Search

The cyclin pathway may confer resistance to standard treatments but also offer novel therapeutic opportunities in prostate cancer. Herein, we analyzed prostate cancer samples (majority metastatic) using comprehensive genomic profiling performed by next-generation sequencing (315 genes, >500× coverage) for alterations in activating and sensitizing cyclin genes (CDK4 amplification, CDK6 amplification, CCND1, CCND2, CCND3, CDKN2B [loss], CDKN2A [loss], SMARCB1), androgen receptor (AR) gene, and coalterations in genes leading to cyclin inhibitor therapeutic resistance (RB1 and CCNE1). Overall, cyclin sensitizing pathway genomic abnormalities were found in 9.7% of the 5,356 tumors. Frequent alterations included CCND1 amplification (4.2%) and CDKN2A and B loss (2.4% each). Alterations in possible resistance genes, RB1 and CCNE1, were detected in 9.7% (up to 54.6% in neuroendocrine) and 1.2% of cases, respectively, whereas AR alterations were seen in 20.9% of tumors (~27.3% in anaplastic). Cyclin sensitizing alterations were also more frequently associated with concomitant AR alterations.

Background: We describe the landscape of cyclin and interactive gene pathway alterations in 190,247 solid tumors. Methods: Using comprehensive genomic profiling (315 genes, >500× coverage), samples were analyzed for alterations in activating/sensitizing cyclin genes (CDK4 amplification, CDK6 amplification, CCND1, CCND2, CCND3, CDKN2B [loss], CDKN2A [loss], SMARCB1), hormone genes (estrogen receptor 1 [ESR1], androgen receptor [AR]), and co‐alterations in genes leading to cyclin inhibitor therapeutic resistance (RB1 and CCNE1). Results: Alterations in at least one cyclin activating/sensitizing gene occurred in 24% of malignancies. Tumors that frequently harbored at least one cyclin alteration were brain gliomas (47.1%), esophageal (40.3%) and bladder cancer (37.9%), and mesotheliomas (37.9%). The most frequent alterations included CDKN2A (13.9%) and CDKN2B loss (12.5%). Examples of unique patterns of alterations included CCND1 amplification in breast cancer (17.3%); CDK4 alterations in sarcomas (12%); CCND2 in testicular cancer (23.4%), and SMARCB1 mutations in kidney cancer (3% overall, 90% in malignant rhabdoid tumors). Alterations in resistance genes RB1 and CCNE1 affected 7.2% and 3.6% of samples. Co‐occurrence analysis demonstrated a lower likelihood of concomitant versus isolated alterations in cyclin activating/sensitizing and resistance genes (odds ratio [OR], 0.35; p <.001), except in colorectal, cervical, and small intestine cancers. AR and cyclin activating/sensitizing alterations in prostate cancer co‐occurred more frequently (vs. AR alterations and wild‐type cyclin activating/sensitizing alterations) (OR, 1.79; p <.001) as did ESR1 and cyclin activating/sensitizing alterations in breast (OR, 1.62; p <.001) and cervical cancer (OR, 4.08; p =.04) (vs. ESR1 and cyclin wild‐type activating/sensitizing alterations). Conclusion: Cyclin pathway alterations vary according to tumor type/histology, informing opportunities for targeted therapy, including for rare cancers. Implications for Practice: Cyclin pathway genomic abnormalities are frequent in human solid tumors, with substantial variation according to tumor site and histology. Opportunities for targeted therapy emerge with comprehensive profiling of this pathway. This article identifies molecular alterations in genes involved in the cyclin activation/sensitizing pathways and reports coexisting resistance and hormone pathway alterations in 190,247 diverse solid tumors that underwent next‐generation sequencing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]