Cited by 87Genetic factors in colorectal cancerColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments

Consensus molecular subtype classification of colorectal adenomas

Open access
Komor, Malgorzata A, Bosch, Linda JW, Bounova, Gergana, Bolijn, Anne S, Delis‐van Diemen, Pien M, Rausch, Christian, Hoogstrate, Youri, Stubbs, Andrew P +9 more·2018·The Journal of Pathology

Abstract

Consensus molecular subtyping is an RNA expression‐based classification system for colorectal cancer (CRC). Genomic alterations accumulate during CRC pathogenesis, including the premalignant adenoma stage, leading to changes in RNA expression. Only a minority of adenomas progress to malignancies, a transition that is associated with specific DNA copy number aberrations or microsatellite instability (MSI). We aimed to investigate whether colorectal adenomas can already be stratified into consensus molecular subtype (CMS) classes, and whether specific CMS classes are related to the presence of specific DNA copy number aberrations associated with progression to malignancy. RNA sequencing was performed on 62 adenomas and 59 CRCs. MSI status was determined with polymerase chain reaction‐based methodology. DNA copy number was assessed by low‐coverage DNA sequencing (n = 30) or array‐comparative genomic hybridisation (n = 32). Adenomas were classified into CMS classes together with CRCs from the study cohort and from The Cancer Genome Atlas (n = 556), by use of the established CMS classifier. As a result, 54 of 62 (87%) adenomas were classified according to the CMS. The CMS3 ‘metabolic subtype’, which was least common among CRCs, was most prevalent among adenomas (n = 45; 73%). One of the two adenomas showing MSI was classified as CMS1 (2%), the ‘MSI immune’ subtype. Eight adenomas (13%) were classified as the ‘canonical’ CMS2. No adenomas were classified as the ‘mesenchymal’ CMS4, consistent with the fact that adenomas lack invasion‐associated stroma. The distribution of the CMS classes among adenomas was confirmed in an independent series. CMS3 was enriched with adenomas at low risk of progressing to CRC, whereas relatively more high‐risk adenomas were observed in CMS2. We conclude that adenomas can be stratified into the CMS classes. Considering that CMS1 and CMS2 expression signatures may mark adenomas at increased risk of progression, the distribution of the CMS classes among adenomas is consistent with the proportion of adenomas expected to progress to CRC. © 2018 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

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.5129

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The CMS4 subtype is barely if not detected in adenomas and arises at the carcinoma stage, notably after transition from an indolent CMS3 subtype.

    “A consensus that emerged from several studies is that the CMS4 subtype is barely if not detected in adenomas and arises at the carcinoma stage (17, 18), notably after transition from an indolent CMS3 subtype.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Komor, M. A., Bosch, L. J., Bounova, G., Bolijn, A. S., Delis‐van Diemen, P. M., Rausch, C., Hoogstrate, Y., Stubbs, A. P., de Jong, M., Jenster, G., van Grieken, N. C., Carvalho, B., Wessels, L. F., Jimenez, C. R., Fijneman, R. J., Meijer, G. A., & In collaboration with the NGS‐ProToCol Consortium:
Affiliations
  • The Netherlands Cancer Institute (NL)
  • Translational Gastrointestinal Oncology, Department of Pathology Netherlands Cancer Institute Amsterdam The Netherlands
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
  • GenomeScan Leiden The Netherlands
  • Department of Pathology VU University Medical Centre Amsterdam The Netherlands
  • Oncoproteomics Laboratory, Department of Medical Oncology VU University Medical Centre Amsterdam The Netherlands
Corresponding author
Fijneman, Remond JA
Venue
The Journal of Pathology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-08-31
Volume
246
Issue
3
Pages
266-276
ISSN
  • 0022-3417 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-9896
OpenAlex
W2809907085
Cited by
86
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
FWCI
6.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Pathology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Repository (Delft University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Center for Translational Molecular Medicine (03O‐402)
  • KWF Kankerbestrijding (2013‐5885, 2013‐6025)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Keywords
colorectal adenoma, consensus molecular subtypes, colorectal cancer, adenoma-to-carcinoma progression, microsatellite instability, DNA copy number aberrations, metabolic subtypes, mesenchymal subtype
MeSH terms
Adenoma, Carcinoma, Cell Differentiation, Humans, Neoplasm Staging, Phenotype, Predictive Value of Tests, Biomarkers, Tumor, Colorectal Neoplasms, Reproducibility of Results, Disease Progression, Gene Dosage, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Gene Expression Profiling, Consensus, Microsatellite Instability, DNA Copy Number Variations, Transcriptome

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