Cited by 377Colorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesGenetic factors in colorectal cancerLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations

Frequency of KRAS, BRAF, and NRAS mutations in colorectal cancer

Vaughn, Cecily P., ZoBell, Scott D., Furtado, Larissa V., Baker, Christine L., Samowitz, Wade S.·2011·Genes, Chromosomes and Cancer

Abstract

Mutational analysis of KRAS codons 12 and 13 is standard for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer since mutations in these codons predict lack of response to anti‐EGFR therapies. However, even among patients whose tumors are wildtype for KRAS codons 12 and 13, only a subset respond to therapy. Since additional activating mutations downstream of EGFR may also play a role in treatment resistance, we sought to establish the frequency of these mutations. We evaluated 2121 colorectal tumors for mutations in codons 12 and 13 of the KRAS gene. A subset of these samples, comprised of 513 samples wildtype for KRAS codons 12 and 13, were tested for mutations in codons 61 and 146 of KRAS, codon 600 of BRAF, and codons 12, 13, and 61 of NRAS. Mutation status was determined by targeted pyrosequencing. Mutations in KRAS codon 12 or 13 were identified in 900/2121 (42.4%) samples. Of the 513 wildtype samples tested for additional mutations, 78 samples were mutant for BRAF, 19 for KRAS codon 61, 17 for KRAS codon 146, and 26 for NRAS. In total, 140/513 (27.3%) tumors wildtype for KRAS codons 12 and 13 harbored a mutation in another of the RAS pathway genes. While further study is needed to determine the full therapeutic implications of mutations in these codons, mutational testing of these codons may be useful for identifying a significant proportion of patients who may also be resistant to anti‐EGFR therapies. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/gcc.20854

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vaughn, C. P., ZoBell, S. D., Furtado, L. V., Baker, C. L., & Samowitz, W. S.
Affiliations
  • ARUP Institute for Clinical and Experimental Pathology (US)
  • ARUP Laboratories (United States) (US)
  • University of Utah (US)
Corresponding author
Samowitz, Wade S.
Venue
Genes, Chromosomes and Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-02-08
Volume
50
Issue
5
Pages
307-312
ISSN
  • 1045-2257 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2264
OpenAlex
W2075158341
Cited by
377
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 24
FWCI
17.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Genes Chromosomes and Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
ARUP Laboratories
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Keywords
KRAS mutation, BRAF mutation, NRAS mutation, colorectal cancer, Ras signaling, anti-EGFR therapy, anti-EGFR therapy resistance, mutation frequency
MeSH terms
Codon, DNA Mutational Analysis, Humans, Mutation, Proto-Oncogene Proteins, Genes, ras, Colorectal Neoplasms, Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras), ras Proteins, Genes, erbB-1, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review