Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Prognosis and Therapeutic Implications for Emerging Colorectal Cancer Subtypes

  • Prevention and Early Detection (N Arber, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Colorectal Cancer Reports

Abstract

Although colorectal cancer was one of the first solid tumors to be characterized at the molecular level, a consensus biological classification for researchers and clinicians is lacking. Prognosis and therapy are mainly defined on the basis of patient characteristics and histopathological findings, despite studies showing that, according to mutation and gene-expression profiles, the evolution of colorectal cancer differs substantially, probably because of the high heterogeneity of the disease. In this paper we review the original molecular classifications of colorectal cancer, microsatellite and chromosomal unstable tumors, and more recent attempts to characterize the disease by using intrinsic gene expression clustering methods. These have identified at least three subtypes with different hypermutation, proliferation, and epithelial and mesenchymal features. Furthermore, we discuss preliminary data from evaluation of the potential effect of colorectal cancer subtype on prognosis and treatment response.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63:11–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Labianca R, Nordlinger B, Beretta GD. Primary colon cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, adjuvant treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2010;21 suppl 5:v70–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sinicrope FA, Sargent DJ. Molecular pathways: microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer: prognosis, predictive, and therapeutic implications. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:1506–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Vecchione L, Jacobs B, Normanno N, et al. EGFR-targeted therapy. Exp Cell Res. 2011;317:2765–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lengauer C, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B. Genetic instability in colorectal cancers. Nature. 1997;386:623–7. This seminal manuscript describes the relationship between genetic instability and colorectal cancer.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Grady WM, Carethers JM. Genomic and epigenetic instability in colorectal cancer pathogenesis. Gastroenterology. 2008;135:1079–99.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Malumbres M, Barbacid M. RAS oncogenes: the first 30 years. Rev Cancer. 2003;3:459–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. McCubrey JA, Steelman LS, Kempf CR, et al. Therapeutic resistance resulting from mutations in Raf/MEK/ERK and PI3K/PTEN/Akt/m-TOR signaling pathways. J Cell Physiol. 2011;226:2762–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Miyaki M, Kuroki T. Role of Smad4 (DPC4) inactivation in human cancer. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2003;306:799–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Baker SJ, Preisinger AC, Jessup JM, et al. p53 gene mutations occur in combination with 17p allelic deletions as late events in colorectal tumorgenesis. Cancer Res. 1990;50:7717–22.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Whalter A, Houlston R, Tomlinsion I. Associations between chromosomal instability and prognosis in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Gut. 2008;57:941–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fearon ER, Cho KR, Nigro JM, et al. Identification of a chromosome 18q gene that is altered in colorectal cancers. Science. 1990;247:49–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ionov Y, Peinado MA, Malkhosyan S, et al. Ubiquitous somatic mutations in simple repeated sequences reveal a new mechanism for colonic carcinogenesis. Nature. 1993;363:558–61. This manuscript explains how MSI can be one of the causes that would lead to carcinogenesis in colorectal cancer.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Liu B, Nicolaides NC, Markowitz S, et al. Mismatch repair gene defects in sporadic colorectal cancers with microsatellite instability. Nat Genet. 1995;9:48–55. This manuscript describes how MSI is associated with mismatch repair gene defects.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Toyota M, Ahuja, Ohe Toyota M, et al. CpG island methylator phenotype in colorectal cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96:8681–6. This is the first study describing CpG island methylation as an important event in colorectal cancer carcinogenesis.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ogino S, Nosho K, Kirkner GJ, et al. CpG island methylator phenotype, microsatellite instability, BRAF mutation and clinical outcome in colon cancer. Gut. 2009;58:90–6.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Weisenberger DJ, Siegmund KD, Campan M, et al. CpG island methylator phenotype underlies sporadic microsatellite instability and is tightly associated with BRAF mutation in colorectal cancer. Nat Genet. 2006;38:787–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Samowitz WS, Albertsen H, Herrick J, et al. Evaluation of a large population-based simple supports a CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) in colon cancer. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:837–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. East JE, Saunders BP, Jass JR. Sporadic and syndromic hyperplastic polyps and serrated adenomas of colon: classification, molecular genetics, natural history and clinical management. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2008;37:25–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gyeon Hoon Kang. Four Molecular subtypes of colorectal cancer and their precursor Lesions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011;135:698–703.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular characterization of human colon and rectal cancer. Nature. 2012;487:330–7. This is the most extensive genome analysis in colorectal cancer describing the genomic aberrations in this tumor.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Simons JM, Hughes LAE, Smits KM, et al. A novel classification of colorectal tumors based on microsatellite instability, the CpG island methylator phenotype and chromosomal instability: implications for prognosis. Ann Oncol. 2013;24:2048–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Domingo E, Ramamoorthy R, Oukrif D, et al. Use of multivariate analysis to suggest a new molecular classification of colorectal cancer. Pathol. 2013;229:441–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumors. Nature. 2000;406:747–52. Genetic profile widely accepted as classifying breast cancer into four subtypes.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Verhaak RG, Hoadley KA, Purdom E, et al. Integrated genomic analysis identifies clinically relevant subtypes of glioblastoma characterized by abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR and NF1. Cancer Cell. 2010;17:98–110.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Loboda A, Nebozhyn MV, Watters JW, et al. EMT is the dominant program in human colon cancer. BMC Med Genomics. 2011;4:9. This manuscript describes a genetic profile for colon cancer clearly associated with epithelial and mesenchymal phenotypes, later confirmed by many studies.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Oh SC, Park Y-Y, Park ES, et al. Prognostic gene expression signature associated with two molecularly distinct subtypes of colorectal cancer. Gut. 2012;61:1291–8.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Schlicker A, Beran G, Chresta CM, et al. Subtypes of primary colorectal tumors correlate with response to targeted treatment in colorectal cell lines. BMC Med Genomics. 2012;31(5):66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Perez-Villamil B, Romera-Lopez A, Hernandez-Prieto S, et al. Colon cancer molecular subtypes identified by expression profiling and associated to stroma, mucinous type and different clinical behavior. BMC Cancer. 2012;12:260.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sadanandam A, Costas A, Lyssiotis, et al. A colorectal cancer classification system that associates cellular phenotype and responses to therapy. Nature Med. 2013;19(5):619–26. One of the main colorectal subtypes classifications and very important because its implications for treatment in adjuvant and systemic setting and the use of cetuximab.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Budinska E, Popovici V, Tejpar S, et al. Gene expression patterns unveil a new level of molecular heterogeneity in colorectal cancer. J Pathol. 2013;231:63–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. De Sousa E, Melo F, Wang X, et al. Poor prognosis colon cancer is defined by molecularly distinct subtype and develops from serrated precursors. Nature Med. 2013;19:614–8. Important reference that shows that subtypes are associated with MSI or CIN status and that there is a worse prognosis subtype clearly defined.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Roepman P, Schlicker A, Tabernero J, et al. Colorectal cancer intrinsic subtypes predict chemotherapy benefit, deficient mismatch repair and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition. Int J Cancer 2013 Jul 13. An important manuscript on the colorectal cancer subtypes that correlates these subtypes with proliferation, EMT, MSI, and response to treatment.

  34. Salazar R, Roepman P, Capella G, et al. Gene expression signature to improve prognosis prediction of stage II and III colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:17–24. One of the first genetic profiles to predict prognosis, and the basis for Ref. [33].

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Popat A. S, Hueber R, Houlston RS. Systematic review of microsatellite instability and colorectal cancer prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:609–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Guastedisegni C, Colafranceschi M, Ottini L, et al. Microsatellite instability as a marker of prognosis and response to therapy: a meta-analysis of colorectal cancer survival date. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:2788–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Finak G, Bertos N, Pepin F, et al. Stroma gene expression predicts clinical outcome in breast cancer. Nature Med. 2008;14:518–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Mesker WE, Liefers GJ, Jungeburt JM, et al. Presence of a high amount of stroma and downregulation of SMAD4 predict for worse survival for stage I-II colon cancer patients. Cell Oncol. 2009;31:169–78.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sargent D, Marsoni S, Thibodeau SN, et al. Confirmation of deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) as a predictive marker for lack of benefit from 5-FU based chemotherapy in stage II and III colon cancer (CC). A pooled molecular analysis of randomized chemotherapy trials. Proc ASCO. 2008;26:A4008. This abstract shows that tumors with the MSI phenotype do not benefit from chemotherapy in adjuvant setting.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Lievre A, Bachet JB, Le Corre D, et al. KRAS mutation status is predictive of response to cetuximab therapy in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 2006;66:3992–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

ᅟ

Conflict of Interest

Enrique Sanz-García, Elena Elez, Teresa Macarulla, and Rodrigo Dienstmann declare that they have no conflict of interest. Ramon Salazar has served as a private investigator of international studies for Agendia. Josep Tabernero has received compensation for service as a Consultant from Amgen, Boehringer–Ingeheim, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Genentech, Imclone, Lilly, Merck kgaA, Millennium, Novartis, Onyx, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Celgene, and has received honoraria for presentations from Amgen, Merck kgaA, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Digestive Oncology Unit, Medical Oncology Department, Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, P. Vall d’Hebron, 119-129, 08035, Barcelona, Spain

    Enrique Sanz-García, Elena Elez, Teresa Macarulla & Josep Tabernero

  2. SAGE Bionetworks, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA

    Rodrigo Dienstmann

  3. Institut Català d’Oncologia. IDIBELL, Av. Gran Via, 199-203, L’Hospitalet, 08907, Barcelona, Spain

    Ramon Salazar

  4. Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology, P. Vall d’Hebron, 119-129, 08035, Barcelona, Spain

    Josep Tabernero

Authors
  1. Enrique Sanz-García
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elena Elez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Teresa Macarulla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rodrigo Dienstmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ramon Salazar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Josep Tabernero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Josep Tabernero.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sanz-García, E., Elez, E., Macarulla, T. et al. Prognosis and Therapeutic Implications for Emerging Colorectal Cancer Subtypes. Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep 10, 55–61 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-013-0205-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-013-0205-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation