Specific mosaic KRAS mutations affecting codon 146 cause oculoectodermal syndrome and encephalocraniocutaneous lipomatosis

Oculoectodermal syndrome (OES) and encephalocraniocutaneous lipomatosis (ECCL) are rare disorders that share many common features, such as epibulbar dermoids, aplasia cutis congenita, pigmentary changes following Blaschko lines, bony tumor‐like lesions, and others. About 20 cases with OES and more than 50 patients with ECCL have been reported. Both diseases were proposed to represent mosaic disorders, but only very recently whole‐genome sequencing has led to the identification of somatic KRAS mutations, p.Leu19Phe and p.Gly13Asp, in affected tissue from two individuals with OES. Here we report the results of molecular genetic studies in three patients with OES and one with ECCL. In all four cases, Sanger sequencing of the KRAS gene in DNA from lesional tissue detected mutations affecting codon 146 (p.Ala146Val, p.Ala146Thr) at variable levels of mosaicism. Our findings thus corroborate the evidence of OES being a mosaic RASopathy and confirm the common etiology of OES and ECCL. KRAS codon 146 mutations, as well as the previously reported OES‐associated alterations, are known oncogenic KRAS mutations with distinct functional consequences. Considering the phenotype and genotype spectrum of mosaic RASopathies, these findings suggest that the wide phenotypic variability does not only depend on the tissue distribution but also on the specific genotype.     

结直肠癌组织和静脉血中KRAS基因突变分析及临床意义

目的：研究结直肠癌组织与静脉血中KRAS基因突变情况,探讨其对临床治疗及预后的意义。方法整群收集2013年1月-2014年12月经病理科诊断手术的129例原发结直肠癌组织标本和肘静脉血5 mL及60例癌旁正常组织对照。用PCR-DNA直接测序法检测KRAS突变情况。结果①癌组织KRAS突变率为39.53%(51/129),静脉血KRAS突变率为32.56%(42/129﹚。静脉血KRAS基因突变率比癌组织的低6.97%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。癌旁正常组织无基因突变。②KRAS基因有7种突变类型,12密码子为主要突变占78.43%(40/51)。③癌组织与静脉血野生型与突变型整体的一致率为89.92%(116/129),一致性较高(K=0.783)。结论结直肠癌组织KRAS基因突变与静脉血高度一致,在肿瘤组织无法获取的情况下能代替其作为检测靶点。     

“宣威”多结节非小细胞肺癌驱动基因突变分析

目的：探讨多结节非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）组织中的驱动基因突变情况与临床病理特征的关系,为多结节NSCLC患者治疗提供分子诊断依据。方法：本研究共纳入2018年1月至2023年10月间云南省肿瘤医院分子诊断中心检测的121例多结节NSCLC患者的253个肺结节肿瘤组织标本,以第二代测序（NGS）技术或扩增阻滞突变系统PCR(ARMS-PCR)技术检测多结节NSCLC组织中驱动基因突变情况,分析其与患者临床病理特征的关系,比较不同结节间肺癌驱动基因的突变异质性。结果：与非“宣威”NSCLC相比,“宣威”多结节NSCLC患者驱动基因突变具有显著的地域特点,表现在“宣威”患者具有较低（20%）的EGFR敏感突变（L858R、19-del）及较高（27.26%）的EGFR少见突变（主要为G719/S768I、G719）;“宣威”多结节NSCLC患者的KRAS突变率（27.27%）亦显著高于非“宣威”患者突变率（12.59%）(P<0.05)。此外,“宣威”多结节NSCLC患者驱动基因突变不一致率高达69.23%,远高于非“宣威”患者驱动基因突变不一致率（55.07%）(P<0.05...     

Components of the phosphatidylserine endoplasmic reticulum to plasma membrane transport mechanism as targets for KRAS inhibition in pancreatic cancer

KRAS is mutated in 90% of human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs). To function, KRAS must localize to the plasma membrane (PM) via a C-terminal membrane anchor that specifically engages phosphatidylserine (PtdSer). This anchor-binding specificity renders KRAS–PM localization and signaling capacity critically dependent on PM PtdSer content. We now show that the PtdSer lipid transport proteins, ORP5 and ORP8, which are essential for maintaining PM PtdSer levels and hence KRAS PM localization, are required for KRAS oncogenesis. Knockdown of either protein, separately or simultaneously, abrogated growth of KRAS-mutant but not KRAS–wild-type pancreatic cancer cell xenografts. ORP5 or ORP8 knockout also abrogated tumor growth in an immune-competent orthotopic pancreatic cancer mouse model. Analysis of human datasets revealed that all components of this PtdSer transport mechanism, including the PM-localized EFR3A-PI4KIIIα complex that generates phosphatidylinositol-4-phosphate (PI4P), and endoplasmic reticulum (ER)–localized SAC1 phosphatase that hydrolyzes counter transported PI4P, are significantly up-regulated in pancreatic tumors compared to normal tissue. Taken together, these results support targeting PI4KIIIα in KRAS-mutant cancers to deplete the PM-to-ER PI4P gradient, reducing PM PtdSer content. We therefore repurposed the US Food and Drug Administration–approved hepatitis C antiviral agent, simeprevir, as a PI4KIIIα inhibitor In a PDAC setting. Simeprevir potently mislocalized KRAS from the PM, reduced the clonogenic potential of pancreatic cancer cell lines in vitro, and abrogated the growth of KRAS-dependent tumors in vivo with enhanced efficacy when combined with MAPK and PI3K inhibitors. We conclude that the cellular ER-to-PM PtdSer transport mechanism is essential for KRAS PM localization and oncogenesis and is accessible to therapeutic intervention.

RAS proteins are small GTPases that switch between active GTP-bound and inactive GDP-bound states, regulating cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis. RAS is regulated by guanine nucleotide exchange factors that promote GDP–GTP exchange, thereby activating RAS, and GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs), which stimulate intrinsic RAS GTPase activity to return it to its inactive state. Approximately 20% of human cancers express oncogenic RAS with mutations at residues 12, 13, or 61 (1), which prevent RASGAPs from stimulating GTP hydrolysis, rendering RAS constitutively active. The RAS isoforms, HRAS, NRAS, KRAS4A, and KRAS4B (hereafter referred to as KRAS), have near-identical G-domains, which are implicated in guanine nucleotide binding and effector interaction. However, they have different C termini and membrane anchors, which contribute to their differential signaling outputs (2). KRAS is the most-frequently mutated isoform in cancer and hence represents the major clinical concern, especially in pancreatic, colon, and non–small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) in which mutant KRAS is expressed in ∼90%, ∼50%, and ∼25% of cases, respectively (3).RAS proteins must localize to the plasma membrane (PM) and organize into nanoclusters for biological activity (4–8), whereby RAS.GTP recruits its effectors to PM nanoclusters, leading to downstream pathway activation. KRAS interacts with the PM via its C-terminal membrane anchor that comprises a farnesyl-cysteine-methyl-ester and a polybasic domain (PBD) of six contiguous lysines (9–11). Together, the KRAS PBD sequence and prenyl group define a combinatorial code for lipid binding, resulting in a membrane anchor that specifically interacts with asymmetric species of phosphatidylserine (PtdSer) that contain one saturated and one desaturated acyl chain (8, 12–14). Since PtdSer binding specificity is hardwired into its anchor structure, KRAS–PM interactions are PtdSer dependent. KRAS that partitions into the cytosol following endocytosis is captured by PDEδ, which, upon interacting with ARL2, is released to the recycling endosome (RE) for forward transport back to the PM (15). Capture of KRAS by the RE is again PtdSer dependent; therefore, abrogating PtdSer delivery to the PM will reduce PM and RE PtdSer content, abrogating both KRAS PM binding and KRAS recycling back to the PM. In sum, KRAS–PM localization, nanoclustering, and signaling capacity are all exquisitely dependent on PM PtdSer levels.Previous attempts at preventing KRAS–PM localization to inhibit its function include the development of farnesyltransferase inhibitors (FTIs), which inhibit the first posttranslational processing step that generates the KRAS membrane anchor. FTIs were clinically unsuccessful since KRAS can alternatively be geranylgeranylated by geranylgeranyl transferase1 when cells are treated with FTIs, allowing for continued PM localization (2, 16, 17). We recently leveraged the dependence of KRAS on PM PtdSer to inhibit KRAS signaling by targeting the cellular machinery that actively maintains PM PtdSer levels (18). Genetic knockdown (KD) of ORP5 or ORP8, two lipid transporters that function at endoplasmic reticulum (ER)–PM membrane contact sites to transport PtdSer to the PM (Fig. 1), mislocalized KRAS from the PM and reduced nanoclustering of any remaining KRAS. Consequently, ORP5/8 KD decreased proliferation and anchorage-independent growth of multiple KRAS-dependent pancreatic cancer cell lines. In this study, we examine the effects of ORP5/8 genetic KD and knockout (KO) on tumor growth in vivo and provide compelling evidence that these proteins are essential for tumor maintenance in KRAS-dependent pancreatic cancer. ORP5/8 function by exchanging phosphoinositide-4-phosphate (PI4P) synthesized on the PM by PI4KIIIα for PtdSer synthesized in the ER (19, 20). We demonstrate both in vitro and in vivo that PI4KIIIα inhibitors can potently inhibit oncogenic KRAS function. One such inhibitor is simeprevir, a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved antiviral agent used for the treatment of hepatitis C, that may have potential for repurposing as a therapeutic for mutant KRAS-driven cancers.Open in a separate windowFig. 1.ORP5 and ORP8 transport PtdSer to the PM. ORP5 and ORP8 exchange ER PtdSer with PM PI4P. This is driven by a PI4P concentration gradient whereby PM PI4P levels are kept high by PI4KIIIα and low at the ER by SAC1P, which hydrolyzes PI4P. ORP, oxysterol-binding protein-related protein; PI4KIIIα, class III PI4 kinase alpha; and SAC1P, SAC1-like phosphatidylinositide phosphatase.     

MicroRNA‐143/Musashi‐2/KRAS cascade contributes positively to carcinogenesis in human bladder cancer

It has been well established that microRNA (miR)‐143 is downregulated in human bladder cancer (BC). Recent precision medicine has shown that mutations in BC are frequently observed in FGFR3, RAS and PIK3CA genes, all of which correlate with RAS signaling networks. We have previously shown that miR‐143 suppresses cell growth by inhibiting RAS signaling networks in several cancers including BC. In the present study, we showed that synthetic miR‐143 negatively regulated the RNA‐binding protein Musashi‐2 (MSI2) in BC cell lines. MSI2 is an RNA‐binding protein that regulates the stability of certain mRNAs and their translation by binding to the target sequences of the mRNAs. Of note, the present study clarified that MSI2 positively regulated KRAS expression through directly binding to the target sequence of KRAS mRNA and promoting its translation, thus contributing to the maintenance of KRAS expression. Thus, miR‐143 silenced KRAS and MSI2, which further downregulated KRAS expression through perturbation of the MSI2/KRAS cascade.     

High Frequency of KRAS Codon 146 and FBXW7 Mutations in Thai Patients with Stage II-III Colon Cancer

Background: KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF gene mutations are the most clinically relevant and frequently reported incolorectal cancer (CRC). Although data on these genes are frequently reported in several counties, data specific to thesegenes among Thai population are scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate and identify molecular alterationsassociated with colon cancer in Thai population, and to determine the impact of these genetic aberrations on clinicaloutcome. Methods: DNA from 108 archived formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue samples that histologicallyconfirmed adenocarcinoma of stage II-III colon cancer between 2010 and 2012 at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand)were extracted. Gene mutational analysis was performed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) using an OncomineSolid Tumor DNA kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., Waltham, MA, USA). Results: A total of 22 somatic genemutations were detected. The mutation frequency observed in KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, and FBXW7 mutationswas 47.2%, 1.9%, 1.9%, 12%, and 14.8%, respectively. KRAS mutation codon 12, 13, 59, 61, 117, and 146 mutationswere identified in 29.6%, 8.3%, 1.8%, 0.9%, 0.0%, and 8.3%, respectively. KRAS Exon 4 had better DFS comparedwith Exon 2 and 3. Conclusions: This study is the first to comprehensively report hotspot mutations using NGS in Thaicolon cancer patients. The most commonly identified gene mutation frequencies among Thai patients (KRAS, NRAS,BRAF, TP53, and PIK3CA) were similar to the gene mutation frequencies reported in Western population, except forsubgroup of KRAS codon 146 and FBXW7 mutations that had a slightly higher frequency.     

Clinical efficacy and drug resistance of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy in colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranked third in cancer related death and its incidence has been increasing worldwide. In recent decades important therapeutic advances have been developed in treatment of metastatic CRC (mCRC), such as monoclonal antibodies against epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR), which provided additional clinical benefits in mCRC. However, anti-EGFR therapies have limited usage due to approximately 95% of patients with KRAS mutated mCRC do not response to anti-EGFR treatment. Thus, KRAS mutation is predictive of nonresponse to anti-EGFR therapies but it alone is not a sufficient basis to decide who should not be received such therapies because; approximately fifty percent (40%-60%) of CRC patients with wild-type KRAS mutation also have poor response to anti-EGFR based treatment. This fact leads us to suspect that there must be other molecular determinants of response to anti-EGFR therapies which have not been identified yet. Current article summarizes the clinical efficacy of anti-EGFR therapies and also evaluates its resistance mechanisms.     

Value of KRAS,BRAF, and PIK3CA Mutations and Survival Benefit from Systemic Chemotherapy in Colorectal Peritoneal Carcinomatosis

Background: It is well known that peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with a poor prognosis. However, data on the prognostic significance of modern chemotherapy containing bevacizumab, cetuximab or panitumumab are not available. Materials and Methods: This retrospective review concerned 526 patients with metastatic CRC who were classified into two groups according to the presence or absence of PC, and were treated with systemic chemotherapy, with or without bevacizumab or anti-EGFR antibodies. The genetic background, in particular KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA gene mutations, and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two groups. Results: The median OS values were 23.3 and 29.1 months for PC and non-PC patients, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]=1.20; p=0.17). Among all patients, tumor location, number of metastatic sites and BRAF mutation status were significant prognostic factors, whereas the presence of PC was not. In the PC group, chemotherapy with bevacizumab resulted in a significantly longer OS than forchemotherapy without bevacizumab (HR=0.38, p<0.01), but this was not the case in the non-PC group (HR=0.80, p=0.10). Furthermore, the incidence of the BRAF V600E mutation was significantly higher in PC than in non-PC patients (27.7% versus 7.3%, p<0.01). BRAF mutations displayed a strong correlation with shorter OS in non-PC (HR=2.26), but not PC patients (HR=1.04). Conclusions: Systemic chemotherapy, especially when combined with bevacizumab, improved survival in patients with PC from CRC as well as non-PC patients. While BRAF mutation demonstrated a high frequency in PC patients, but it was not associated with prognosis.