Ovarian clear-cell and endometrioid carcinomas may arise from endometriosis, but the molecular events involved in this transformation have not been described. We sequenced the whole transcriptomes of 18 ovarian clear-cell carcinomas and 1 ovarian clear-cell carcinoma cell line and found somatic mutations in ARID1A (the AT-rich interactive domain 1A [SWI-like] gene) in 6 of the samples. ARID1A encodes BAF250a, a key component of the SWI–SNF chromatin remodeling complex. We sequenced ARID1A in an additional 210 ovarian carcinomas and a second ovarian clear-cell carcinoma cell line and measured BAF250a expression by means of immunohistochemical analysis in an additional 455 ovarian carcinomas. ARID1A mutations were seen in 55 of 119 ovarian clear-cell carcinomas (46%), 10 of 33 endometrioid carcinomas (30%), and none of the 76 high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas. Seventeen carcinomas had two somatic mutations each. Loss of the BAF250a protein correlated strongly with the ovarian clear-cell carcinoma and endometrioid carcinoma subtypes and the presence of ARID1A mutations. In two patients, ARID1A mutations and loss of BAF250a expression were evident in the tumor and contiguous atypical endometriosis but not in distant endometriotic lesions. These data implicate ARID1A as a tumor-suppressor gene frequently disrupted in ovarian clear-cell and endometrioid carcinomas. Since ARID1A mutation and loss of BAF250a can be seen in the preneoplastic lesions, we speculate that this is an early event in the transformation of endometriosis into cancer. (Funded by the British Columbia Cancer Foundation and the Vancouver General Hospital–University of British Columbia Hospital Foundation.)

Although it has long been appreciated that ovarian carcinoma subtypes (serous, clear cell, endometrioid, and mucinous) are associated with different natural histories, most ovarian carcinoma biomarker studies and current treatment protocols for women with this disease are not subtype specific. With the emergence of high-throughput molecular techniques, distinct pathogenetic pathways have been identified in these subtypes. We examined variation in biomarker expression rates between subtypes, and how this influences correlations between biomarker expression and stage at diagnosis or prognosis. In this retrospective study we assessed the protein expression of 21 candidate tissue-based biomarkers (CA125, CRABP-II, EpCam, ER, F-Spondin, HE4, IGF2, K-Cadherin, Ki-67, KISS1, Matriptase, Mesothelin, MIF, MMP7, p21, p53, PAX8, PR, SLPI, TROP2, WT1) in a population-based cohort of 500 ovarian carcinomas that was collected over the period from 1984 to 2000. The expression of 20 of the 21 biomarkers differs significantly between subtypes, but does not vary across stage within each subtype. Survival analyses show that nine of the 21 biomarkers are prognostic indicators in the entire cohort but when analyzed by subtype only three remain prognostic indicators in the high-grade serous and none in the clear cell subtype. For example, tumor proliferation, as assessed by Ki-67 staining, varies markedly between different subtypes and is an unfavourable prognostic marker in the entire cohort (risk ratio [RR] 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2%–2.4%) but is not of prognostic significance within any subtype. Prognostic associations can even show an inverse correlation within the entire cohort, when compared to a specific subtype. For example, WT1 is more frequently expressed in high-grade serous carcinomas, an aggressive subtype, and is an unfavourable prognostic marker within the entire cohort of ovarian carcinomas (RR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2%–2.3%), but is a favourable prognostic marker within the high-grade serous subtype (RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3%–0.8%). The association of biomarker expression with survival varies substantially between subtypes, and can easily be overlooked in whole cohort analyses. To avoid this effect, each subtype within a cohort should be analyzed discretely. Ovarian carcinoma subtypes are different diseases, and these differences should be reflected in clinical research study design and ultimately in the management of ovarian carcinoma.

Quiz Ref ID Gastric cancer (GC) is the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide.¹ The 2 major subtypes, diffuse GC (DGC) and intestinal-type GC, are distinguished by molecular, epidemiologic, and morphologic features.² Although GC is usually sporadic, familial aggregation occurs in approximately 10% of cases.^3,4 Quiz Ref ID Clinically defined hereditary DGC (HDGC) (OMIM #137215) is characterized by early-onset, multigenerational DGC and lobular breast cancer. Clinical criteria for this entity was established by the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC) (Table 1).^5,6 Approximately 40% of HDGC families have germline mutations in CDH1 (E-cadherin) (Ensembl ENSG00000039068; OMIM *192090), and over 100 different pathogenic germline mutations are reported across multiple ethnicities (eTable 1 in the Supplement).

Endometriosis, defined as the presence of ectopic endometrial stroma and epithelium, affects approximately 10% of reproductive-age women and can cause pelvic pain and infertility. Endometriotic lesions are considered to be benign inflammatory lesions but have cancerlike features such as local invasion and resistance to apoptosis. We analyzed deeply infiltrating endometriotic lesions from 27 patients by means of exomewide sequencing (24 patients) or cancer-driver targeted sequencing (3 patients). Mutations were validated with the use of digital genomic methods in microdissected epithelium and stroma. Epithelial and stromal components of lesions from an additional 12 patients were analyzed by means of a droplet digital polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) assay for recurrent activating KRAS mutations. Exome sequencing revealed somatic mutations in 19 of 24 patients (79%). Five patients harbored known cancer driver mutations in ARID1A, PIK3CA, KRAS, or PPP2R1A, which were validated by Safe-Sequencing System or immunohistochemical analysis. The likelihood of driver genes being affected at this rate in the absence of selection was estimated at P=0.001 (binomial test). Targeted sequencing and a droplet digital PCR assay identified KRAS mutations in 2 of 3 patients and 3 of 12 patients, respectively, with mutations in the epithelium but not the stroma. One patient harbored two different KRAS mutations, c.35G→T and c.35G→C, and another carried identical KRAS c.35G→A mutations in three distinct lesions. We found that lesions in deep infiltrating endometriosis, which are associated with virtually no risk of malignant transformation, harbor somatic cancer driver mutations. Ten of 39 deep infiltrating lesions (26%) carried driver mutations; all the tested somatic mutations appeared to be confined to the epithelial compartment of endometriotic lesions.

Gastric cancer is the second most common cause of cancer death worldwide.¹ Two major histopathological variants of this cancer have been described: an intestinal type and a diffuse type.² A decline in the overall incidence of gastric cancer can be attributed primarily to a decrease of the intestinal variant of gastric cancer with the diffuse type remaining stable or possibly even increasing.³