oncogenic fusions detected by MSK-IMPACT are classified as drivers. In the FGA and TMB plots, box boundaries indicate 25th and 75th percentiles, interior lines medians, and whiskers 1.5 times the interquartile range. VUS variant of unknown significance. B Significant mutations were identified in all subtypes with n ≥ 20 in our dataset using both MutSig and MuSiC analysis. Percentages indicate the percentage of samples with an oncogenic mutation in the corresponding gene. C FLT4 mutation type, frequency, and location in ANGS vs. other subtypes. D Cancer cell fraction (CCF) and number of mutations for driver mutations and VUS by subtype. Circles indicate medians and vertical lines interquartile ranges.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3. Copy number changes by subtype.
Copy number alteration (CNA) and whole-genome doubling events (WGD) compared across subtypes. A Individual sample CNA across the genome for each subtype. WGD, fraction genome altered (FGA), and purity are shown at right. B Aggregate arm-level (left) and gene-level events (right) grouped by subtype. *significant change based on Bonferroni corrected p-values. Significance was evaluated by random permutations testing. Oncogenic (bold) vs. non-oncogenic CNA classifications according to OncoKB. C Frequency of WGD by subtype (green) compared to other cancers with ≥200 samples available for comparison (gray). NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; ST, soft tissue. D, Overall survival based on WGD status within primary and metastatic samples. p.adj, adjusted p-value.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4. Integrated pathway analysis.
A Oncogenic alterations within each of 12 pathways with relevance to cancer biology in each subtype. Numbers in each cell indicate percentage of samples harboring alterations. Stacked bar graphs indicate the distribution of the type of oncogenic alteration per gene or pathway (top) or subtype (right). CC, cell cycle; DDR, DNA damage repair; EPI, epigenetic. B PI3K pathway alterations in specific subtypes. The percentage of samples with an alteration in a specific gene in each subtype is indicated in each box. C Oncogenic TERT alterations in each of the 9 most altered subtypes. D Oncogenic epigenetic pathway alterations by subtype, grouped by complex and/or biochemical function of the encoded protein. Totals include all alterations in genes that belong to a parent category, not only those affecting specific complexes listed.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5. Mutual exclusivity, co-occurrence, ATRX alterations, and unsupervised clustering based on genetic signatures.
A Co-occurrence and mutual exclusivity of gene- (top) and pathway-level (bottom) alterations in each subtype with significant findings shown. Significance was evaluated by two-sided Fisher’s exact test. EPI, epigenetic; DDR, DNA damage repair. B Frequency and types of oncogenic ATRX alterations in each of the 14 most altered subtypes. C Unsupervised clustering of all samples based on oncogenic alteration patterns. D Subtype-specific cluster associations and entropy scores. For clarity, subtypes with n > 5 are displayed.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6. Actionability of mutations by subtype and gene.
For each of the 22 most common subtypes: A Frequency of actionable alterations by level of evidence. B Actionable alterations in individual genes, grouped by pathway. Numbers in each cell represent the percentage of samples with actionable alterations in that gene. C Number of actionable alterations per sample. D Frequency of actionable alterations classified by alteration type.

References

    1. Burningham Z, Hashibe M, Spector L, Schiffman JD. The epidemiology of sarcoma. Clin. Sarcoma Res. 2012;2:14. doi: 10.1186/2045-3329-2-14. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2018;68:7–30. doi: 10.3322/caac.21442. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Board, W. C. o. T. E. Soft tissue and bone tumours. 5th edn, (International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2020).
    1. Schaefer IM, Cote GM, Hornick JL. Contemporary sarcoma diagnosis, genetics, and genomics. J. Clin. Oncol. 2018;36:101–110. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.9374. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cancer Genome Atlas Research, N. Comprehensive and integrated genomic characterization of adult soft tissue sarcomas. Cell. 2017;171:950–965 e928. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.10.014. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types