» Articles » PMID: 37276492

Mutation Burden Independently Predicts Survival in the Pan-Cancer Atlas

Overview
Specialty Oncology
Date 2023 Jun 5
PMID 37276492
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Long-standing clinical predictors of cancer survival have included histopathologic type, stage, and grade. We hypothesized that the principal categories of tumor somatic mutations might also portend survival. We investigated this hypothesis using the Pan-Cancer Atlas, encompassing clinical, genomic, and outcome data of 10,652 patients and 32 cancer types.

Methods: We evaluated the prognostic capability of cancer type, stage, grade and the burden of each major mutation category on overall and disease-specific survival. Mutation categories included short substitution and insertion-deletion mutations (SMs), copy number alterations (CNAs), and gene fusions.

Results: SM count and CNA fraction proved to be strong independent predictors of survival (joint = 5.3e-95) that remained highly significant when adjusted for the traditional factors. Importantly, the relationship between mutation burden and survival proved to be nonlinear ( = 9.5e-56); survival improved at both low- and high-burden extremes. In clinically predictive modeling, SM count together with CNA fraction meaningfully distinguished survival even among patients sharing a given cancer type, stage, or grade.

Conclusion: Burden of somatic mutation is a key index of survival of analogous clinical utility to these traditional factors.

Citing Articles

CancerPro: deciphering the pan-cancer prognostic landscape through combinatorial enrichment analysis and knowledge network insights.

Wang Z, Yuan Y, Wang Z, Zhang W, Chen C, Duan Z NAR Genom Bioinform. 2024; 6(4):lqae157.

PMID: 39633722 PMC: 11616677. DOI: 10.1093/nargab/lqae157.


Association of Tumor Mutational Burden and PD-L1 with the Efficacy of Pembrolizumab with or without Chemotherapy versus Chemotherapy in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

Flechon A, Morales-Barrera R, Powles T, Alva A, Ozguroglu M, Csoszi T Clin Cancer Res. 2024; 30(23):5353-5364.

PMID: 39475359 PMC: 11609623. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-23-3518.

References
1.
Li Y, Luo Y . Optimizing the evaluation of gene-targeted panels for tumor mutational burden estimation. Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):21072. PMC: 8548549. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-00626-7. View

2.
Zheng X, Amos C, Frost H . Cancer prognosis prediction using somatic point mutation and copy number variation data: a comparison of gene-level and pathway-based models. BMC Bioinformatics. 2020; 21(1):467. PMC: 7574407. DOI: 10.1186/s12859-020-03791-0. View

3.
Ellrott K, Bailey M, Saksena G, Covington K, Kandoth C, Stewart C . Scalable Open Science Approach for Mutation Calling of Tumor Exomes Using Multiple Genomic Pipelines. Cell Syst. 2018; 6(3):271-281.e7. PMC: 6075717. DOI: 10.1016/j.cels.2018.03.002. View

4.
Riviere P, Goodman A, Okamura R, Barkauskas D, Whitchurch T, Lee S . High Tumor Mutational Burden Correlates with Longer Survival in Immunotherapy-Naïve Patients with Diverse Cancers. Mol Cancer Ther. 2020; 19(10):2139-2145. PMC: 7541603. DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-20-0161. View

5.
Sha D, Jin Z, Budczies J, Kluck K, Stenzinger A, Sinicrope F . Tumor Mutational Burden as a Predictive Biomarker in Solid Tumors. Cancer Discov. 2020; 10(12):1808-1825. PMC: 7710563. DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-20-0522. View