SSBP2 Variants Are Associated with Survival in Glioblastoma Patients

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco 185 Berry St, Suite 5700, San Francisco, CA 94107, USA.
Clinical Cancer Research (Impact Factor: 8.72). 04/2012; 18(11):3154-62. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-2778
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Glioblastoma is a devastating, incurable disease with few known prognostic factors. Here, we present the first genome-wide survival and validation study for glioblastoma.
Cox regressions for survival with 314,635 inherited autosomal single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) among 315 San Francisco Adult Glioma Study patients for discovery and three independent validation data sets [87 Mayo Clinic, 232 glioma patients recruited from several medical centers in Southeastern United States (GliomaSE), and 115 The Cancer Genome Atlas patients] were used to identify SNPs associated with overall survival for Caucasian glioblastoma patients treated with the current standard of care, resection, radiation, and temozolomide (total n = 749). Tumor expression of the gene that contained the identified prognostic SNP was examined in three separate data sets (total n = 619). Genotype imputation was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for SNPs that had not been directly genotyped.
From the discovery and validation analyses, we identified a variant in single-stranded DNA-binding protein 2 (SSBP2) on 5q14.1 associated with overall survival in combined analyses (HR, 1.64; P = 1.3 × 10(-6)). Expression of SSBP2 in tumors from three independent data sets also was significantly related to patient survival (P = 5.3 × 10(-4)). Using genotype imputation, the SSBP2 SNP rs17296479 had the strongest statistically significant genome-wide association with poorer overall patient survival (HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.45-2.22; P = 1.0 × 10(-7)).
The minor allele of SSBP2 SNP rs17296479 and the increased tumor expression of SSBP2 were statistically significantly associated with poorer overall survival among glioblastoma patients. With further confirmation, previously unrecognized inherited variations influencing survival may warrant inclusion in clinical trials to improve randomization. Unaccounted for genetic influence on survival could produce unwanted bias in such studies.

Download full-text


Available from: Steven Brem, Sep 27, 2015
28 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recurrent copy number alterations (CNAs) play an important role in cancer genesis. While a number of computational methods have been proposed for identifying such CNAs, their relative merits remain largely unknown in practice since very few efforts have been focused on comparative analysis of the methods. To facilitate studies of recurrent CNA identification in cancer genome, it is imperative to conduct a comprehensive comparison of performance and limitations among existing methods. In this paper, six representative methods proposed in the latest six years are compared. These include one-stage and two-stage approaches, working with raw intensity ratio data and discretized data respectively. They are based on various techniques such as kernel regression, correlation matrix diagonal segmentation, semi-parametric permutation and cyclic permutation schemes. We explore multiple criteria including type I error rate, detection power, Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve and the area under curve (AUC), and computational complexity, to evaluate performance of the methods under multiple simulation scenarios. We also characterize their abilities on applications to two real datasets obtained from cancers with lung adenocarcinoma and glioblastoma. This comparison study reveals general characteristics of the existing methods for identifying recurrent CNAs, and further provides new insights into their strengths and weaknesses. It is believed helpful to accelerate the development of novel and improved methods.
    PLoS ONE 12/2012; 7(12):e52516. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0052516 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Significant gaps exist in our understanding of the causes and clinical management of glioma. One of the biggest gaps is how best to manage low-grade (World Health Organization [WHO] Grade II) glioma. Low-grade glioma (LGG) is a uniformly fatal disease of young adults (mean age 41 years), with survival averaging approximately 7 years. Although LGG patients have better survival than patients with high-grade (WHO Grade III or IV) glioma, all LGGs eventually progress to high-grade glioma and death. Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program of the National Cancer Institute suggest that for the majority of LGG patients, overall survival has not significantly improved over the past 3 decades, highlighting the need for intensified study of this tumor. Recently published research suggests that historically used clinical variables are not sufficient (and are likely inferior) prognostic and predictive indicators relative to information provided by recently discovered tumor markers (e.g., 1p/19q deletion and IDH1 or IDH2 mutation status), tumor expression profiles (e.g., the proneural profile) and/or constitutive genotype (e.g., rs55705857 on 8q24.21). Discovery of such tumor and constitutive variation may identify variables needed to improve randomization in clinical trials as well as identify patients more sensitive to current treatments and targets for improved treatment in the future. This article reports on survival trends for patients diagnosed with LGG within the United States from 1973 through 2011 and reviews the emerging role of tumor and constitutive genetics in refining risk stratification, defining targeted therapy, and improving survival for this group of relatively young patients.
    Neurosurgical FOCUS 01/2015; 38(1):E6. DOI:10.3171/2014.10.FOCUS12367 · 2.11 Impact Factor