[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Over the past decade, comprehensive genomic studies demonstrated that leiomyosarcomas and most of the tumors previously labeled as 'malignant fibrous histiocytomas' share complex karyotypes and genomic profiles, and can be referred to as 'sarcomas with complex genomics'. We recently reported a series of 160 sarcomas with complex genomics such as leiomyosarcomas, myxofibrosarcomas, pleomorphic liposarcomas/rhabdomyosarcomas and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcomas. These tumors present with a frequent loss of chromosome 10 region encompassing the tumor suppressor gene PTEN. In the present study, we assessed PTEN genomic level and protein expression in this large series of sarcomas with complex genomics, as well as activation of downstream pathways. PTEN partial genomic loss was observed in only 46% of tumors, especially in well-differentiated leiomyosarcomas, whereas up to 68% of these tumors demonstrate a loss of protein expression on western blot analysis. Specific discrepancies in PTEN immunohistochemical results suggested bias in this latter technique. PTEN mutations were rare, with only 4 point mutations in the 65 samples studied. Subsequent activation of AKT and mTOR pathways was only observed in 2 out of 3 of PTEN-deleted tumors. On the other hand, RICTOR, a major component of the mTOR complex 2, was significantly overexpressed in well-differentiated leiomyosarcomas. These results, confirmed on tissue micro-array immunohistochemical analysis of 459 sarcomas, could suggest a link between RICTOR overexpression and leiomyosarcomas oncogenesis. As therapeutics directed against the mTOR pathway are assessed in sarcomas, RICTOR overexpression in sarcomas and its links to therapeutic response need to be assessed.
Modern Pathology 11/2011; 25(2):197-211. DOI:10.1038/modpathol.2011.163 · 6.19 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The MDM2 and CDK4 genes are the main targets of chromosome 12 amplification in well-differentiated and dedifferentiated liposarcomas. Nevertheless, around 10% of these tumors do not amplify CDK4. To find substitutive alterations of CDK4 amplification, we analyzed a large series of liposarcomas by array-CGH, real-time genomic PCR, gene expression array, and real-time RT-PCR. We demonstrate that an alteration in the CDKN2A/CDKN2B/CDK4/CCND1 pathway is present in almost all cases without CDK4 amplification, thereby confirming the pivotal role of this pathway in liposarcoma oncogenesis. Moreover, we show that cell cycle and differentiation are driven by a subtle and complex balance between members of this pathway. Finally, we demonstrate that in tumors without amplification/overexpression of CDK4, the chromosome 1q21-1q23 region is a preferential partner of chromosome 12 amplicon, suggesting that the mechanism of amplification is slightly different in this group of tumors.
Genes Chromosomes and Cancer 11/2011; 50(11):896-907. DOI:10.1002/gcc.20909 · 4.04 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In a series of 404 adult soft tissue sarcomas, analyzed by array-CGH, we have observed in approximately 10% of them a genomic amplification of either chromosome bands 11q22 or 3p12. These two amplicons likely target the YAP1 and VGLL3 genes, respectively. Both genes encode proteins that are cofactors of the TEAD family of transcription factors. Very good correlations between amplification and expression levels were observed. Welch test analyses of transcriptome data demonstrate that tumors with amplicons share a large set of upregulated and downregulated genes. Inhibition of YAP1 and VGLL3 in cell lines with these amplifications/overexpressions leads to similar phenotypes: decrease of proliferation rate, and to a lesser extent decrease of migration properties. These data, and the fact that these amplicons are observed either in de-differentiated liposarcomas or in undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcomas, suggest that these genetics events could be involved in oncogenesis and progression of soft tissue sarcomas.
Genes Chromosomes and Cancer 12/2010; 49(12):1161-71. DOI:10.1002/gcc.20825 · 4.04 Impact Factor