| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Molecular Biology and Genetics |
The Molecular Neuro-Oncology Laboratory and Molecular Pathology Laboratory, Department of Pathology and Neurosurgical Service, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 149 13th St., Charlestown, Massachusetts 02129
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The two hallmark genetic events that seem to demarcate clinicopathological subtypes of glioblastoma, EGFR gene amplification and TP53 mutation, have been considered almost mutually exclusive. On the basis of a series of Southern blot and PCR studies of glioblastoma, the co-occurrence of EGFR gene amplification and TP53 mutation appeared to be extremely rare (4 , 7) . At a biological level, this near exclusivity has not been explained, and coexpression of aberrant p53 and EGFR has been observed in other human tumors, typically in higher-grade carcinomas (8 , 9) . During the multistep tumorigenesis of TP53-mutant glioblastomas, it is not known whether amplification of the EGFR gene does not take place, or if EGFR amplification occurs but is not selected for in the presence of TP53-mutant cells.
EGFR gene amplification occurs in glioblastomas as extrachromosomal, double minute fragments that, to maintain consistently high copy numbers, must be repeatedly selected for during cell division. Evidence for such selection pressure is found when EGFR-amplified glioblastomas are passaged in vitro, because these cells rapidly lose their additional, extrachromosomal copies of EGFR (10) . This indicates that the local environment is necessary for the maintained selection of EGFR amplification and raises the possibility that the heterogeneous intratumoral environment may affect regional variability of EGFR copy number even within a single glioblastoma.
The evaluation of intratumoral selection of EGFR-amplified cells requires in situ assessment of copy number relative to overall tumor genotype and to intratumoral location. To determine whether EFGR amplification occurs on an individual cellular basis in glioblastomas without frank EGFR gene amplification, we, therefore, investigated EGFR copy number using FISH in both TP53-normal and TP53-mutated glioblastomas. In addition, to evaluate whether EGFR gene amplification was more likely to occur in particular regions of glioblastomas, we examined the relative location and distribution of EGFR-amplified cells within individual tumors.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Contrary to the results of prior studies of glioblastoma using approaches such as Southern blotting and PCR of tumor lysates, which suggested the near exclusivity of EGFR amplification and TP53 mutation (4 , 7) , the present FISH studies demonstrate that EGFR amplification occurs in the majority of glioblastomas with TP53 mutation. However, the cells with EGFR amplification remain isolated and few in number and, therefore, remain below the level of detection of tumor lysate-based approaches. Although EGFR gene amplification can occur as frequently in TP53-mutated tumors as in TP53-wild-type lesions, EGFR amplification does not appear to bestow a growth advantage to TP53-mutant glioblastoma cells. In other words, TP53 mutation does not facilitate the selection of EGFR-amplified tumor cell populations. Recently, mutant p53 proteins have been shown to promote CAD gene amplification in vitro (15) , bestowing drug resistance to cell lines. Although selection pressures governing drug resistance in vitro are likely different from those operative in glioblastoma growth in vivo, such data demonstrate that p53 inactivation, by encouraging genomic instability, may promote rather than prevent gene amplification. In light of these findings, it is perhaps not surprising that we have detected frequent but scattered EGFR-amplified cells in TP53-mutant tumors. The combined observations suggest that mutant p53, although enabling gene amplification, does not support the selection of cellular populations that require EGFR overexpression to promote growth.
Widespread EGFR gene amplification was found in five (62.5%) of eight TP53-wild-type glioblastomas. In these cases, cells with EGFR gene amplification were not uniformly distributed in the tumors. Cells with EGFR amplification were clustered at the less cellular, more infiltrative portions and were less conspicuous in the relatively solid tumor centers. Sauter et al. (14) also observed heterogeneity in EGFR copy number within single tumors, but the pattern of heterogeneity was not detailed. These authors suggested that the heterogeneity was related to the presence of different amplified clonal lines. However, various EGFR gene copy numbers does not necessarily imply multiple clones, because amplified EGFR genes are present as double-minute, extrachromosomal elements in glioblastoma (1) . To maintain consistently high copy numbers across large numbers of cells, the extrachromosomal fragments must be repeatedly selected for during many cell divisions. We would, therefore, argue that such intratumoral heterogeneity reflects ongoing selection pressures.
Higher copy numbers of EGFR found at the probable periphery of the glioblastoma presumably provide a tumorigenic advantage for infiltrating the surrounding brain parenchyma. The reported inverse relationship between tumor cell dispersal and division, with migrating cells generally demonstrating lower proliferation indices than do solid tumor components (16) , argues that up-regulation of EGFR at the edge of a glioblastoma is more likely related to invasion than to proliferation. Indeed, EGFR may play a role in the hallmark diffuse infiltration of glioblastomas into the adjacent brain. EGFR has been implicated in in vitro studies of glioma invasion (17, 18, 19) . Furthermore, up-regulation of invasion-related transcripts has recently been reported in glioblastoma cell lines and postmortem glioblastomas expressing mutant EGFR (20 , 21) . Our observation of EGFR gene amplification preferentially in the infiltrative portions of human gliomas suggests that EGFR has a similar role in vivo.
Intratumoral EGFR gene amplification heterogeneity also highlights potential pitfalls, as well as advantages, for molecular classification of glioblastomas. A glioblastoma could be misclassified as "lacking EGFR amplification" if only the central region of a tumor is sample for genomic assessment. On the other hand, in difficult cases of infiltrating malignant diffuse astrocytomas in which diagnostic criteria for glioblastoma are not met, molecular analysis for EGFR gene amplification may suggest a diagnosis of glioblastoma in the absence of definite necrosis or microvascular proliferation. In light of the growing number of reports investigating the clinical relevance of EGFR amplification (22 , 23) , the present results imply that intratumoral heterogeneity for EGFR gene status should be taken into account.
In summary, EGFR gene amplification occurs commonly in glioblastoma cells with TP53 mutation, perhaps reflecting the propensity of mutant p53 to induce genomic instability and gene amplification. The previously observed exclusivity of TP53 mutation and widespread EGFR amplification in glioblastoma cell lysates is most likely because EGFR gene amplification does not confer a growth advantage in TP53-mutant cells, raising interesting questions about how these pathways interact at a molecular level. In addition, EGFR amplification in TP53-normal glioblastomas can be heterogeneous and exhibit topological gradation, supporting a role for EGFR in glioblastoma cell invasion of the adjacent brain, and begging caution in the selection of tumor regions for molecular genetic analyses.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
1 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Molecular Pathology Laboratory, CNT7, Massachusetts General Hospital, 149 13th Street, Charlestown, MA 02129. Phone: (617) 726-5690; Fax: (617) 726-5079; E-mail: DLOUIS{at}PARTNERS.ORG ![]()
2 The abbreviations used are: EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; FISH, fluorescence in situ hybridization. ![]()
3 Internet address: http://genomics.roswellpark.org/human/overview.html. ![]()
Received 7/ 1/02. Accepted 11/13/02.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. L. Bearer, J. S. Lowengrub, H. B. Frieboes, Y.-L. Chuang, F. Jin, S. M. Wise, M. Ferrari, D. B. Agus, and V. Cristini Multiparameter Computational Modeling of Tumor Invasion Cancer Res., May 15, 2009; 69(10): 4493 - 4501. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Li, J. Walling, S. Ahn, Y. Kotliarov, Q. Su, M. Quezado, J. C. Oberholtzer, J. Park, J. C. Zenklusen, and H. A. Fine Unsupervised Analysis of Transcriptomic Profiles Reveals Six Glioma Subtypes Cancer Res., March 1, 2009; 69(5): 2091 - 2099. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Ruano, T. Ribalta, A. R. de Lope, Y. Campos-Martin, C. Fiano, E. Perez-Magan, J.-L. Hernandez-Moneo, M. Mollejo, and B. Melendez Worse Outcome in Primary Glioblastoma Multiforme With Concurrent Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor and p53 Alteration Am J Clin Pathol, February 1, 2009; 131(2): 257 - 263. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Martens, Y. Laabs, H. S. Gunther, D. Kemming, Z. Zhu, L. Witte, C. Hagel, M. Westphal, and K. Lamszus Inhibition of Glioblastoma Growth in a Highly Invasive Nude Mouse Model Can Be Achieved by Targeting Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor but not Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-2 Clin. Cancer Res., September 1, 2008; 14(17): 5447 - 5458. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. A. Engler, G. Mohapatra, D. N. Louis, and R. A. Betensky A pseudolikelihood approach for simultaneous analysis of array comparative genomic hybridizations Biostat., July 1, 2006; 7(3): 399 - 421. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Mohapatra, R. A. Betensky, E. R. Miller, B. Carey, L. D. Gaumont, D. A. Engler, and D. N. Louis Glioma Test Array for Use with Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Tissue: Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization Correlates with Loss of Heterozygosity and Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization J. Mol. Diagn., May 1, 2006; 8(2): 268 - 276. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Aghi, P. Gaviani, J. W. Henson, T. T. Batchelor, D. N. Louis, and F. G. Barker II Magnetic Resonance Imaging Characteristics Predict Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Amplification Status in Glioblastoma Clin. Cancer Res., December 15, 2005; 11(24): 8600 - 8605. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. J. Riemenschneider, W. Mueller, R. A. Betensky, G. Mohapatra, and D. N. Louis In Situ Analysis of Integrin and Growth Factor Receptor Signaling Pathways in Human Glioblastomas Suggests Overlapping Relationships with Focal Adhesion Kinase Activation Am. J. Pathol., November 1, 2005; 167(5): 1379 - 1387. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. K. Wiencke, K. Aldape, A. McMillan, J. Wiemels, M. Moghadassi, R. Miike, K. T. Kelsey, J. Patoka, J. Long, and M. Wrensch Molecular Features of Adult Glioma Associated with Patient Race/Ethnicity, Age, and a Polymorphism in O6-Methylguanine-DNA-Methyltransferase Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2005; 14(7): 1774 - 1783. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Misra, M. Pellarin, J. Nigro, I. Smirnov, D. Moore, K. R. Lamborn, D. Pinkel, D. G. Albertson, and B. G. Feuerstein Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization Identifies Genetic Subgroups in Grade 4 Human Astrocytoma Clin. Cancer Res., April 15, 2005; 11(8): 2907 - 2918. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Giannini, J. N. Sarkaria, A. Saito, J. H. Uhm, E. Galanis, B. L. Carlson, M. A. Schroeder, and C. D. James Patient tumor EGFR and PDGFRA gene amplifications retained in an invasive intracranial xenograft model of glioblastoma multiforme Neuro-oncol, April 1, 2005; 7(2): 164 - 176. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. E. Van Meter, W. C. Broaddus, H. K. Rooprai, G. J. Pilkington, and H. L. Fillmore Induction of membrane-type-1 matrix metalloproteinase by epidermal growth factor-mediated signaling in gliomas Neuro-oncol, July 1, 2004; 6(3): 188 - 199. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Shinojima, K. Tada, S. Shiraishi, T. Kamiryo, M. Kochi, H. Nakamura, K. Makino, H. Saya, H. Hirano, J.-i. Kuratsu, et al. Prognostic Value of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor in Patients with Glioblastoma Multiforme Cancer Res., October 15, 2003; 63(20): 6962 - 6970. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Meeting Abstracts Online |