Genomic Copy Number Aberrations and Extremely Poor Survival in High-Risk Neuroblastoma

Key Points

  • Distal 6q losses were associated with 10-year survival probability of 3.4%.
  • Amplifications of regions not encompassing the MYCN locus were associated with 10-year survival probability of 5.8%.

In a study reported in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Depuydt et al identified two genomic copy number aberrations associated with risk of extremely poor survival in patients with high-risk neuroblastoma.

Study Details

The international collaborative study included normalized high-resolution DNA copy number data (arrayCGH and SNP arrays) from 556 high-risk neuroblastomas obtained at diagnosis from nine collaborative groups and segmented using a single method (SegAnnDB).

Poor Survival

Two types of copy number aberrations were identified as being associated with extremely poor outcome. Distal 6q losses were detected in 5.9% of patients and were associated with a 10-year survival probability of 3.4% (P < .002 vs absence of distal 6q loss). Amplifications of regions not encompassing the MYCN locus were identified in 18.1% of patients and were associated with a 10-year survival probability of 5.8% (P < .001 vs presence of other amplicons).

The investigators concluded, “Using a unique large copy number data set of high-risk neuroblastoma cases, we identified a small subset of high-risk neuroblastoma patients with extremely low survival probability that might be eligible for inclusion in clinical trials of new therapeutics. The amplicons may also nominate alternative treatments that target the amplified genes.”

The study was supported by the National Cancer Institute, Fund for Scientific Research Flanders, ATIP-Avenir Program, ARC Foundation, Worldwide Cancer Research Foundation, French National Research Agency, and others.

Katleen De Preter Eng, PhD, of the Center for Medical Genetics Ghent, is the corresponding author for the Journal of the National Cancer Institute article.

The content in this post has not been reviewed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. (ASCO®) and does not necessarily reflect the ideas and opinions of ASCO®.


Advertisement

Advertisement



;
Advertisement

By continuing to browse this site you permit us and our partners to place identification cookies on your browser and agree to our use of cookies to identify you for marketing. Read our Privacy Policy to learn more.