Mutations of the EGFR, K-ras, EML4–ALK, and BRAF genes in resected pathological stage I lung adenocarcinoma
Background and purpose The EGFR, K-ras, EML4–ALK, and BRAF genes are oncogenic drivers of lung adenocarcinoma. We conducted this study to analyze the mutations of these genes in stage I adenocarcinoma. Methods The subjects of this retrospective study were 256 patients with resected stage I lung aden...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Surgery today (Tokyo, Japan) Japan), 2016-09, Vol.46 (9), p.1091-1098 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background and purpose
The EGFR, K-ras, EML4–ALK, and BRAF genes are oncogenic drivers of lung adenocarcinoma. We conducted this study to analyze the mutations of these genes in stage I adenocarcinoma.
Methods
The subjects of this retrospective study were 256 patients with resected stage I lung adenocarcinoma. We analyzed mutations of the EGFR, K-ras, and BRAF genes, and the EML4–ALK fusion gene. We also assessed disease-free survival (DFS) to evaluate the prognostic value and overall survival (OS) to evaluate the predictive value of treatment after recurrence.
Results
Mutations of the EGFR, K-ras, EML4–ALK, and BRAF genes were detected in 120 (46.8 %), 14 (5.5 %), 6 (2.3 %), and 2 (0.8 %) of the 256 tumors. Two tumors had double mutations (0.8 %). The incidence of EGFR mutations was significantly higher in women than in men. The EML4–ALK fusion gene was detected only in younger patients. The DFS and OS of the K-ras mutant group were significantly worse than those of the EGFR mutant group, the EML4–ALK fusion gene group, and the wild-type group. Six of the seven patients with the EML4–ALK fusion gene are still alive without recurrent disease.
Conclusions
In patients with stage I adenocarcinoma, mutation of the K-ras gene was a poor prognostic factor for recurrence. The presence of a mutation of the EGFR or EML4–ALK gene was not a prognostic factor. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0941-1291 1436-2813 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00595-015-1295-z |