9p21 locus analysis in high-risk gastrointestinal stromal tumors characterized for c-kit and platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha gene alterations.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are noncomplex sarcomas that often are due to c-kit-activating and platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha gene (PDGFRalpha)-activating mutations and perturbations of their related signaling pathways. Molecular and cytogenetic findings have indicated correlations between tumor progression and high-risk GISTs with c-kit mutations, the overexpression of genes such as ezrin, and losses at 9p. In particular, it was reported recently that malignant GISTs showed alterations in the p16INK4a gene located at the 9p21 locus. METHODS: To assess the involvement of p14ARF and p15INK4b in addition to p16INK4a in GISTs, the authors undertook a molecular and cytogenetic study of the 9p21 locus. A series of 22 pre-Gleevec era, cryopreserved, high-risk GISTs that were characterized well in terms of KIT and PDGFRalpha receptors were investigated for mRNA expression, homozygous deletions, mutations, and promoter methylation of locus 9p21, in some instances complemented by fluorescent in situ hybridization studies. RESULTS: The results indicated the loss of p16INK4a mRNA expression in 41% of the GISTs, mainly due to the homozygous deletion of both the p16INK4a gene and the p14ARF gene (24%). No mutations were found, and promoter methylation (detected by means of methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction analysis in 27% of tumors) was restricted mainly to the p15INK4b gene (20%). It is noteworthy that, in all of the methylated GISTs, the epigenetic promoter alteration was coupled with mRNA expression. CONCLUSIONS: Alterations in the 9p21 locus were found cumulatively in 54% of the tumors in the current series and were represented mainly by the loss of tumor suppressor gene expression. The p16INK4a deletion, which always was coupled with p14ARF gene loss, seemed to be the most common 9p21 inactivation mechanism.

BRAF alterations are associated with complex mutational profiles in malignant melanoma.

To evaluate the mutational profiles associated with BRAF mutations in human melanoma, we have studied BRAF, RAS, PTEN, TP53, CDKN2A and CDK4 genes and their expression in melanoma lesions. Owing to the lack of sufficient material from fresh specimens, we employed short-term cell lines obtained from melanoma biopsies. In all, 41 melanoma obtained from eight primary lesions, 20 nodal, 11 cutaneous and two visceral metastases from patients with sporadic (n=31), familial (n=4) and multiple melanoma (n=2) were analysed. The results revealed novel missense mutations in the BRAF, PTEN, CDKN2A and CDK4 genes. Overall, activating mutations of BRAF and loss of functional p16 and ARF were detected in the majority of melanomas (29/41, 36/41 and 29/41, respectively), while PTEN alterations/loss, NRAS and TP53 mutations occurred less frequently (6/41, 6/41 and 10/41, respectively). In the resulting 12 mutational profiles, p16/ARF loss associated with mutated BRAFV599E was the most represented (n=15). In addition, TP53 and PTEN mutations were always accompanied with BRAF alterations, while PTEN loss was found in association with CDKN2A or TP53 mutations in the absence of BRAF activation. The p16/ARFDelta+BRAF/RAS profile was significantly associated with a longer survival, while complex mutational profiles were detected in highly aggressive disease and poor survival. These data support the existence of several molecularly defined melanoma groups which likely reflect different clinical/biological behaviour, thus suggesting that a more extensive molecular classification of melanoma would significantly impact its clinical management.

High prevalence of the G101W germline mutation in the CDKN2A (P16(ink4a)) gene in 62 Italian malignant melanoma families.

CDKN2A germline mutation frequency estimates are commonly based on families with several melanoma cases. When we started counseling in a research setting on gene susceptibility analysis in northern and central Italy, however, we mostly found small families with few cases. Here we briefly characterize those kindred, estimate CDKN2A/CDK4 mutation test yields, and provide indications on the possibility of implementing formal DNA testing for melanoma-prone families in Italy. In September 1995 we started genetic counseling in a research setting at our Medical Genetics Center. Screening for CDKN2A/CDK4 mutations was performed on families with two melanoma patients, one of whom was younger than 50 years at onset, the other complying with one of the following: 1) being a first-degree relative, 2) having an additional relative with pancreatic cancer, or 3) having multiple primary melanomas. Sixty-two of 67 (80%) melanoma cases met our criteria. Four previously described CDKN2A mutations (G101W, R24P, V126D, and N71S) were found in 21 of the 62 families (34%) with a high prevalence of G101W (18/21). The percentage of families with two melanoma cases/family harboring a mutation was low (7%, 2/27), but rose to 45% (9/20) if one of the melanoma patients carried multiple melanomas or if pancreatic cancer was present in that family. In the 15 families with three melanoma cases the presence of a mutation was higher (67%, 10/15) and reached 100% in the 4 families with four or more melanoma cases. Our results suggest that CDKN2A/CDK4 counseling-based mutational analysis may be reasonably efficient also for families with two melanoma cases, if one patient carries multiple melanomas or if pancreatic cancer is present in the family.