BACKGROUND Little is known about the genomic differences between metastatic lower tract urothelial carcinoma (LTUC) and upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). We compare genomic features of primary and metastatic UTUC and LTUC tumors in a cohort of patients with end-stage disease.METHODS We performed whole-exome sequencing on matched primary and metastatic tumor samples (n = 37) collected via rapid autopsy of 7 patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Inter- and intrapatient mutational burden, mutational signatures, predicted deleterious mutations, and somatic copy number variations (sCNVs) were analyzed.RESULTS We investigated 3 patients with UTUC (3 primary samples, 13 metastases) and 4 patients with LTUC (4 primary samples, 17 metastases). We found that somatic single-nucleotide variant (sSNV) burden was higher in metastatic LTUC compared with UTUC. Moreover, the apolipoprotein B mRNA editing enzyme, catalytic polypeptide-like (APOBEC), mutational signature was pervasive in metastatic LTUC and less so in UTUC. Despite a lower overall sSNV burden, UTUC displayed greater inter- and intra-individual genomic distances at the copy number level between primary and metastatic tumors than LTUC. Our data also indicate that metastatic UTUC lesions can arise from small clonal populations present in the primary cancer. Importantly, putative druggable mutations were found across patients with the majority shared across all metastases within a patient.CONCLUSIONS UTUC demonstrated a lower overall mutational burden but greater structural variability compared with LTUC. Our findings suggest that metastatic UTUC displays a greater spectrum of copy number divergence from LTUC. Importantly, we identified druggable lesions shared across metastatic samples, which demonstrate a level of targetable homogeneity within individual patients.FUNDING NIH, Seattle Translation Tumor Research Program in Bladder Cancer, Howard J. Cohen Bladder Cancer Foundation, Johns Hopkins Greenberg Bladder Cancer Institute, Department of Defense Prostate Cancer Research Program, American Association for Cancer Research, Burroughs Wellcome Fund, David Matthews, and the Stinchcomb Memorial Funds.
Brian R. Winters, Navonil De Sarkar, Sonali Arora, Hamid Bolouri, Sujata Jana, Funda Vakar-Lopez, Heather H. Cheng, Michael T. Schweizer, Evan Y. Yu, Petros Grivas, John K. Lee, Lori Kollath, Sarah K. Holt, Lisa McFerrin, Gavin Ha, Peter S. Nelson, Robert B. Montgomery, Jonathan L. Wright, Hung-Ming Lam, Andrew C. Hsieh
Usage data is cumulative from May 2019 through February 2020.
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.