Infrequent mutations of the PPP2R1A and PPP2R1B genes in patients with ovarian cancer

Translational Theragnosis of Ovarian Cancer: where do we stand?

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is the second most common gynecologic malignancy, accounting for approximately 220,000 deaths annually worldwide. Despite radical surgery and initial high response rates to platinum- and taxane-based chemotherapy, most patients experience a relapse, with a median progression-free survival of only 18 months. Overall survival is approximately 30% at 5 years from the diagnosis. In comparison, patients out from breast cancer are more than 80 % after ten years from the disease discovery. In spite of a large number of published fundamental and applied research, and clinical trials, novel therapies are urgently needed to improve outcomes of the ovarian cancer. The success of new drugs development in ovarian cancer will strongly depend on both fully genomic disease characterization and, then, availability of biomarkers able to identify women likely to benefit from a given new therapy.

METHODS

In this review, the focus is given to describe how complex is the diseases under the simple name of ovarian cancer, in terms of cell tumor types, histotypes, subtypes, and specific gene mutation or differently expressed in the tumor with respect the healthy ovary. The first- and second-line pharmacological treatment clinically used over the last fifty years are also described. Noteworthy achievements in vitro and in vivo tested new drugs are also summarized. Recent literature related to up to date ovarian cancer knowledge, its detection by biomarkers and chemotherapy was searched from several articles on Pubmed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE and various Governmental Agencies till April 2019.

RESULTS

The papers referenced by this review allow a deep analysis of status of the art in the classification of the several types of ovarian cancer, the present knowledge of diagnosis based on biomarkers and imaging techniques, and the therapies developed over the past five decades.

CONCLUSION

This review aims at stimulating more multi-disciplinary efforts to identify a panel of novel and more specific biomarkers to be used to screen patients for a very early diagnosis, to have prognosis and therapy efficacy indications. The desired final goal would be to have available tools allowing to reduce the recurrence rate, increase both the disease progression free interval and of course the overall survival at five years from the diagnosis that today is still very low.

PP2A: A Promising Biomarker and Therapeutic Target in Endometrial Cancer

Over the last decade, the use of targeted therapies has immensely increased in the treatment of cancer. However, treatment for endometrial carcinomas (ECs) has lagged behind, although potential molecular markers have been identified. This is particularly problematic for the type II ECs, since these aggressive tumors are usually not responsive toward the current standard therapies. Therefore, type II ECs are responsible for most EC-related deaths, indicating the need for new treatment options. Interestingly, molecular analyses of type II ECs have uncovered frequent genetic alterations (up to 40%) in PPP2R1A, encoding the Aα subunit of the tumor suppressive heterotrimeric protein phosphatase type 2A (PP2A). PPP2R1A mutations were also reported in type I ECs and other common gynecologic cancers, albeit at much lower frequencies (0-7%). Nevertheless, PP2A inactivation in the latter cancer types is common via other mechanisms, in particular by increased expression of Cancerous Inhibitor of PP2A (CIP2A) and PP2A Methylesterase-1 (PME-1) proteins. In this review, we discuss the therapeutic potential of direct and indirect PP2A targeting compounds, possibly in combination with other anti-cancer drugs, in EC. Furthermore, we investigate the potential of the PP2A status as a predictive and/or prognostic marker for type I and II ECs.

Endometriosis-associated ovarian cancer: What have we learned so far?

Endometriosis is defined as the presence of ectopic endometrial tissue outside of the uterine cavity, most commonly in the ovaries and peritoneum. It is a complex disease that is influenced by multiple factors. It is also a common gynecological disorder and affects approximately 10-15% of all women of reproductive age. Recent molecular and pathological studies indicate that endometriosis may serve as a precursor of ovarian cancer (endometriosis-associated ovarian cancer, EAOC), particularly endometrioid and clear cell ovarian cancers. Although histological and epidemiological studies have demonstrated that endometriosis has a malignant potential, the molecular mechanism that underlies the malignant transformation of endometriosis is still controversial, and the precise mechanism of carcinogenesis must be fully elucidated. Currently, the development and improvement of a new sequencing technology, next-generation sequencing (NGS), has been increasingly relevant in cancer genomics research. Recently, NGS has also been utilized in clinical oncology to advance the personalized treatment of cancer. In addition, the sensitivity, speed, and cost make NGS a highly attractive platform compared to other sequencing modalities. For this reason, NGS may lead to the identification of driver mutations and underlying pathways associated with EAOC. Here, we present an overview of the molecular pathways that have led to the current opinions on the relationship between endometriosis and ovarian cancer.

Frequent POLE1 p.S297F mutation in Chinese patients with ovarian endometrioid carcinoma

The catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE1) functions primarily in nuclear DNA replication and repair. Recently, POLE1 mutations were detected frequently in colorectal and endometrial carcinomas while with lower frequency in several other types of cancer, and the p.P286R and p.V411L mutations were the potential mutation hotspots in human cancers. Nevertheless, the mutation frequency of POLE1 in ovarian cancer still remains largely unknown. Here, we screened a total of 251 Chinese samples with distinct subtypes of ovarian carcinoma for the presence of POLE1 hotspot mutations by direct sequencing. A heterozygous somatic POLE1 mutation, p.S297F (c.890C>T), but not p.P286R and p.V411L hotspot mutations observed in other cancer types, was identified in 3 out of 37 (8.1%) patients with ovarian endometrioid carcinoma; this mutation was evolutionarily highly conserved from Homo sapiens to Schizosaccharomyces. Of note, the POLE1 mutation coexisted with mutation in the ovarian cancer-associated PPP2R1A (protein phosphatase 2, regulatory subunit A, α) gene in a 46-year-old patient, who was also diagnosed with ectopic endometriosis in the benign ovary. In addition, a 45-year-old POLE1-mutated ovarian endometrioid carcinoma patient was also diagnosed with uterine leiomyoma while the remaining 52-year-old POLE1-mutated patient showed no additional distinctive clinical manifestation. In contrast to high frequency of POLE1 mutations in ovarian endometrioid carcinoma, no POLE1 mutations were identified in patients with other subtypes of ovarian carcinoma. Our results showed for the first time that the POLE1 p.S297F mutation, but not p.P286R and p.V411L hotspot mutations observed in other cancer types, was frequent in Chinese ovarian endometrioid carcinoma, but absent in other subtypes of ovarian carcinoma. These results implicated that POLE1 p.S297F mutation might be actively involved in the pathogenesis of ovarian endometrioid carcinoma, but might not be actively involved in other subtypes of ovarian carcinoma.