1. |
- Brinkman, Arie B., et al.
(author)
-
Partially methylated domains are hypervariable in breast cancer and fuel widespread CpG island hypermethylation
- 2019
-
In: Nature Communications. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2041-1723. ; 10:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Global loss of DNA methylation and CpG island (CGI) hypermethylation are key epigenomic aberrations in cancer. Global loss manifests itself in partially methylated domains (PMDs) which extend up to megabases. However, the distribution of PMDs within and between tumor types, and their effects on key functional genomic elements including CGIs are poorly defined. We comprehensively show that loss of methylation in PMDs occurs in a large fraction of the genome and represents the prime source of DNA methylation variation. PMDs are hypervariable in methylation level, size and distribution, and display elevated mutation rates. They impose intermediate DNA methylation levels incognizant of functional genomic elements including CGIs, underpinning a CGI methylator phenotype (CIMP). Repression effects on tumor suppressor genes are negligible as they are generally excluded from PMDs. The genomic distribution of PMDs reports tissue-of-origin and may represent tissue-specific silent regions which tolerate instability at the epigenetic, transcriptomic and genetic level.
|
|
2. |
- Davies, Helen R., et al.
(author)
-
HRDetect is a predictor of BRCA1 and BRCA2 deficiency based on mutational signatures
- 2017
-
In: Nature Medicine. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1546-170X .- 1078-8956. ; 23:4, s. 517-525
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Approximately 1-5% of breast cancers are attributed to inherited mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 and are selectively sensitive to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. In other cancer types, germline and/or somatic mutations in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 (BRCA1/BRCA2) also confer selective sensitivity to PARP inhibitors. Thus, assays to detect BRCA1/BRCA2-deficient tumors have been sought. Recently, somatic substitution, insertion/deletion and rearrangement patterns, or 'mutational signatures', were associated with BRCA1/BRCA2 dysfunction. Herein we used a lasso logistic regression model to identify six distinguishing mutational signatures predictive of BRCA1/BRCA2 deficiency. A weighted model called HRDetect was developed to accurately detect BRCA1/BRCA2-deficient samples. HRDetect identifies BRCA1/BRCA2-deficient tumors with 98.7% sensitivity (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.98). Application of this model in a cohort of 560 individuals with breast cancer, of whom 22 were known to carry a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, allowed us to identify an additional 22 tumors with somatic loss of BRCA1 or BRCA2 and 47 tumors with functional BRCA1/BRCA2 deficiency where no mutation was detected. We validated HRDetect on independent cohorts of breast, ovarian and pancreatic cancers and demonstrated its efficacy in alternative sequencing strategies. Integrating all of the classes of mutational signatures thus reveals a larger proportion of individuals with breast cancer harboring BRCA1/BRCA2 deficiency (up to 22%) than hitherto appreciated (∼1-5%) who could have selective therapeutic sensitivity to PARP inhibition.
|
|
3. |
- Degasperi, Andrea, et al.
(author)
-
A practical framework and online tool for mutational signature analyses show intertissue variation and driver dependencies
- 2020
-
In: Nature Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2662-1347. ; 1:2, s. 249-263
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Mutational signatures are patterns of mutations that arise during tumorigenesis. We present an enhanced, practical framework for mutational signature analyses. Applying these methods to 3,107 whole-genome-sequenced (WGS) primary cancers of 21 organs reveals known signatures and nine previously undescribed rearrangement signatures. We highlight interorgan variability of signatures and present a way of visualizing that diversity, reinforcing our findings in an independent analysis of 3,096 WGS metastatic cancers. Signatures with a high level of genomic instability are dependent on TP53 dysregulation. We illustrate how uncertainty in mutational signature identification and assignment to samples affects tumor classification, reinforcing that using multiple orthogonal mutational signature data is not only beneficial, but is also essential for accurate tumor stratification. Finally, we present a reference web-based tool for cancer and experimentally generated mutational signatures, called Signal (https://signal.mutationalsignatures.com), that also supports performing mutational signature analyses.
|
|
4. |
- Glodzik, Dominik, et al.
(author)
-
A somatic-mutational process recurrently duplicates germline susceptibility loci and tissue-specific super-enhancers in breast cancers
- 2017
-
In: Nature Genetics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1061-4036 .- 1546-1718. ; 49:3, s. 341-348
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Somatic rearrangements contribute to the mutagenized landscape of cancer genomes. Here, we systematically interrogated rearrangements in 560 breast cancers by using a piecewise constant fitting approach. We identified 33 hotspots of large (>100 kb) tandem duplications, a mutational signature associated with homologous-recombination-repair deficiency. Notably, these tandem-duplication hotspots were enriched in breast cancer germline susceptibility loci (odds ratio (OR) = 4.28) and breast-specific 'super-enhancer' regulatory elements (OR = 3.54). These hotspots may be sites of selective susceptibility to double-strand-break damage due to high transcriptional activity or, through incrementally increasing copy number, may be sites of secondary selective pressure. The transcriptomic consequences ranged from strong individual oncogene effects to weak but quantifiable multigene expression effects. We thus present a somatic-rearrangement mutational process affecting coding sequences and noncoding regulatory elements and contributing a continuum of driver consequences, from modest to strong effects, thereby supporting a polygenic model of cancer development.
|
|
5. |
- Morganella, Sandro, et al.
(author)
-
The topography of mutational processes in breast cancer genomes
- 2016
-
In: Nature Communications. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2041-1723. ; 7
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Somatic mutations in human cancers show unevenness in genomic distribution that correlate with aspects of genome structure and function. These mutations are, however, generated by multiple mutational processes operating through the cellular lineage between the fertilized egg and the cancer cell, each composed of specific DNA damage and repair components and leaving its own characteristic mutational signature on the genome. Using somatic mutation catalogues from 560 breast cancer whole-genome sequences, here we show that each of 12 base substitution, 2 insertion/deletion (indel) and 6 rearrangement mutational signatures present in breast tissue, exhibit distinct relationships with genomic features relating to transcription, DNA replication and chromatin organization. This signature-based approach permits visualization of the genomic distribution of mutational processes associated with APOBEC enzymes, mismatch repair deficiency and homologous recombinational repair deficiency, as well as mutational processes of unknown aetiology. Furthermore, it highlights mechanistic insights including a putative replication-dependent mechanism of APOBEC-related mutagenesis.
|
|
6. |
- Nik-Zainal, Serena, et al.
(author)
-
Landscape of somatic mutations in 560 breast cancer whole-genome sequences
- 2016
-
In: Nature. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0028-0836 .- 1476-4687. ; 534:7605, s. 47-54
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We analysed whole-genome sequences of 560 breast cancers to advance understanding of the driver mutations conferring clonal advantage and the mutational processes generating somatic mutations. We found that 93 protein-coding cancer genes carried probable driver mutations. Some non-coding regions exhibited high mutation frequencies, but most have distinctive structural features probably causing elevated mutation rates and do not contain driver mutations. Mutational signature analysis was extended to genome rearrangements and revealed twelve base substitution and six rearrangement signatures. Three rearrangement signatures, characterized by tandem duplications or deletions, appear associated with defective homologous-recombination-based DNA repair: one with deficient BRCA1 function, another with deficient BRCA1 or BRCA2 function, the cause of the third is unknown. This analysis of all classes of somatic mutation across exons, introns and intergenic regions highlights the repertoire of cancer genes and mutational processes operating, and progresses towards a comprehensive account of the somatic genetic basis of breast cancer.
|
|