Cited by 83Colorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesCancer Cells and MetastasisColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments

Tumour budding is associated with the mesenchymal colon cancer subtype and RAS/RAF mutations: a study of 1320 colorectal cancers with Consensus Molecular Subgroup (CMS) data

Open access
Trinh, Anne, Lädrach, Claudia, Dawson, Heather E., ten Hoorn, Sanne, Kuppen, Peter J. K., Reimers, Marlies S., Koopman, Miriam, Punt, Cornelis J. A. +3 more·2018·British Journal of Cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tumour budding is an important prognostic factor in colorectal cancer (CRC). Molecular profiling of tumour buds suggests (partial) epithelial-mesenchymal transition and cancer stem-cell phenotype, similarly described in the "mesenchymal" Consensus Molecular Subtype 4 (CMS4), which identifies a particularly poor prognostic subgroup. Here, we determine the association of tumour budding with CMS classification, prognosis, and response to therapy. METHODS: AMC-AJCCII-90 cohort (n = 76, stage II) was evaluated for peritumoural budding on H&E slides. LUMC (n = 270, stage I-IV), CAIRO (n = 504, metastatic CRC) and CAIRO2 (n = 472, metastatic CRC) cohorts were investigated for intratumoural budding using pan-cytokeratin-stained tissue microarrays. Budding was scored as count/area, then classified as <5 or ≥5 buds. For all cohorts, CMS classifications were available (gene-expression/immunohistochemistry-based classifiers). RESULTS: High (≥5) budding predicted a worse outcome in multivariate analysis in AMC-AJCCII-90 (p = 0.018), LUMC (p < 0.0001), and CAIRO (p = 0.03), and in CAIRO2 (continuous variable, p = 0.02). Tumour budding counts were higher in CMS4 compared to epithelial CMS2/3 cancers (p < 0.01, all), and associated with KRAS/BRAF mutations (p < 0.01, AMC-AJCCII-90, CAIRO, CAIRO2). CONCLUSION: Tumour budding is an adverse prognostic factor across all CRC stages and is associated with the mesenchymal CMS4 phenotype. KRAS/BRAF mutations are strongly correlated with tumour budding suggesting their involvement in the regulation of this process.

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 · 10.1038/s41416-018-0230-7

Cites

31 of 31 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?

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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Trinh, A., Lädrach, C., Dawson, H. E., ten Hoorn, S., Kuppen, P. J. K., Reimers, M. S., Koopman, M., Punt, C. J. A., Lugli, A., Vermeulen, L., & Zlobec, I.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Bern (CH)
  • Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Amsterdam University Medical Centers (NL)
Corresponding author
Zlobec, Inti
Venue
British Journal of Cancer
Published
2018-11
Volume
119
Issue
10
Pages
1244-1251
ISSN
  • 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-1827
OpenAlex
W2899462292
Cited by
83
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • New York Stem Cell Foundation (ERG-StG 638193, UVA2014-7245)
  • Mach-Gaensslen Foundation of Canada
  • ZonMw (ERG-StG 638193, 016.156.308, UVA2014-7245, Vidi 016.156.308)
  • KWF Kankerbestrijding (UVA2014‐7245, ERG-StG 638193)
  • Innovatiefonds Zorgverzekeraars
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Cells and Metastasis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Keywords
tumor budding, colorectal cancer, mesenchymal subtype, KRAS mutation, BRAF mutation, RAS/RAF mutations, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, cancer stem cells, prognostic factors, metastatic colorectal cancer, tumor microenvironment
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Male, Mesoderm, Middle Aged, Mutation, Prognosis, Genes, ras, Biomarkers, Tumor, Colorectal Neoplasms, Cohort Studies, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, raf Kinases, Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition

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