Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 536

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Heterogeneity of kinase inhibitor resistance mechanisms in GIST

Open access
Liegl, B, Kepten, I, Le, C, Zhu, M, Demetri, GD, Heinrich, MC, Fletcher, CDM, Corless, CL, Fletcher, JA·2008·The Journal of Pathology
DOI 10.1002/path.2382
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Most GIST patients develop clinical resistance to KIT/PDGFRA tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). However, it is unclear whether clinical resistance results from single or multiple molecular mechanisms in each patient. KIT and PDGFRA mutations were evaluated in 53 GIST metastases obtained from 14 patients who underwent surgical debulking after progression on imatinib or sunitinib. To interrogate possible resistance mechanisms across a broad biological spectrum of GISTs, inter‐ and intra‐lesional heterogeneity of molecular drug‐resistance mechanisms were evaluated in the following: conventional KIT (CD117)‐positive GISTs with KIT mutations in exon 9, 11 or 13; KIT‐negative GISTs; GISTs with unusual morphology; and KIT/PDGFRA wild‐type GISTs. Genomic KIT and PDGFRA mutations were characterized systematically, using complementary techniques including D‐HPLC for KIT exons 9, 11–18 and PDGFRA exons 12, 14, 18, and mutation‐specific PCR (V654A, D820G, N822K, Y823D). Primary KIT oncogenic mutations were found in 11/14 patients (79%). Of these, 9/11 (83%), had secondary drug‐resistant KIT mutations, including six (67%) with two to five different secondary mutations in separate metastases, and three (34%) with two secondary KIT mutations in the same metastasis. The secondary mutations clustered in the KIT ATP binding pocket and kinase catalytic regions. FISH analyses revealed KIT amplicons in 2/10 metastases lacking secondary KIT mutations. This study demonstrates extensive intra‐ and inter‐lesional heterogeneity of resistance mutations and gene amplification in patients with clinically progressing GIST. KIT kinase resistance mutations were not found in KIT/PDGFRA wild‐type GISTs or in KIT ‐mutant GISTs showing unusual morphology and/or loss of KIT expression by IHC, indicating that resistance mechanisms are fundamentally different in these tumours. Our observations underscore the heterogeneity of clinical TKI resistance, and highlight the therapeutic challenges involved in salvaging patients after clinical progression on TKI monotherapies. Copyright © 2008 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/path.2382

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 536

Metadata

Authors
Liegl, B., Kepten, I., Le, C., Zhu, M., Demetri, G., Heinrich, M., Fletcher, C., Corless, C., & Fletcher, J.
Venue
The Journal of Pathology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-07-11
Volume
216
Issue
1
Pages
64-74
ISSN
  • 0022-3417 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-9896
DOI
10.1002/path.2382
OpenAlex
W2143295396
Cited by
536
References
28
FWCI
26.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.