DNA methylation, transcriptome and genetic copy number signatures of diffuse cerebral WHO grade II/III gliomas resolve cancer heterogeneity and development.
Astrocytoma
Cellular composition
DNA methylation
Epigenetics
Glioma
Molecular subtypes
Prognosis
Tumor microenvironment
Journal
Acta neuropathologica communications
ISSN: 2051-5960
Titre abrégé: Acta Neuropathol Commun
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101610673
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 04 2019
25 04 2019
Historique:
received:
17
01
2019
accepted:
18
03
2019
entrez:
27
4
2019
pubmed:
27
4
2019
medline:
22
4
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Diffuse lower WHO grade II and III gliomas (LGG) are slowly progressing brain tumors, many of which eventually transform into a more aggressive type. LGG is characterized by widespread genetic and transcriptional heterogeneity, yet little is known about the heterogeneity of the DNA methylome, its function in tumor biology, coupling with the transcriptome and tumor microenvironment and its possible impact for tumor development. We here present novel DNA methylation data of an LGG-cohort collected in the German Glioma Network containing about 85% isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutated tumors and performed a combined bioinformatics analysis using patient-matched genome and transcriptome data. Stratification of LGG based on gene expression and DNA-methylation provided four consensus subtypes. We characterized them in terms of genetic alterations, functional context, cellular composition, tumor microenvironment and their possible impact for treatment resistance and prognosis. Glioma with astrocytoma-resembling phenotypes constitute the largest fraction of nearly 60%. They revealed largest diversity and were divided into four expression and three methylation groups which only partly match each other thus reflecting largely decoupled expression and methylation patterns. We identified a novel G-protein coupled receptor and a cancer-related 'keratinization' methylation signature in in addition to the glioma-CpG island methylator phenotype (G-CIMP) signature. These different signatures overlap and combine in various ways giving rise to diverse methylation and expression patterns that shape the glioma phenotypes. The decrease of global methylation in astrocytoma-like LGG associates with higher WHO grade, age at diagnosis and inferior prognosis. We found analogies between astrocytoma-like LGG with grade IV IDH-wild type tumors regarding possible worsening of treatment resistance along a proneural-to-mesenchymal axis. Using gene signature-based inference we elucidated the impact of cellular composition of the tumors including immune cell bystanders such as macrophages. Genomic, epigenomic and transcriptomic factors act in concert but partly also in a decoupled fashion what underpins the need for integrative, multidimensional stratification of LGG by combining these data on gene and cellular levels to delineate mechanisms of gene (de-)regulation and to enable better patient stratification and individualization of treatment.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Diffuse lower WHO grade II and III gliomas (LGG) are slowly progressing brain tumors, many of which eventually transform into a more aggressive type. LGG is characterized by widespread genetic and transcriptional heterogeneity, yet little is known about the heterogeneity of the DNA methylome, its function in tumor biology, coupling with the transcriptome and tumor microenvironment and its possible impact for tumor development.
METHODS
We here present novel DNA methylation data of an LGG-cohort collected in the German Glioma Network containing about 85% isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutated tumors and performed a combined bioinformatics analysis using patient-matched genome and transcriptome data.
RESULTS
Stratification of LGG based on gene expression and DNA-methylation provided four consensus subtypes. We characterized them in terms of genetic alterations, functional context, cellular composition, tumor microenvironment and their possible impact for treatment resistance and prognosis. Glioma with astrocytoma-resembling phenotypes constitute the largest fraction of nearly 60%. They revealed largest diversity and were divided into four expression and three methylation groups which only partly match each other thus reflecting largely decoupled expression and methylation patterns. We identified a novel G-protein coupled receptor and a cancer-related 'keratinization' methylation signature in in addition to the glioma-CpG island methylator phenotype (G-CIMP) signature. These different signatures overlap and combine in various ways giving rise to diverse methylation and expression patterns that shape the glioma phenotypes. The decrease of global methylation in astrocytoma-like LGG associates with higher WHO grade, age at diagnosis and inferior prognosis. We found analogies between astrocytoma-like LGG with grade IV IDH-wild type tumors regarding possible worsening of treatment resistance along a proneural-to-mesenchymal axis. Using gene signature-based inference we elucidated the impact of cellular composition of the tumors including immune cell bystanders such as macrophages.
CONCLUSIONS
Genomic, epigenomic and transcriptomic factors act in concert but partly also in a decoupled fashion what underpins the need for integrative, multidimensional stratification of LGG by combining these data on gene and cellular levels to delineate mechanisms of gene (de-)regulation and to enable better patient stratification and individualization of treatment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31023364
doi: 10.1186/s40478-019-0704-8
pii: 10.1186/s40478-019-0704-8
pmc: PMC6482573
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
59Références
Bioinformatics. 2015 Oct 1;31(19):3225-7
pubmed: 26063839
Am J Pathol. 2009 Apr;174(4):1149-53
pubmed: 19246647
Clin Cancer Res. 2012 May 1;18(9):2490-501
pubmed: 22415316
Cell. 2016 Jan 28;164(3):550-63
pubmed: 26824661
Cancer Cell. 2018 Feb 12;33(2):309-321.e5
pubmed: 29438699
Nat Biotechnol. 2010 Oct;28(10):1079-88
pubmed: 20944600
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Dec 23;105(51):20422-7
pubmed: 19088187
Clin Epigenetics. 2017 Apr 4;9:32
pubmed: 28392842
Br J Cancer. 2014 May 13;110(10):2560-8
pubmed: 24691423
Cell Rep. 2018 Apr 10;23(2):637-651
pubmed: 29642018
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 10;9(3):e91216
pubmed: 24614622
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2015 Jul 16;1:15017
pubmed: 27188790
Cancer Cell. 2010 Jan 19;17(1):98-110
pubmed: 20129251
Cancer Cell. 2010 May 18;17(5):510-22
pubmed: 20399149
Science. 2017 Mar 31;355(6332):
pubmed: 28360267
BioData Min. 2012 Oct 08;5(1):18
pubmed: 23043905
Expert Rev Neurother. 2018 Sep;18(9):729-737
pubmed: 30099909
Cancer Cell. 2017 Jul 10;32(1):42-56.e6
pubmed: 28697342
Nat Methods. 2015 May;12(5):453-7
pubmed: 25822800
Nature. 2007 Aug 2;448(7153):553-60
pubmed: 17603471
Mol Carcinog. 2010 Jun;49(6):532-44
pubmed: 20082319
Cell Signal. 2017 Sep;37:81-92
pubmed: 28600192
PLoS One. 2012;7(1):e29686
pubmed: 22235325
Int J Cancer. 2014 Oct 15;135(8):1822-31
pubmed: 24615357
Genome Res. 2001 May;11(5):685-702
pubmed: 11337468
Neuro Oncol. 2011 Jan;13(1):84-98
pubmed: 20926426
Oncogene. 2012 May 10;31(19):2491-8
pubmed: 21996744
BMC Bioinformatics. 2009 Sep 23;10:307
pubmed: 19775443
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 25;372(26):2499-508
pubmed: 26061753
Oncotarget. 2013 Apr;4(4):636-46
pubmed: 23592437
Cancer Cell. 2012 Oct 16;22(4):425-37
pubmed: 23079654
Nature. 2015 Feb 19;518(7539):317-30
pubmed: 25693563
Nat Biotechnol. 2010 Aug;28(8):817-25
pubmed: 20657582
Int J Mol Sci. 2018 Feb 01;19(2):
pubmed: 29389898
Nature. 2018 Mar 22;555(7697):469-474
pubmed: 29539639
Cell. 2013 Oct 10;155(2):462-77
pubmed: 24120142
Genome Biol. 2015 May 21;16:105
pubmed: 25994056
Cancer Cell. 2015 Sep 14;28(3):307-317
pubmed: 26373278
JCI Insight. 2016;1(2):
pubmed: 26973881
Immunotherapy. 2012 Jan;4(1):59-75
pubmed: 22150001
Nat Neurosci. 2016 Oct;19(10):1321-30
pubmed: 27526204
Brain Behav Immun. 2016 Mar;53:1-15
pubmed: 26216710
Oncogene. 2018 Nov;37(47):6136-6151
pubmed: 29995873
Cancer Res. 2016 Jun 15;76(12):3446-50
pubmed: 27256564
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Oct 3;114(40):10743-10748
pubmed: 28916733
BMC Cancer. 2015 May 13;15:399
pubmed: 25962645
BMC Bioinformatics. 2011 Jul 27;12:306
pubmed: 21794127
Oncogene. 2011 Jan 13;30(2):127-38
pubmed: 20890307
Front Immunol. 2017 Nov 07;8:1451
pubmed: 29163521
Immunity. 2013 Oct 17;39(4):782-95
pubmed: 24138885
Cell Rep. 2016 Dec 13;17(11):2994-3009
pubmed: 27974212
Acta Neuropathol. 2018 Nov;136(5):805-810
pubmed: 30259105
Nat Neurosci. 2016 Sep 27;19(10):1271-3
pubmed: 27669984
Nat Genet. 2008 May;40(5):499-507
pubmed: 18443585
Nat Genet. 2015 May;47(5):458-68
pubmed: 25848751
Acta Neuropathol. 2018 May;135(5):649-670
pubmed: 29616301
Curr Cancer Drug Targets. 2017;17(3):267-281
pubmed: 27528361
Nat Med. 2018 Oct;24(10):1611-1624
pubmed: 30150718
Nat Neurosci. 2016 Jan;19(1):20-7
pubmed: 26713745
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Jan 19;103(2):143-53
pubmed: 21163902
Epigenomics. 2018 Jun;10(6):745-764
pubmed: 29888966
Stem Cell Reports. 2013 Dec 26;2(1):36-43
pubmed: 24511466
Epigenetics. 2009 May 16;4(4):255-64
pubmed: 19550145
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2014 Apr;119:125-32
pubmed: 24582432
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Nov 15;22(22):4632-42
pubmed: 15542813
Acta Neuropathol. 2015 May;129(5):679-93
pubmed: 25783747
Acta Neuropathol. 2016 Jun;131(6):803-20
pubmed: 27157931
Lancet Oncol. 2011 Jan;12(1):83-91
pubmed: 20615753
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 25;372(26):2481-98
pubmed: 26061751
ASN Neuro. 2011 Sep 22;3(4):
pubmed: 21834792
Mol Syst Biol. 2011 Jun 07;7:497
pubmed: 21654674