* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download The genomic landscape of chronic lymphocytic leukemia: clinical
Behavioural genetics wikipedia , lookup
Genetic code wikipedia , lookup
Quantitative trait locus wikipedia , lookup
Tay–Sachs disease wikipedia , lookup
No-SCAR (Scarless Cas9 Assisted Recombineering) Genome Editing wikipedia , lookup
Genomic library wikipedia , lookup
Biology and consumer behaviour wikipedia , lookup
Human genetic variation wikipedia , lookup
Gene therapy wikipedia , lookup
History of genetic engineering wikipedia , lookup
Pharmacogenomics wikipedia , lookup
Neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis wikipedia , lookup
Genome evolution wikipedia , lookup
Medical genetics wikipedia , lookup
Epigenetics of neurodegenerative diseases wikipedia , lookup
Koinophilia wikipedia , lookup
Genetic engineering wikipedia , lookup
Genetic testing wikipedia , lookup
Genome editing wikipedia , lookup
Site-specific recombinase technology wikipedia , lookup
Population genetics wikipedia , lookup
Frameshift mutation wikipedia , lookup
Point mutation wikipedia , lookup
Microevolution wikipedia , lookup
Designer baby wikipedia , lookup
Oncogenomics wikipedia , lookup
The genomic landscape of chronic lymphocytic leukemia: clinical implications Quesada V et al BMC Med. 2013;11:124. The last 10-15 years has been marked by the identification of a number of genetic biomarkers (eg IgVH mutational status and presence of genomic mutations) which may be used to predict the clinical course of CLL. However, although these provide insight into the biology of the disease, the genomic events that underpin the initiation and evolution of the disease are less well understood. This review article from the Oviedo group in Spain summarises some of the recent important work undertaken by the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) and the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) using large scale next generation sequencing technology has been more recently used to identify novel genetic drivers of CLL. Comparing the sequences of the entire genome or known coding regions (the exome) between tumour cells and germline cells or different subsets of tumour cells (eg mutated vs unmutated IgVH) allows identification of somatic point mutations which are known to be an important component of cancer development. The results of these studies identified a number of candidate genes (including NOTCH1, MYD88, XPO1, KLHL6, and SF3B1) that may represent genetic drivers to CLL. The importance of some of these genes (eg NOTCH1) in CLL pathogenesis has previously been described although for others, this work has identified other pathways (eg RNA splicing) that are important in CLL development and that could be therapeutically targeted. How best to use these data? The first drawback is that even the highest mutation frequencies are relatively uncommon (NOTCH1 and SF3B1 are mutated in 4% and 10% of cases of CLL respectively) with a long tail of very low frequency events. Some of these (eg deletions of 13q14) are likely to be of limited clinical significance; moreover many patients will not harbour any of the currently characterised mutations. Secondly, the genetic landscape of CLL in an individual patient is subject to variation; clonal evolution occurs in response to therapy and as such subclones harbouring significant genetic mutations may only become apparent over time. Thirdly, the frequency of a mutation does not correlate with its potential significance; CLL is a heterogenous disorder and as such rare mutations may be of significance for subsets of patients. These data provide a tantalising insight into the biology of CLL and potential future directions for treatment. Dysregulation of key genes acting as drivers to CLL development appear to have a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of the disease, and identification of these factors at an early stage may allow for more effective targeted therapy. It is however apparent that CLL is driven by multiple independent biological pathways and as such there is still much to be done before this type of genomic information can be effectively utilised for personalised treatment. Immunogenetics shows that not all MBL are equal: the larger the clone, the more similar to CLL Vardi A et al Blood. 2013;121:4521. The existence of monoclonal B cell proliferation in asymptomatic individuals (termed monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis – MBL) is well described although the cut-off for diagnosis, based on level of circulating monoclonal lymphocytosis, is uncertain. Moreover, although this has been categorised as a premalignant state analogous to the relationship between monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and myeloma, the rate of progression from MBL to CLL is variable and dependent on the level of clonal lymphocytes present in peripheral blood. In patients with MBL >0.5x109/l (termed high count MBL – HC-MBL) around 1-4% may be expected to progress to clinically apparent CLL requiring treatment per year, whereas MBL <0.5x109/l (low count MBL – LC-MBL) appears to persist over time typically without clinical progression. The reasons for the differences in the behaviour of LC-MBL and HC-MBL are uncertain. This study assessed IgVH repertoire and B cell receptor (BcR) stereotypy in over 300 cases of MBL from a number of European Centres. The results of this analysis demonstrated firstly that the frequency of unmutated IgVH sequence (germline homology ≥98%) between LC-MBL and HC-MBL was similar (around 25%) and less than that observed in cases of CLL (45%), although the immunoglobulin gene repertoire employed was markedly different (eg suppressed frequency of IGVHV1-69 and over-representation of IGVHV4-59/61 in cases of LC-MBL). Secondly, comparison of the frequency of CLL specific BcR stereotypes between LC-MBL and HC-MBL demonstrated a significantly greater frequency of BcR stereotypy in HC-MCL (21.9% - similar to that in stage 0 CLL) than in LCMCL (5.5%). The results of this study suggest for the first time that LC-MBL and HC-MBL are biologically distinct entities and suggest that the increasing BcR stereotypy observed in larger clones may underpin their different clinical behaviour. It would however also be possible to contend that LC-MBL may in fact have little relation to CLL and should be better be regarded as a physiological process related to ageing based on the pattern of IgVH expression eg the over-representation of IGVH4-59/61 (more common in the elderly) and lack of BcR stereotypy. Balanced against this contention is the previously published observation that LC-MBL and HC-MBL both harbour the same recurrent genetic mutations (deletions of 17p13, 11q23, 13q14 and trisomy 12) which are frequently observed in CLL. The authors speculate that that the genetic mutations may be acquired early in the timeline of MBL as a result of chronic antigenic stimulation (supported by the multiple productive IgVH rearrangements observed in LC-MBL cases) and leading to an aberrant phenotype, but that additional genetic cofactors are required to drive progression to HC-MBL or CLL. This remains a hypothesis and further work would be needed to elucidate why some LC-MBL clones are contained whilst others transit rapidly to HC-MBL or a disease phenotype. A diagnosis of LC-MBL can only be made using high sensitivity flow cytometry due to the small size of the B-cell clone (typically <0.001x109/l) and taken together with the apparent lack of progression over time, this disease classification is not of significance for research rather than clinical practice. Nonetheless, the observations that MBL is not a priori a pre-malignant disease provides further insight into the ontogeny of CLL.