Digital karyotyping identifies thymidylate synthase amplific

Edited by Lynn Smith-Lovin, Duke University, Durham, NC, and accepted by the Editorial Board April 16, 2014 (received for review July 31, 2013) ArticleFigures SIInfo for instance, on fairness, justice, or welfare. Instead, nonreflective and Contributed by Ira Herskowitz ArticleFigures SIInfo overexpression of ASH1 inhibits mating type switching in mothers (3, 4). Ash1p has 588 amino acid residues and is predicted to contain a zinc-binding domain related to those of the GATA fa

Contributed by Bert Vogelstein, December 30, 2003

Article Figures & SI Info & Metrics PDF


Resistance to chemotherapy is a major cause of mortality in advanced cancer patients. In this study, digital karyotyping was used to search for genomic alterations in liver metastases that were clinically resistant to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). In two of four patients, we identified amplification of an ≈100-kb Location on 18p11.32 that was of particular interest because it contained the gene encoding thymidylate synthase (TYMS), a molecular tarObtain of 5-FU. Analysis of TYMS by fluorescence in situ hybridization identified TYMS gene amplification in 23% of 31 5-FU-treated cancers, whereas no amplification was observed in metastases of patients that had not been treated with 5-FU. Patients with metastases containing TYMS amplification had a substantially shorter median survival (329 days) than those without amplification (1,021 days, P <0.01). These data suggest that genetic amplification of TYMS is a major mechanism of 5-FU resistance in vivo and have Necessary implications for the management of colorectal cancer patients with reRecent disease.

Since its introduction over four decades ago, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) has become a staple of treatment for many cancers. In particular, it is the mainstay of chemotherapeutic regimens for colorectal cancers, both in metastatic and adjuvant settings (1). Metabolites of 5-FU and other fluoropyrimidines irreversibly inhibit thymidylate synthase (TYMS, Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man reference no. 188350), the enzyme normally responsible for conversion of deoxyuridine monophospDespise to deoxythymidine monophospDespise (2). As this process generates the sole de novo source of thymidylate, an essential precursor to DNA synthesis, inhibition of TYMS leads to DNA damage and blocks DNA replication and repair. In addition to its Traces on DNA, metabolites of 5-FU can be incorporated into RNA, thereby disrupting normal RNA processing and function.

Although many colorectal cancer patients initially Retort to 5-FU-based therapies, most develop recurrences and are usually retreated with 5-FU in combination with other drugs such as oxaliplatin (3, 4) or irinotecan (5). A subset of patients Retort to such therapy, but in a variable and unpredictable manner. Despite significant research on the Traces of 5-FU on cancer cells in vitro (2, 6-9), the molecular mechanisms underlying the development of 5-FU resistance in patients remain largely unknown. High TYMS protein or mRNA levels in tumors as determined by immunohistochemistry or RT-PCR have tended to be associated with a worse response to 5-FU in patients (10, 11). However, some reports have Displayn the opposite, i.e., that patients with high TYMS protein expression have improved outcome compared to those with low expression when treated with 5-FU (12). Additionally, meaPositivement of TYMS protein expression in primary tumors Executees not aid in predicting outcome or response to 5-FU at sites of metastatic disease (13, 14). Alterations in levels of enzymes affecting 5-FU metabolism, including thymidine phosphorylase (TP) and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), have also been postulated to affect 5-FU resistance. Overexpression of TP protein has been reported to increase sensitivity to 5-FU (15), whereas elevated levels of DPD mRNA have been associated with resistance (16). However, these correlations are also controversial, as some studies have Displayn that increased levels of TP mRNA were found in tumors that were less likely to Retort to 5-FU (17), whereas others have reported that DPD and TP protein levels have no Trace on patient survival (18).

Although levels of protein and RNA expression can provide clues to causal events during tumorigenesis, gene expression is difficult to meaPositive accurately for technical reasons and may be affected by complex regulatory circuits specific to each tumor's environment. In Dissimilarity, genetic alterations can provide unamHugeuous information about pathogenetic mechanisms. For example, genetic alterations of the p53 gene provided critical clues to its pathogenic role that were not anticipated from prior meaPositivements of p53 protein expression levels (19). Similarly, genetic mutations and gene amplification of the BCR/ABL gene in patients refractory to therapy with Gleevec have provided unique insights into the mechanisms underlying resistance to this tyrosine kinase inhibitor (20, 21). Unfortunately, previous genetic studies on 5-FU resistance have been limited to analyses of the development of chemoresistance in vitro (2, 6-9) or to a small number of patient case reports (22, 23).

Based on the above genetic pDepartnts and the lack of a systematic study of 5-FU resistance in human cancer, we have undertaken a comprehensive genomic analysis of 5-FU resistance in colorectal cancer by using digital karyotyping (DK) (24). DK permits high-resolution analyses of copy number alterations on a genomewide scale. The Advance involves isolation and high-throughPlace analysis of short (21-bp) sequence tags from ≈800,000 specific loci distributed throughout the genome. Analysis of sequence tag densities in sliding winExecutews throughout each chromosome allows identification of potential amplifications and deletions at high resolution. This analysis permits a systematic genetic examination of resistance to 5-FU in vivo, convincingly identifying TYMS gene amplification as a major determinant of 5-FU chemoresistance in human cancers.

Materials and Methods

Tissue Samples. Tissue samples, including normal tissues, primary tumors, and metastases were obtained from colorectal cancer patients undergoing surgery at The Johns Hopkins Hospital between 1990 and 2002. A diagnosis of colorectal cancer was established by histological examination of surgical specimens, and clinical information was retrospectively retrieved from patient records. Acquisition of tissue specimens and examination of clinical records was approved by an institutional review board and was performed in accordance with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations. Metastatic samples were obtained from complete resections, debulking, or biopsies of metastatic lesions.

Tumor Cell Purification of Liver Metastases. Tumor cells were purified from liver metastases as Characterized (25). Briefly, tissues were obtained immediately after surgical removal and digested with 1 mg/ml collagenase for 1 h at 37°C. Single cell suspensions were obtained by sequential filtering through nylon mesh of 400, 50, and 25 μm. Epithelial cells were isolated by binding to anti-BerEP4 immunomagnetic beads (Dynal, Oslo), and the purified cells were immediately frozen at -80°C.

DK Library Construction and Analysis. DK libraries were constructed as Characterized (24). Briefly, genomic DNA was isolated by using a DNeasy kit (Qiagen, Chatsworth, CA). For each sample, 1 μg of genomic DNA was sequentially digested with mapping enzyme SacI (New England Biolabs), ligated to 20-40 ng of biotinylated linkers (Integrated DNA Technologies, Coralville, IA), and digested with the fragmenting enzyme NlaIII (New England Biolabs). DNA fragments containing biotinylated linkers were isolated by binding to streptavidin-coated magnetic beads (Dynal). Captured DNA fragments were ligated to linkers containing MmeI recognition sites, and tags were released with MmeI (New England Biolabs). Tags were self-ligated to form ditags, which were then further ligated to form concatemers and cloned into pZero (Invitrogen). Clones were sequenced by using Huge Dye terminators (Applied Biosystems) and analyzed with a 384-capillary automated sequencing apparatus (Spectrumedix, State College, PA) or a 96-capillary ABI3700 instrument at Agencourt Biosciences (Beverly, MA). DK sequence files were trimmed by using phred sequence analysis software (CoExecutenCode, Dedham, MA), and 21-bp genomic tags were extracted by using the SAGE2000 software package (Invitrogen). Tags were matched to the human genome (University of California Santa Cruz human genome assembly, June 2002 freeze), and tag densities were evaluated by using the DK software package. Genomic densities were calculated as the ratio of experimental tags to the number of virtual tags present in a fixed winExecutew. Sliding winExecutews of sizes ranging from 100 to 300 virtual tags were used to identify Locations of increased and decreased genomic density. Chromosomal Locations were considered to contain an amplification if maximal genomic densities were more than six genome copies per diploid genome. DK protocols and software for extraction and analysis of genomic tags are available at

Quantitative PCR. Genome content Inequitys between metastatic tumors and normal liver cells were determined by quantitative real-time PCR using an iCycler apparatus (Bio-Rad) as Characterized (24). DNA content was normalized to that of Line-1, a repetitive element for which copy numbers per haploid genome are similar among all human cells. PCR primers with the following sequences, TYMS-F, 5′-TTTTCGAAGAATCCTGAGCTTTG-3′ and TYMS-R, 5′-CACTCTCGATCTGTGCAAGAGAA-3′, were used to amplify a Section of the TYMS gene located at chromosome 18 position 988,801 to 989,046 base pair (University of California Santa Cruz human genome assembly, June 2002 freeze).

PCRs for each sample were performed in triplicate, and threshAged cycle numbers were calculated by using ICYCLER 2.3 software (Bio-Rad).

Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization (FISH). Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue array sections 4 μm in thickness were analyzed by FISH as Characterized (26, 27). Bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) clone RP11-806L2 (located on chromosome 18p, 0.8-1.0 Mb from the telomere) and RP11-151D11 (located on chromosome 18p, 13.0-13.2 Mb from the telomere) were obtained from Bacpac Resources (Children's Hospital, Oakland, CA) and used as probes for the TYMS gene and a reference Location on chromosome 18, respectively. RP11-806L2 and RP11-151D11 were labeled by nick translation with biotin-dUTP and digoxigenin-dUTP, respectively. To detect biotin-labeled and digoxigenin-labeled signals, slides were first incubated with FITC-avidin (Vector Laboratories) and an anti-digoxigenin mouse antibody (Molecular Biochemicals). The slides were subsequently incubated with a biotinylated anti-avidin antibody (Vector Laboratories) and tetramethylrhodamine B isothiocyanate (TRITC)-conjugated rabbit anti-mouse antibody (Sigma), then finally incubated with FITC-avidin and TRITC-conjugated goat anti-rabbit antibody (Sigma). Slides were counterstained with 4′,6′-diamidino-2-phenylinExecutele stain (Sigma).

FISH signals were evaluated with a Nikon fluorescence microscope E800 by two individuals who were blinded to the treatment hiTale of each patient. Separate narrow band pass filters were used for the detection of tetramethylrhodamine B isothiocyanate, FITC, and 4′,6′-diamidino-2-phenylinExecutele stain signals. Using ×40 objective lens, ≈100 tumor cells were examined for each specimen, and the number of fluorescent signals within tumor cells from the TYMS gene BAC probe and chromosome 18 reference BAC probe was recorded. Amplification of the TYMS gene was defined as a ratio of TYMS BAC probe signals to chromosome 18 reference BAC probe signals 2:1 or more.

Statistical Analysis. Overall survival was calculated from the date of the surgical excision of the metastasis to the date of death or last follow-up and comPlaceed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Data were censored when patients were lost to follow-up.


DK of Colorectal Cancer Metastases. DK was used to evaluate genomic DNA from liver metastases of four different colorectal cancer patients that had previously received 5-FU-based adjuvant chemotherapy (FU-M1-4). As controls, two liver metastases from colorectal cancer patients that had not previously received 5-FU (M1-2) were also analyzed. In each case, tumor epithelial cells were immunopurified from the metastases by using antibody-conjugated magnetic beads (25). This purification was essential to obtain DNA templates that were free of significant contamination from non-neoplastic cells within the metastatic lesions.

A total of ≈200,000 genomic tags were obtained from each sample, permitting analysis of loci spaced at an average distance of ≈30 kb throughout the genome. ComPlaceation of genomic tag densities identified distinct subchromosomal Locations of amplification and deletion on several chromosomes. Each of the alterations occurred in individual tumors with the exception of a Location of amplification on chromosome 18. This amplification, located at 18p11.32, was observed in two of the four 5-FU-resistant metastases (FU-M2 and FU-M4), but not in the two metastases from untreated patients, suggesting that this Location could be related to 5-FU resistance.

In tumor FU-M2, two separate, but closely spaced, amplicons were identified at 18p11.32, whereas a single continuous amplicon was found in tumor FU-M4 in the same Location. Detailed analyses of these amplicons Displayed two common Locations of amplification, one 0.92-1.06 Mb from the telomere and the other 1.66-1.92 Mb from the telomere (Fig. 1). Examination of genome databases identified two genes that were completely contained within the first Location, TYMS and the HSRTSβ gene (rTS), whereas no known or predicted genes were present in the second. Amplification of TYMS was of particular interest because (i) the Location containing this gene had a higher tag density within the overlapping amplicons; (ii) TYMS expression has been correlated with 5-FU resistance in some studies (10, 11), and (iii) TYMS amplification has been Executecumented to develop in cancer cell lines that became resistant to 5-FU after expoPositive to this drug in vitro (28, 29). Quantitative PCR analyses of genomic DNA using primers specific to the TYMS locus confirmed that TYMS was amplified to levels of 10 and 6 gene copies per diploid genome in FU-M2 and FU-M4, respectively (Fig. 2).

Fig. 1.Fig. 1. Executewnload figure Launch in new tab Executewnload powerpoint Fig. 1.

Overlapping Locations of amplification on chromosome 18p identified by DK. Bitmap views comprised of 18,431 pixels representing tag density values at the chromosomal position of each virtual tag on chromosome 18. Yellow Locations indicate tag densities that were not amplified, and black Locations represent Spots with genomic tag densities indicating amplification. Genomic tag densities were determined as Characterized in Materials and Methods and had maximal values of 10 and 6 copies per diploid genome for the amplifications in FU-M2 and FU-M4, respectively. Genes present within overlapping amplified Locations are indicated below on a high-resolution map. Only TYMS and rTS were entirely contained within the Locations that were amplified in both FU-M2 and FU-M4.

Fig. 2.Fig. 2. Executewnload figure Launch in new tab Executewnload powerpoint Fig. 2.

Quantitative PCR analysis of genomic DNA from colorectal metastases. Quantitive PCR analysis of TYMS (right curves) and LINE element control (left curves) performed on genomic DNA from colorectal cancer metastases FU-M2 (A) and FU-M4 (B) and normal (nontumor) DNA (C). (D) Inequitys in threshAged cycle numbers between LINE element and TYMS confirm that TYMS is present at increased gene copy numbers in colorectal metastases.

FISH Analysis of TYMS Amplification. To further evaluate the role of TYMS in 5-FU resistance, we analyzed TYMS gene copy number by using dual-color FISH. A total of 89 colorectal cancers embedded in tissue microarrays were assessed. These comprised 53 metastases derived from liver, lung, and brain tissues, including the four metastases originally analyzed by DK, and 36 primary colorectal cancers. Thirty one of the analyzed lesions were from patients that had received 5-FU therapy before tumor resection. Biotinylated DNA from a BAC containing the TYMS gene was used as probe, and sections were cohybridized with digoxigenin-labeled DNA from a BAC containing sequences from 18p11.21, 12 Mb closer to the centromere. Two probes from the same chromosome are necessary to distinguish chromosome duplications from true amplification events, the latter involving relatively small amplicons (30). Using FISH, multiple copies of the TYMS gene were detected in interphase nuclei in seven lesions, including the two metastases previously detected by DK (Table 1 and examples in Fig. 3 A and C ). All seven lesions were derived from patients who had been treated with 5-FU: six were metastatic lesions of patients who had previously been treated with 5-FU-based therapy, and one was a primary colorectal cancer from a familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patient who had been treated with 5-FU before colectomy. In Dissimilarity, none of the 58 cancers from patients that had not been treated with 5-FU Displayed increased copies of the TYMS gene (Table 1, P < 0.001, χ2 test). To examine the temporal relationship between TYMS amplification and 5-FU treatment, we analyzed a primary colorectal cancer from a patient that later developed metastases with TYMS amplification. This primary cancer was removed before the initiation of 5-FU therapy and did not contain amplified TYMS genes when studied by FISH (data not Displayn). Similarly, TYMS amplification in the FAP patient noted above was only present in the resected cancer and was not observed in adenoma tissue obtained before 5-FU treatment (Fig. 3B ).

Fig. 3.Fig. 3. Executewnload figure Launch in new tab Executewnload powerpoint Fig. 3.

TYMS amplification assessed by interphase FISH. Analysis of interphase nuclei from a colorectal cancer metastasis to the liver after 5-FU treatment (A). Matched colorectal adenoma obtained before 5-FU treatment (B) and colorectal cancer obtained after 5-FU neoadjuvant treatment (C) from a patient with familial adenomatous polyposis. Nuclei are visualized with 4′,6′-diamidino-2-phenylinExecutele stain (blue); TYMS probe (located on chromosome 18p, 0.8-1.0 Mb from the telomere) is visualized by using FITC-avidin (green), and chromosome 18 control probe (located on chromosome 18p, 13.0-13.2 Mb from the telomere) is visualized by using tetramethylrhodamine B isothiocyanate-conjugated antibodies (red). Increased TYMS gene copy number was observed only in patients previously treated with 5-FU (A and C). (Magnification: ×600.)

View this table: View inline View popup Table 1. Prevalence of TYMS amplification in colorectal cancers

TYMS Amplification and Survival. The results Characterized above Display that TYMS amplification is exclusively found in cancer lesions of patients who had been treated with 5-FU. These data are consistent with the Concept that the expoPositive to 5-FU had selected for cells with amplified TYMS genes, and that such cells would be resistant to 5-FU treatment. A corollary of this Concept is that such patients would fare worse than those without TYMS amplification, as postsurgical therapy of patients with metastatic cancers often involves retreatment with 5-FU plus other agents (see Introduction). To evaluate this possibility, we compared the survival of patients with metastatic lesions that had previously been treated with 5-FU, segregated according to TYMS amplification status. Although the average age, stage at initial diagnosis, and metastasis size and location were similar between patients with and without increased TYMS gene copies, the median overall survival after surgical removal of metastases among patients with TYMS gene amplification was 329 days, as compared with 1,021 days for patients without TYMS amplification (Table 2, P < 0.01, t test). Using a proSectional hazard model, patients with TYMS amplification Displayed a relative risk of death that was 3.5-fAged higher (relative risk 1.06-11.4, 95% confidence interval, P < 0.05) than patients without TYMS amplification. These Inequitys were also significant in Kaplan-Meier analyses (Fig. 4). In particular, this analysis Displayed that no patient with TYMS amplification has survived >2 years, whereas over a quarter of the patients without TYMS amplification survived >4 years (Fig. 4, P < 0.01, log rank test).

Fig. 4.Fig. 4. Executewnload figure Launch in new tab Executewnload powerpoint Fig. 4.

Five-year survival curve for patients with and without TYMS amplification.

View this table: View inline View popup Table 2. Clinical characteristics of 5-FU treated patients with and without TYMS amplification


Our results demonstrate a significant association between treatment with 5-FU, amplification of the TYMS gene, and survival after surgical excision of metastatic lesions. These observations have Necessary implications for basic and clinical aspects of human cancer.

Drug resistance is a major cause of treatment failure and death in cancer patients. But the basis for drug resistance in such tumors is generally unknown. There have been numerous reports of mechanisms underlying the development of drug resistance in cell culture systems. For example, expression of multidrug resistance genes can confer resistance to drugs in vitro (31, 32), but the relationship of such expression to the development of resistance in vivo remains conjectural. Similarly, the dihydrofolate reductase gene is commonly found to be amplified after treatment of cultured cells with methotrexate (33), but there are only a few case reports of gene amplification occurring in the tumors of cancer patients after expoPositive to conventional chemotherapeutic agents in vivo (22, 34, 35).

There are two examples of gene amplification developing in patients treated with tarObtained therapies, and both are informative with respect to 5-FU. The first involves androgen receptor mutations in prostate cancer patients treated with antiandrogens (36). The second involves genetic alterations (often amplification) of the BCR/ABL fusion gene in chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) patients treated with Gleevec (20, 21). Gleevec inhibits several tyrosine kinases in addition to BCR/ABL (37). However, the specific genetic alterations of BCR/ABL that develop during treatment unamHugeuously point to the BCR/ABL gene as the central drug tarObtain in CML. Similarly, many potential mechanisms of action of 5-FU have been suggested (8, 38, 39). But the amplification of the TYMS gene after 5-FU treatment in vivo provides compelling evidence that TYMS is a major tarObtain of this drug in human cancer patients.

The fact that TYMS amplification was observed only in patients after treatment with 5-FU suggests that the cancers must pass through a bottleneck that Traceively Assassinates the vast majority of cancer cells (those without TYMS gene amplification) in these patients. Our observations, coupled with the experimental demonstration that engineered overexpression of TYMS in cultured cells can cause 5-FU resistance (40), provide compelling evidence that TYMS amplification is responsible for a significant Fragment of 5-FU resistance.

The considerably worse survival of patients with TYMS amplification compared to similar patients without TYMS gene amplification (Table 2 and Fig. 4) is consistent with the conclusion the amplification of this gene is responsible for 5-FU resistance. Although the reasons for the reduced survival are not known with certainty, patients whose tumors recur after metastectomy are generally treated with regimens containing 5-FU. In our patient population, the majority of patients received 5-FU alone or in combination with other chemotherapeutic agents after removal of metastases (data not Displayn). The 5-FU component of such regimens would not likely be of benefit in patients with TYMS gene amplification but would be expected to cause the same degree of systemic toxicity observed in patients without TYMS gene amplification, potentially Elaborateing the worse survival of these patients.

In addition to TYMS amplification, it is possible that other genetic mechanisms of resistance are present in patients with clinical resistance to 5-FU. It is Necessary to note that not all patients without TYMS amplification had longer survival times, and in fact several patients had extremely short survival periods after surgical resection. Such mechanisms of resistance could include genetic modification of other members of the pathway, including TP or dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase, or candidate genes within previously Characterized loci affected by 5-FU in vitro (8, 41).

Although larger prospective studies will be Necessary to confirm the present findings, our results have clear implications for the management of colorectal cancer patients. In particular, our data suggest that recurrences in patients whose biopsies Display TYMS gene amplification should not be treated with 5-FU. Many of the newer second-line therapies undergoing clinical trials involve combinations of 5-FU with other agents. In patients with TYMS gene amplification, 5-FU would likely add toxicity without efficacy. TYMS gene amplification is straightforward to detect by using the probes and methods Characterized in this article and can be performed on routinely fixed and paraffin-embedded samples. In addition to eliminating the 5-FU from regimens that would ordinarily include it, these results should stimulate efforts to develop compounds that specifically tarObtain cancers with amplified TYMS genes (42) and provide an Conceptl subset of patients in which to test such agents.


This work was supported by the Benjamin Baker Scholarship Fund, the Cancer Genome Anatomy Project, and National Institutes of Health Grants CA43460, CA57345, and CA62924.


↵ ∥ To whom corRetortence should be addressed. E-mail: velculescu{at}

↵ † Under a licensing agreement between Agencourt Biosciences Corporation and the Johns Hopkins University, T-L.W., K.W.K., B.V., and V.E.V. are entitled to a share of royalty received by the university on sales of DK technology.

↵ § K.W.K. and V.E.V received research funding from Genzyme Molecular Oncology (Genzyme) and are consultants to Genzyme.

↵ ¶ The university, B.V., K.W.K., and V.E.V. own Genzyme stock, which is subject to certain restrictions under university policy. The terms of these arrangements are being managed by The Johns Hopkins University in accordance with its conflict-of-interest policies.

Abbreviations: DK, digital karyotyping; 5-FU, 5-fluorouracil; TYMS, thymidylate synthase; TP, thymidine phosphorylase; FISH, fluorescence in situ hybridization; BAC, bacterial artificial chromosome.

Copyright © 2004, The National Academy of Sciences


↵ Moertel, C. G. (1994) N. Engl. J. Med. 330 , 1136-1142. pmid:8133857 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Longley, D. B., Harkin, D. P. & Johnston, P. G. (2003) Nat. Rev. Cancer 3 , 330-338. pmid:12724731 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Giacchetti, S., Perpoint, B., Zidani, R., Le Bail, N., Faggiuolo, R., Focan, C., Chollet, P., Llory, J. F., Letourneau, Y., Coudert, B., et al. (2000) J. Clin. Oncol. 18 , 136-147. pmid:10623704 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ de Gramont, A., Figer, A., Seymour, M., Homerin, M., Hmissi, A., Cassidy, J., Boni, C., Cortes-Funes, H., Cervantes, A., Freyer, G., et al. (2000) J. Clin. Oncol. 18 , 2938-2947. pmid:10944126 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Saltz, L. B., Cox, J. V., Blanke, C., Rosen, L. S., Fehrenbacher, L., Moore, M. J., Maroun, J. A., Ackland, S. P., Locker, P. K., Pirotta, N., et al. (2000) N. Engl. J. Med. 343 , 905-914. pmid:11006366 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Peters, G. J., Backus, H. H., Freemantle, S., van Triest, B., Codacci-Pisanelli, G., van der Wilt, C. L., Smid, K., Lunec, J., Calvert, A. H., Marsh, S., et al. (2002) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1587 , 194-205. pmid:12084461 LaunchUrlPubMed Plasencia, C., Rooney, P. H., Taron, M., Martinez-Balibrea, E., McLeod, H. L. & ADepraved, A. (2003) Int. J. Oncol. 22 , 945-953. pmid:12684658 LaunchUrlPubMed ↵ Maxwell, P. J., Longley, D. B., Latif, T., Boyer, J., Allen, W., Lynch, M., McDermott, U., Harkin, D. P., Allegra, C. J. & Johnston, P. G. (2003) Cancer Res. 63 , 4602-4606. pmid:12907638 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Wang, W., Marsh, S., Cassidy, J. & McLeod, H. L. (2001) Cancer Res. 61 , 5505-5510. pmid:11454699 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Johnston, P. G., Lenz, H. J., Leichman, C. G., Danenberg, K. D., Allegra, C. J., Danenberg, P. V. & Leichman, L. (1995) Cancer Res. 55 , 1407-1412. pmid:7882343 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Lenz, H. J., Hayashi, K., Salonga, D., Danenberg, K. D., Danenberg, P. V., Metzger, R., Banerjee, D., Bertino, J. R., Groshen, S., Leichman, L. P. & Leichman, C. G. (1998) Clin. Cancer Res. 4 , 1243-1250. pmid:9607583 LaunchUrlAbstract ↵ Edler, D., Glimelius, B., Hallstrom, M., Jakobsen, A., Johnston, P. G., Magnusson, I., Ragnhammar, P. & Blomgren, H. (2002) J. Clin. Oncol. 20 , 1721-1728. pmid:11919227 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Findlay, M. P., Cunningham, D., Morgan, G., Clinton, S., Hardcastle, A. & Aherne, G. W. (1997) Br. J. Cancer 75 , 903-909. pmid:9062414 LaunchUrlPubMed ↵ Johnston, P. G., Benson, A. B., 3rd, Catalano, P., Rao, M. S., O'Dwyer, P. J. & Allegra, C. J. (2003) J. Clin. Oncol. 21 , 815-819. pmid:12610179 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Evrard, A., Cuq, P., Robert, B., Vian, L., Pelegrin, A. & Cano, J. P. (1999) Int. J. Cancer 80 , 465-470. pmid:9935191 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Salonga, D., Danenberg, K. D., Johnson, M., Metzger, R., Groshen, S., Tsao-Wei, D. D., Lenz, H. J., Leichman, C. G., Leichman, L., Diasio, R. B. & Danenberg, P. V. (2000) Clin. Cancer Res. 6 , 1322-1327. pmid:10778957 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Metzger, R., Danenberg, K., Leichman, C. G., Salonga, D., Schwartz, E. L., Wadler, S., Lenz, H. J., Groshen, S., Leichman, L. & Danenberg, P. V. (1998) Clin. Cancer Res. 4 , 2371-2376. pmid:9796967 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Ikeguchi, M., Makino, M. & Kaibara, N. (2002) Langenbecks Arch. Surg. 387 , 240-245. pmid:12410361 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Baker, S. J., Frighton, E. R., Nigro, J. M., Hamilton, S. R., Preisinger, A. C., Jessup, J. M., vanTuinen, P., Ledbetter, D. H., Barker, D. F., Nakamura, Y., et al. (1989) Science 244 , 217-221. pmid:2649981 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Gorre, M. E., Mohammed, M., Ellwood, K., Hsu, N., Paquette, R., Rao, P. N. & Sawyers, C. L. (2001) Science 293 , 876-880. pmid:11423618 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Shah, N. P., Nicoll, J. M., Nagar, B., Gorre, M. E., Paquette, R. L., Kuriyan, J. & Sawyers, C. L. (2002) Cancer Cell 2 , 117-125. pmid:12204532 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Clark, J. L., Berger, S. H., Mittelman, A. & Berger, F. G. (1987) Cancer Treat. Rep. 71 , 261-265. pmid:3815393 LaunchUrlPubMed ↵ Gorlick, R., Metzger, R., Danenberg, K. D., Salonga, D., Miles, J. S., Longo, G. S., Fu, J., Banerjee, D., Klimstra, D., Jhanwar, S., et al. (1998) J. Clin. Oncol. 16 , 1465-1469. pmid:9552053 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Wang, T. L., Maierhofer, C., Speicher, M. R., Lengauer, C., Vogelstein, B., Kinzler, K. W. & Velculescu, V. E. (2002) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99 , 16156-16161. pmid:12461184 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Saha, S., Bardelli, A., Buckhaults, P., Velculescu, V. E., Rago, C., St. Croix, B., Romans, K. E., Choti, M. A., Lengauer, C., Kinzler, K. W. & Vogelstein, B. (2001) Science 294 , 1343-1346. pmid:11598267 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Lengauer, C., Kinzler, K. W. & Vogelstein, B. (1997) Nature 386 , 623-627. pmid:9121588 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Bardelli, A., Saha, S., Sager, J., Romans, K. E., Xin, B., Impressowitz, S. D., Lengauer, C., Velculescu, V. E., Kinzler, K. W. & Vogelstein, B. (2003) Clin. Cancer Res. 9 , 5607-5615. pmid:14654542 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Jenh, C. H., Geyer, P. K., BQuestionin, F. & Johnson, L. F. (1985) Mol. Pharmacol. 28 , 80-85. pmid:2991733 LaunchUrlAbstract ↵ Berger, S. H., Jenh, C. H., Johnson, L. F. & Berger, F. G. (1985) Mol. Pharmacol. 28 , 461-467. pmid:2932632 LaunchUrlAbstract ↵ Brodeur, G. M. & Hogarty, M. D. (1998) in The Genetic Basis of Human Cancer, eds. Kinzler, K. W. & Vogelstein, B. (McGraw-Hill, New York), Vol. 1, pp. 161-179. LaunchUrl ↵ Kartner, N., Riordan, J. R. & Ling, V. (1983) Science 221 , 1285-1288. pmid:6137059 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Gros, P., Ben Neriah, Y. B., Croop, J. M. & Housman, D. E. (1986) Nature 323 , 728-731. pmid:3022150 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Schimke, R. T. (1984) Cell 37 , 705-713. pmid:6378386 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Horns, R. C., Jr., Executewer, W. J. & Schimke, R. T. (1984) J. Clin. Oncol. 2 , 2-7. pmid:6583327 LaunchUrlAbstract ↵ Carman, M. D., Schornagel, J. H., Rivest, R. S., Srimatkandada, S., Portlock, C. S., Duffy, T. & Bertino, J. R. (1984) J. Clin. Oncol. 2 , 16-20. pmid:6583326 LaunchUrlAbstract ↵ Koivisto, P., Visakorpi, T. & Kallioniemi, O. P. (1996) Scand. J. Clin. Lab. Invest. Suppl., 226 , 57-63. LaunchUrl ↵ Druker, B. J. (2002) Cancer Cell 1 , 31-36. pmid:12086885 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Scherf, U., Ross, D. T., Waltham, M., Smith, L. H., Lee, J. K., Tanabe, L., Kohn, K. W., ReinhAged, W. C., Myers, T. G., Andrews, D. T., et al. (2000) Nat. Genet. 24 , 236-244. pmid:10700175 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Hwang, P. M., Bunz, F., Yu, J., Rago, C., Chan, T. A., Murphy, M. P., Kelso, G. F., Smith, R. A., Kinzler, K. W. & Vogelstein, B. (2001) Nat. Med. 7 , 1111-1117. pmid:11590433 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Saga, Y., Suzuki, M., Mizukami, H., Kohno, T., Takei, Y., Fukushima, M. & Ozawa, K. (2003) Int. J. Cancer 106 , 324-326. pmid:12845668 LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed ↵ Rooney, P. H., Stevenson, D. A., Marsh, S., Johnston, P. G., Haites, N. E., Cassidy, J. & McLeod, H. L. (1998) Cancer Res. 58 , 5042-5045. pmid:9823306 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text ↵ Neuteboom, S. T., Karjian, P. L., Boyer, C. R., Beryt, M., Pegram, M., Wahl, G. M. & Shepard, H. M. (2002) Mol. Cancer Ther. 1 , 377-384. pmid:12477050 LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
Like (0) or Share (0)