Published in

American Association for Cancer Research, Cancer Research, 18(67), p. 8504-8510, 2007

DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-07-0673

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Genomic Profiling Reveals Alternative Genetic Pathways of Prostate Tumorigenesis

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Prostate cancer is clinically heterogeneous, ranging from indolent to lethal disease. Expression profiling previously defined three subtypes of prostate cancer, one (subtype-1) linked to clinically favorable behavior, and the others (subtypes-2 and -3) linked with a more aggressive form of the disease. To explore disease heterogeneity at the genomic level, we carried out array-based comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) on 64 prostate tumor specimens, including 55 primary tumors and 9 pelvic lymph node metastases. Unsupervised cluster analysis of DNA copy number alterations (CNA) identified recurrent aberrations, including a 6q15-deletion group associated with subtype-1 gene expression patterns and decreased tumor recurrence. Supervised analysis further disclosed distinct patterns of CNA among gene-expression subtypes, where subtype-1 tumors exhibited characteristic deletions at 5q21 and 6q15, and subtype-2 cases harbored deletions at 8p21 (NKX3-1) and 21q22 (resulting in TMPRSS2-ERG fusion). Lymph node metastases, predominantly subtype-3, displayed overall higher frequencies of CNA, and in particular gains at 8q24 (MYC) and 16p13, and loss at 10q23 (PTEN) and 16q23. Our findings reveal that prostate cancers develop via a limited number of alternative preferred genetic pathways. The resultant molecular genetic subtypes provide a new framework for investigating prostate cancer biology and explain in part the clinical heterogeneity of the disease. [Cancer Res 2007;67(18):8504–10]