Supplementary Table 1. PIK3CA mutation in colorectal cancer

Similar documents
Whole Exome Sequenced Characteristics

July 2015 Assay ID Assay Name Gene COSMIC ID Amino acid change Nucleotide change Wild type allele (VIC label) Mutant allele (FAM label)

Serrated Polyps and a Classification of Colorectal Cancer

Supplementary Table 2. Identified causative mutations and/or mutation candidates.

Development of Carcinoma Pathways

Supplementary Figure 1

Aspirin Use, Tumor PIK3CA Mutation, and Colorectal-Cancer Survival

Ian Landry, MPH Beth Schmidt, MSPH

Collaboration between CEQAS and UK NEQAS for Molecular Genetics Solid Tumour EQAs and variant interpretation

Beyond the APC era Alternative pathways to CRC. Jeremy R Jass McGill University

The Personalized Cancer Medicine Initiative at Vanderbilt

Personalized Aspirin Therapy

The Role of the CpG Island Methylator Phenotype on Survival Outcome in Colon Cancer

Integration of Cancer Genome into GECCO- Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium

General Session 7: Controversies in Screening and Surveillance in Colorectal Cancer

Clinical and Pathological Significance of Epigenomic Changes in Colorectal Cancer

Molecular biology of colorectal cancer

The molecular genetics of colorectal cancer

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR MEDICINE 38: Received November 13, 2015; Accepted March 11, DOI: /ijmm.2016.

This is an Open Access document downloaded from ORCA, Cardiff University's institutional repository:

The Role of Next Generation Sequencing in Solid Tumor Mutation Testing

Supplementary Online Content

SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURES: Supplementary Figure 1

Marcatori biomolecolari dei carcinomi del colon-retto sporadici ed ereditari

Recent advances in the molecular pathology of lung cancer: role of EGFR and KRAS mutation testing in treatment selection

Netherlands Cohort Study on diet and cancer NLCS

METASTATIC COLORECTAL CANCER: TUMOR MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS AND ITS IMPACT ON CHEMOTHERAPY SUMA SATTI, MD

La genetica del carcinoma colo-rettale

Gender-related prognostic value and genomic pattern of intra-tumor heterogeneity in colorectal cancer

Colon Cancer and Hereditary Cancer Syndromes

BRAF Testing In The Elderly: Same As in Younger Patients?

MUTATION TEST CE IVD. ctnras-braf FEATURES

Personalized Gene Profile

Sessile Serrated Polyps

Names for H (ISBT 018) Blood Group Alleles

ASCO 2017 updates in Colorectal and Gastric Cancers. May Cho, M.D.

(a) Schematic diagram of the FS mutation of UVRAG in exon 8 containing the highly instable

Title:BRAF V600E mutation and KRAS codon 13 mutations predict poor survival in Chinese colorectal cancer patients

Immunotherapy in Colorectal cancer

Microsatellite instability and other molecular markers: how useful are they?

Colorectal Cancer - Working in Partnership. David Baty Genetics, Ninewells Hospital

Description of Supplementary Files. File Name: Supplementary Information Description: Supplementary Figures and Supplementary Tables

Supplementary Table 1. Association of rs with risk of obesity among participants in NHS and HPFS

The left versus right colon cancer story What is the truth?

Colorectal Cancer in 2017: From Biology to the Clinics. Rodrigo Dienstmann

Biomarker development in the era of precision medicine. Bei Li, Interdisciplinary Technical Journal Club

6/12/2018. Disclosures. Clinical Genomics The CLIA Lab Perspective. Outline. COH HopeSeq Heme Panels

ADVANCES IN COLON CANCER

Anatomic Molecular Pathology: An Emerging Field

Colon cancer: practical molecular diagnostics. Wade S. Samowitz, M.D. University of Utah and ARUP

Supplementary Appendix

Colorectal Cancer Expression of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor (PPARG, PPARgamma) Is Associated With Good Prognosis

Supplementary Document

Targeted sequencing of refractory myeloma reveals a high incidence of mutations in CRBN and Ras pathway genes

Molecular subtyping: how useful is it?

Colorectal cancer Chapelle, J Clin Oncol, 2010

Supplementary Table 3. 3 UTR primer sequences. Primer sequences used to amplify and clone the 3 UTR of each indicated gene are listed.

Immunotherapy for dmmr metastatic colorectal cancer. Prof.dr. Kees Punt Dept. Medical Oncology AUMC

Suspected Renal Colic in the Emergency Department

Nature Genetics: doi: /ng Supplementary Figure 1. Alternative splicing events in the 5K panel.

Variant interpretation exercise. ACGS Somatic Variant Interpretation Workshop Joanne Mason 21/09/18

Supplementary Online Content

Index. Note: Page numbers of article titles are in boldface type.

T ranscriptional inactivation by cytosine methylation at

OverView Circulating Nucleic Acids (CFNA) in Cancer Patients. Dave S.B. Hoon John Wayne Cancer Institute Santa Monica, CA, USA

Molecular Testing Updates. Karen Rasmussen, PhD, FACMG Clinical Molecular Genetics Spectrum Medical Group, Pathology Division Portland, Maine

Genetic testing all you need to know

KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF Variant Analysis in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association

Serrated Colorectal Polyps and the Serrated Neoplasia Pathway

Report OPERRA Workshop: Modelling of pathogenesis

Supplementary Figure 1 MicroRNA expression in human synovial fibroblasts from different locations. MicroRNA, which were identified by RNAseq as most

Nature Medicine: doi: /nm.3967

Nivolumab in Patients With DNA Mismatch Repair Deficient/Microsatellite Instability High Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Update From CheckMate 142

Sample Report. Result: POSITIVE Mutations Detected: NRAS-G13V, TP53-R282W, TP53-G245D, TP53-R175H, BRAF-V600M, MSI-High

ORIGINAL ARTICLE. and treatment of patients

Out-Patient Billing CPT Codes

Genetic Alteration Panels

Published OnlineFirst October 14, 2009; DOI: / CCR

Resectable locally advanced oesophagogastric cancer

Molecular Diagnosis for Colorectal Cancer Patients

Related Policies None

Names for ABO (ISBT 001) Blood Group Alleles

RESEARCH ARTICLE. Value of KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA Mutations and Survival Benefit from Systemic Chemotherapy in Colorectal Peritoneal Carcinomatosis

Toxicity by Age Group. Old Factor 1: Age. Disclosures. Predicting survival in metastatic colorectal cancer. Personalized Medicine - Decision Tools -

THE FUTURE OF IMMUNOTHERAPY IN COLORECTAL CANCER. Prof. Dr. Hans Prenen, MD, PhD Oncology Department University Hospital Antwerp, Belgium

Intron p Hybrid with p.leu245val p. Gly336Cys. p.leu62phe p. Ala137Val p. Asn152Thr hybrid with p.leu245val p.

Caring for a Patient with Colorectal Cancer. Objectives. Poll question. UNC Cancer Network Presented on 10/15/18. For Educational Use Only 1

Vectibix. Vectibix (panitumumab) Description

Synchronous and Subsequent Lesions of Serrated Adenomas and Tubular Adenomas of the Colorectum

BMJ Open. A Nationwide Danish Cohort Study challenging the Categorization into Right Sided and Left Sided Colon Cancer

Prognostic significance of K-Ras mutation rate in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Bruno Vincenzi Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma

Colorectal Cancer Structured Pathology Reporting Proforma DD MM YYYY

Kolorektalni karcinom- novosti u liječenju. PANEL: Maja Banjin, Janja Ocvirk, Borislav Belev, Ivan Nikolić, Anes Pašić

NIH Public Access Author Manuscript Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 December 1.

LOINC. Clinical information. RCPA code. Record if different to report header Operating surgeon name and contact details. Absent.

Leveraging Prospective Cohort Studies to Advance Colorectal Cancer Prevention, Treatment and Biology

Analysis of factors influencing molecular testing at diagnostic of colorectal cancer

w ª wy xvwz A ª vw xvw P ª w} xvw w Æ w Æ V w,x Æ w Æ w Æ y,z Æ { Æ y,z, w w w~ w wy}æ zy Æ wyw{ xæ wz w xywæ xx Æ wv Æ } w x w x w Æ w Æ wy} zy Æ wz

B Base excision repair, in MUTYH-associated polyposis and colorectal cancer, BRAF testing, for hereditary colorectal cancer, 696

Transcription:

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 1 Supplementary Table 1. PIK3CA mutation in colorectal cancer Exon Domain Nucleotide change* Amino acid change* cases 9 Helical c.1621t>a p.e541t 1 9 Helical c.1624g>a p.e542k 40 # 9 Helical c.1631c>a p.t544n 3 # 9 Helical c.1631c>t p.t544i 1 9 Helical c.1633g>a p.e545k 57 9 Helical c.1634a>c p.e545a 1 9 Helical c.1634a>g p.e545g 1 9 Helical c.1636c>a p.q546k 14 # 20 Kinase c.3129g>t p.m1043i 18 20 Kinase c.3133g>a p.d1045n 1 20 Kinase c.3136g>a p.a1046t 2 20 Kinase c.3137c>a p.a1046e 1 20 Kinase c.3139c>t p.h1047y 5 20 Kinase c.3140a>c p.h1047p 1 20 Kinase c.3140a>g p.h1047r 41 20 Kinase c.3140a>t p.h1047l 11 # 20 Kinase c.3142c>t p.h1048y 1 # *Nomenclature of mutation follows the recommendations by the Human Genome Variation Society (http://www.hgvs.org/mutnomen/). # One case had both c.1636c>a and c.1631c>a mutations, another had c.3140a>t and c.3142c>t mutations and another had c.1624g>a and c.1631c>a mutations.

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 2 Supplementary Table 2. Clinical, pathological and molecular features of colorectal cancer according to PIK3CA mutation status in the Nurses Health Study PIK3CA wildtype Only in exon 9 PIK3CA mutation present P (exon 9 Only in exon vs. 20 exon 20) Feature No. No. No. No. No. No. 634 542 53 37 2 In both exon 9 and exon 20 P (across all categories) Mean age at diagnosis (years) ± SD 66.7 ± 8.3 66.7 ± 8.3 67.2 ± 8.6 66.5 ± 8.6 64.3 ± 5.4 0.96 Year of diagnosis 0.74 0.55 Prior to 1997 264 42% 232 43% 19 36% 12 32% 1 50% 1997 or after 370 58% 310 57% 34 64% 25 68% 1 50% Family history of colorectal cancer in first degree relatives 0.39 0.0048 Absent 514 81% 441 81% 44 83% 28 76% 1 50% Present 120 19% 101 19% 9 17% 9 24% 1 50% Tumor location 0.70 0.87 Rectum 132 21% 117 22% 10 19% 5 14% 0 0 Distal colon 190 30% 161 30% 15 28% 13 35% 1 50% Proximal colon 310 49% 262 49% 28 53% 19 51% 1 50% Disease stage 0.41 0.59 I 146 23% 123 23% 17 32% 6 16% 0 0 II 196 31% 165 30% 16 30% 14 38% 1 50% III 176 28% 151 28% 13 25% 11 30% 1 50% IV 85 13% 72 13% 7 13% 6 16% 0 0 Unknown 31 5% 31 6% 0 0 0 0% 0 0

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 3 Tumor grade 0.10 0.41 Low 557 88% 474 88% 50 94% 31 84% 2 100% High 73 12% 64 12% 3 6% 6 16% 0 0 MSI status 0.17 0.51 MSI-low/MSS 508 81% 432 81% 46 87% 28 76% 2 100% MSI-high 116 19% 100 19% 7 13% 9 24% 0 0 CIMP status 0.067 0.21 CIMP-low/0 488 79% 415 79% 45 88% 27 73% 1 50% CIMP-high 129 21% 112 21% 6 12% 10 27% 1 50% BRAF status 0.091 0.28 Wild-type 501 80% 425 79% 47 89% 27 75% 2 100% Mutant 128 20% 113 21% 6 11% 9 25% 0 0 KRAS status 0.30 0.0031 Wild-type 429 68% 382 70% 25 47% 21 58 % 1 50% Mutant 204 32% 160 30% 28 53% 15 42% 1 50% Mean LINE-1 methylation level (%) ± SD 63.1 ± 9.4 62.8 ± 9.4 65.5 ± 9.7 63.1 ± 9.0 58.4 ± 12.2 0.94 TP53 expression 0.68 0.062 Negative 319 58% 265 56% 32 74% 21 70% 1 50% Positive 229 42% 208 44% 11 26% 9 30% 1 50%

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 4 Supplementary Table 3. Clinical, pathological and molecular features of colorectal cancer according to PIK3CA mutation status in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study PIK3CA mutation present PIK3CA wildtype exon 9 (exon 9 vs. exon 20 9 and exon 20 Only in P Only in In both exon Feature No. No. No. exon 20) No. No. No. 536 439 56 36 5 P (across all categories) Mean age at diagnosis (years) ± SD 71.1 ± 8.7 71.0 ± 8.6 71.5 ± 8.9 70.2 ± 9.2 80.2 ± 7.1 0.83 Year of diagnosis 0.35 0.76 Prior to 1997 237 44% 192 44% 24 43% 19 53% 2 40% 1997 or after 299 56% 247 56% 32 57% 17 47% 3 60% Family history of colorectal cancer in first degree relatives 0.26 0.042 Absent 437 82% 363 83% 46 82% 26 72% 2 40% Present 99 18% 76 17% 10 18% 10 28% 3 60% Tumor location 0.92 0.16 Rectum 126 24% 113 26% 7 13% 5 14% 1 20% Distal colon 169 32% 139 32% 17 30% 12 33% 1 20% Proximal colon 236 44% 182 42% 32 57% 19 53% 3 60% Disease stage 0.18 0.15 I 136 25% 108 25% 16 29% 9 25% 3 60% II 131 24% 105 24% 12 21% 14 39% 0 0 III 132 25% 113 26% 11 20% 8 22% 0 0 IV 66 12% 52 12% 8 14% 4 11% 2 40% Unknown 71 13% 61 14% 9 16% 1 3% 0 0

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 5 Tumor grade 0.32 0.69 Low 495 93% 406 93% 52 95% 32 89% 5 100% High 38 7% 31 7% 3 5% 4 11% 0 0 MSI status 0.0002 0.0004 MSI-low/MSS 470 89% 388 89% 54 96% 24 69% 4 80% MSI-high 60 11% 46 11% 2 4% 11 31% 1 20% CIMP status 0.15 0.0093 CIMP-low/0 418 88% 347 90% 43 86% 25 74% 3 60% CIMP-high 58 12% 40 10% 7 14% 9 26% 2 40% BRAF status 0.15 0.17 Wild-type 492 92% 406 93% 52 93% 30 83% 4 80% Mutant 43 8% 32 7% 4 7% 6 17% 1 20% KRAS status 0.56 0.0009 Wild-type 318 60% 277 64% 23 41% 17 47% 1 20% Mutant 214 40% 158 36% 33 59% 19 58% 4 80% Mean LINE-1 methylation level (%) ± SD 62.4 ± 9.6 62.1 ± 9.8 63.2 ± 9.4 64.7 ± 8.8 63.9 ± 6.0 0.64 TP53 expression 0.87 0.24 Negative 201 56% 157 54% 24 69% 18 67% 2 67% Positive 156 44% 135 46% 11 31% 9 33% 1 33%

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 6 Supplementary Table 4. Clinical, pathological and molecular features of colorectal cancer according to overall PIK3CA mutation status PIK3CA wildtype mutant PIK3CA P Feature No. No. No. No. 1170 981 189 Sex 0.097 Male 536 46% 439 45% 97 51% Female 634 54% 542 55% 92 49% Mean age (years) ± SD 68.7 ± 8.7 68.6 ± 8.7 69.2 ± 9.1 0.42 Year of diagnosis 0.53 Prior to 1997 501 43% 424 43% 77 41% 1997 or after 669 57% 557 57% 112 59% Family history of colorectal cancer in first degree relatives 0.18 Absent 951 81% 804 82% 147 78% Present 219 19% 177 18% 42 22% Tumor location 0.019 Rectum 258 22% 230 24% 28 15% Distal colon 359 31% 300 31% 59 31% Proximal colon 546 47% 444 45% 102 54% Disease stage 0.25 I 282 24% 231 24% 51 27% II 327 28% 270 28% 57 30% III 308 26% 264 27% 44 23% IV 151 13% 124 13% 27 14% Unknown 102 9% 92 9% 10 6% Tumor grade 0.60 Low 1052 91% 880 90% 172 91% High 111 9% 95 10% 16 9% MSI status 0.77 MSI-low/MSS 978 85% 820 85% 158 84% MSI-high 176 15% 146 15% 30 16%

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 7 CIMP status 0.34 CIMP-low/0 906 83% 762 83% 144 80% CIMP-high 187 17% 152 17% 35 20% BRAF status 0.72 Wild-type 993 85% 831 85% 162 86% Mutant 171 15% 145 15% 26 14% KRAS status <0.0001 Wild-type 747 64% 659 67% 88 47% Mutant 418 36% 318 33% 100 53% Mean LINE-1 methylation level (%) ± SD 62.8 ± 9.5 62.5 ± 9.6 64.1 ± 9.2 0.53 TP53 expression 0.0011 Negative 520 57% 422 55% 98 70% Positive 385 43% 343 46% 42 30%

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 8 Supplementary Table 5. analysis of the relations between KRAS mutation and PIK3CA mutation in colorectal cancers Variable independently associated with PIK3CA OR P KRAS mutation vs wild-type 2.65 (1.89-3.73) <0.0001 Other variables in the model CIMP high vs low/0 1.65 (1.07-2.54) 0.024 The multivariate logistic regression model initially included age, sex, year of diagnosis, tumor location, microsatellite instability, CpG island methylator phenotype, KRAS, BRAF and LINE-1 methylation. A backward elimination with threshold of p=0.05 was used to select variables in the final models. CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio.

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 9 Supplementary Table 6. PIK3CA exon 9 or exon 20 mutation in colorectal cancer and patient mortality PIK3CA status No. Colorectal cancer-specific mortality Overall mortality Stagestratified (95% Stagestratified (95% Wild-type 981 277 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 467 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 1 (referent) Exon 9 mutant (regardless of exon 20 status) Exon 20 mutant (regardless of exon 9 status) 116 33 80 22 1.03 (0.71-1.47) 0.96 (0.62-1.48) 1.15 (0.80-1.65) 1.01 (0.65-1.56) 1.15 (0.79-1.66) 1.11 (0.71-1.71) 55 37 1.02 (0.77-1.36) 0.90 (0.65-1.26) 1.09 (0.82-1.44) 0.94 (0.67-1.31) 0.98 (0.74-1.31) 0.92 (0.66-1.29) The multivariate, stage-stratified Cox regression model initially included age, sex, year of diagnosis, tumor location, tumor grade, microsatellite instability, CpG island methylator phenotype, KRAS mutation, BRAF mutation, LINE-1 methylation and PIK3CA mutation status in the other exon. A backward elimination with a threshold of P = 0.05 was used to select variables in the final models. CI, confidence interval;, hazard ratio.

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 10 Supplementary Table 7. PIK3CA mutation in colorectal cancer and patient mortality according to cohort (gender) Colorectal cancer-specific mortality Overall mortality PIK3CA status No. Stagestratified (95% Stagestratified (95% Men (HPFS) Women (NHS) Wild-type 439 120 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 227 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 1 (referent) Mutant 97 26 0.99 (0.65-1.51) 1.07 (0.70-1.65) 1.01 (0.66-1.55) 51 0.97 (0.72-1.32) 1.03 (0.76-1.40) 0.93 (0.69-1.27) Wild-type 542 157 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 240 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 1 (referent) Mutant 92 25 0.92 (0.60-1.40) 1.00 (0.65-1.52) 1.11 (0.72-1.70) 34 0.81 (0.57-1.16) 0.85 (0.60-1.23) 0.88 (0.62-1.27) The multivariate, stage-stratified Cox regression model initially included age, sex, year of diagnosis, tumor location, tumor grade, microsatellite instability, CpG island methylator phenotype, KRAS mutation, BRAF mutation and LINE-1 methylation. A backward elimination with a threshold of P = 0.05 was used to select variables in the final models. CI, confidence interval; HPFS, Health Professionals Follow-Up Study;, hazard ratio; NHS, Nurses Health Study.

Liao X et al. PIK3CA Mutation in Colorectal Cancer. Page 11 Supplementary Table 8. Combined PIK3CA and BRAF mutation status in colorectal cancer and patient mortality PIK3CA BRAF No. Colorectal cancer-specific mortality Overall mortality Stagestratified stratified Stage- (95% (95% Wild-type Wild-type 831 234 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 392 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 1 (referent) Mutant Wild-type 162 43 Wild-type Mutant 145 41 Mutant Mutant 26 8 0.93 (0.67-1.29) 1.09 (0.78-1.52) 1.24 (0.61-2.52) 0.82 (0.59-1.14) 1.11 (0.79-1.56) 1.19 (0.58-2.44) 0.80 (0.57-1.11) 1.37 (0.95-1.97) 2.40 (1.12-5.16) 73 71 12 0.93 (0.72-1.19) 1.17 (0.91-1.50) 1.06 (0.60-1.89) 0.88 (0.68-1.14) 1.21 (0.94-1.57) 1.07 (0.60-1.92) 0.80 (0.62-1.03) 1.34 (1.0-1.78) 1.48 (0.81-2.73) PIK3CA KRAS Wild-type Wild-type 659 167 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 294 1 (referent) 1 (referent) 1 (referent) Mutant Wild-type 88 21 Wild-type Mutant 318 109 Mutant Mutant 100 30 0.97 (0.61-1.52) 1.42 (1.12-1.81) 1.18 (0.80-1.74) 0.97 (0.61-1.54) 1.19 (0.93-1.52) 0.87 (0.59-1.29) 1.0 (0.63-1.59) 1.17 (0.91-1.49) 0.85 (0.57-1.27) 35 170 50 0.88 (0.62-1.25) 1.27 (1.05-1.54) 1.11 (0.82-1.50) 0.91 (0.64-1.30) 1.15 (0.95-1.39) 0.93 (0.69-1.27) 0.89 (0.62-1.27) 1.09 (0.90-1.33) 0.84 (0.62-1.15) The multivariate, stage-stratified Cox regression model initially included age, sex, year of diagnosis, tumor location, tumor grade, microsatellite instability, CpG island methylator phenotype, KRAS mutation and LINE-1 methylation. A backward elimination with a threshold of P = 0.05 was used to select variables in the final models. CI, confidence interval;, hazard ratio.