Clinical and Translational Oncology

, Volume 20, Issue 11, pp 1422–1429 | Cite as

Molecular subtypes in early colorectal cancer associated with clinical features and patient prognosis

  • M. Gil-RagaEmail author
  • E. Jantus-Lewintre
  • S. Gallach
  • V. Giner-Bosch
  • A. Frangi-Caregnato
  • M. J. Safont-Aguilera
  • J. Garde-Noguera
  • E. Zorraquino-Pina
  • M. García-Martínez
  • C. Camps-Herrero
Research Article



After surgical resection, an ample prognosis variability among stages is observed. Multiple prognostic factors are individually studied and some CRC classifiers have been proposed. Not one have been implemented into clinical practice.


We classified 105 patients with resected CRC (stage I–III) into five molecular subtypes using BRAFV600E and RAS (KRAS; NRAS) status, and the expression of DNA mismatch repair (MMR) proteins (MLH1 and MSH2). Clinicopathological features and DFS) of distincts groups were evaluated.

Results and conclusions

RAS and BRAFV600E mutations were detected in 43.8 and 11.4% of patients, respectively. 19% of tumours had lack of expression of any MMR proteins reflecting a system deficiency (dMMR). Patients with any RAS mutation had lower DFS that patients with RAS wild type (wt) (40.23 vs 45.26 months; p value = 0.035). Of a total of five molecular subtypes, three were MMR proficient (pMMR): RAS mutated (39%), BRAFV600E mutated (6.7%) and RAS/BRAFV600E wt (35.2%); and two were dMMR: BRAFV600E mutated (4.8%) and BRAFV600E wt (14.3%). Left side tumours were more frequently observed in pMMR/RAS and BRAFV600E wt subtype, and right side tumours in dMMR subtypes. Among the three pMMR subtypes, a benefit survival was observed for patients without any mutation in BRAFv600E or RAS oncogenes (median of DFS = 45.5 vs 40.98 months in RAS mutated group; p = 0.084 and vs 34.13 in BRAFv600E mutated group; p = 0.031). Molecular classification using these biomarkers can be useful to identify groups with differences in prognosis.


Colorectal cancer Prognostic factor Molecular subtypes 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals/ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of General University Hospital of Valencia and by The Research Committee of Hospital of Sagunto, in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (1964), the Good Clinical Practices and local ethical and legal requirements (Spanish laws). This study complied with all applicable regulations for human participant studies. All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript.

Informed consent

Prior to study entry, all patients provided written informed consent according to the local ethics committee regulations.


  1. 1.
    Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, et al. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase. No. 11 [Internet], vol. 11. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer. 2013. p.
  2. 2.
    Markowitz SD, Bertagnolli MM. Molecular basis of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;362(13):1246 (author reply 1246–1247).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lindor NM, Burgart LJ, Leontovich O, Goldberg RM, Cunningham JM, Sargent DJ, et al. Immunohistochemistry versus microsatellite instability testing in phenotyping colorectal tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(4):1043–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rodríguez-Moranta F, Castells A, Andreu M, Piñol V, Castellvi-Bel S, Alenda C, et al. Clinical performance of original and revised Bethesda guidelines for the identification of MSH2/MLH1 gene carriers in patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer: proposal of a new and simpler set of recommendations. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101(5):1104–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lanza G, Gafà R, Santini A, Maestri I, Guerzoni L, Cavazzini L. Immunohistochemical test for MLH1 and MSH2 expression predicts clinical outcome in stage II and III colorectal cancer patients. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(15):2359–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sargent DJ, Marsoni S, Monges G, Thibodeau SN, Labianca R, Hamilton SR, et al. Defective mismatch repair as a predictive marker for lack of efficacy of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy in colon cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(20):3219–26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bos JL, Fearon ER, Hamilton SR, Verlaan-de Vries M, van Boom JH, van der Eb AJ, et al. Prevalence of ras gene mutations in human colorectal cancers. Nature. 1987;327(6120):293–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davies H, Bignell GR, Cox C, Stephens P, Edkins S, Clegg S, et al. Mutations of the BRAF gene in human cancer. Nature [Internet]. 2002;417(6892):949–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Benvenuti S, Sartore-Bianchi A, Di Nicolantonio F, Zanon C, Moroni M, Veronese S, et al. Oncogenic activation of the RAS/RAF signaling pathway impairs the response of metastatic colorectal cancers to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody therapies. Cancer Res. 2007;67(6):2643–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Seppälä TT, Böhm JP, Friman M, Lahtinen L, Väyrynen VMJ, Liipo TKE, et al. Combination of microsatellite instability and BRAF mutation status for subtyping colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer [Internet]. 2015;112(12):1966–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Birgisson H, Edlund K, Wallin U, Påhlman L, Kultima H, Mayrhofer M, et al. Microsatellite instability and mutations in BRAF and KRAS are significant predictors of disseminated disease in colon cancer. BMC Cancer [Internet]. 2015;15(1):125.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sinicrope FA, Shi Q, Smyrk TC, Thibodeau SN, Dienstmann R, Guinney J, et al. Molecular markers identify subtypes of stage III colon cancer associated with patient outcomes. Gastroenterology [Internet]. 2015;148(1):88–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Osumi H, Shinozaki E, Suenaga M, Matsusaka S, Konishi T, Akiyoshi T, et al. RAS mutation is a prognostic biomarker in colorectal cancer patients with metastasectomy. Int J Cancer. 2016;139(4):803–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Edge T. AJCC Cancer Staging Handbook. From the AJCC cancer staging manual. 7th ed. In: Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL TA, editor. New York: Springer; 2010.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jass JR. Classification of colorectal cancer based on correlation of clinical, morphological and molecular features. Histopathology. 2007;50:113–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leggett B, Whitehall V. Role of the serrated pathway in colorectal cancer pathogenesis. Gastroenterology. 2010;138:2088–100.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Douillard J-Y, Oliner KS, Siena S, Tabernero J, Burkes R, Barugel M, et al. Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2013;369(11):1023–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sorich MJ, Wiese MD, Rowland A, Kichenadasse G, McKinnon RA, Karapetis CS. Extended RAS mutations and anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody survival benefit in metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Ann Oncol [Internet]. 2015;26(1):13–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hassabo HM, Sahin IH, Kazmi SMA, Al Mutar SS, Gomes DBD, Pini TM, et al. Associations between patient (pt) colorectal cancer (CRC) tumor KRAS and BRAF mutation (mut) status and overall survival (OS). J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(3_suppl):473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alberts SR, Sargent DJ, Smyrk TC, Shields AF, Chan E, Goldberg RM, et al. Adjuvant mFOLFOX6 with or without cetuximab (Cmab) in KRAS wild-type (WT) patients (pts) with resected stage III colon cancer (CC):results from NCCTG Intergroup phase III Trial N0147. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(18s).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee D-W, Kim KJ, Han S-W, Lee HJ, Rhee YY, Bae JM, et al. KRAS Mutation is associated with worse prognosis in stage III or high-risk stage II colon cancer patients treated with adjuvant FOLFOX. Ann Surg Oncol [Internet]. 2014;187–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kadowaki S, Kakuta M, Takahashi S, Takahashi A, Arai Y, Nishimura Y, et al. Prognostic value of KRAS and BRAF mutations in curatively resected colorectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21(4):1275–83.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Venderbosch S, Nagtegaal ID, Maughan TS, Smith CG, Cheadle JP, Fisher D, et al. Mismatch repair status and BRAF mutation status in metastatic colorectal cancer patients: a pooled analysis of the CAIRO, CAIRO2, COIN, and FOCUS studies. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:5322–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van Cutsem E, Köhne C-H, Láng I, Folprecht G, Nowacki MP, Cascinu S, et al. Cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: updated analysis of overall survival according to tumor KRAS and BRAF mutation status. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(15):2011–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen KH, Lin YL, Liau JY, Tsai JH, Tseng LH, Lin LI, et al. BRAF mutation may have different prognostic implications in early- and late-stage colorectal cancer. Med Oncol. 2016;33(5).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kakar S, Aksoy S, Burgart LJ, Smyrk TC. Mucinous carcinoma of the colon: correlation of loss of mismatch repair enzymes with clinicopathologic features and survival. Mod Pathol. 2004;17(6):696–700.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Popat S, Hubner R, Houlston RS. Systematic review of microsatellite instability and colorectal cancer prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(3):609–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    De Sousa E, Melo F, Wang X, Jansen M, Fessler E, Trinh A, de Rooij LPMH, et al. Poor-prognosis colon cancer is defined by a molecularly distinct subtype and develops from serrated precursor lesions. Nat Med [Internet]. 2013;19(5):614–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sadanandam A, Lyssiotis CA, Homicsko K, Collisson EA, Gibb WJ, Wullschleger S, et al. A colorectal cancer classification system that associates cellular phenotype and responses to therapy. Nat Med [Internet]. 2013;19(5):619–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Guinney J, Dienstmann R, Wang X, de Reyniès A, Schlicker A, Soneson C, et al. The consensus molecular subtypes of colorectal cancer. Nat Med. 2015;21(11):1350–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stintzing S, Wirapati P, Lenz H-J, Neureiter D, von Weikersthal LF, Decker T. Consensus molecular subgroups (CMS) of colorectal cancer (CRC) and first-line efficacy of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab in the FIRE3 (AIO KRK-0306) trial. J Clin Oncol. 2017; 35(15)_suppl:3510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Le DT, Uram JN, Wang H, Bartlett BR, Kemberling H, Eyring AD, et al. PD-1 blockade in tumors with mismatch-repair deficiency. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:2509–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Le DT, Durham JN, Smith KN, Wang Hao, Bartlett Bjarne R, Aulakh Laveet K, et al. Mismatch-repair deficiency predicts response of solid tumors to PD-1 blockade. Science. 2017;357(6349):409–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Overman MJ, Lonardi S, Wong KYM, Lenz H-J, Gelsomino F, Aglietta M, et al. Durable clinical benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in DNA mismatch repair—deficient/microsatellite instability-high metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(8):773–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Federación de Sociedades Españolas de Oncología (FESEO) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Gil-Raga
    • 1
    Email author
  • E. Jantus-Lewintre
    • 2
    • 3
  • S. Gallach
    • 2
  • V. Giner-Bosch
    • 4
  • A. Frangi-Caregnato
    • 5
  • M. J. Safont-Aguilera
    • 6
  • J. Garde-Noguera
    • 7
  • E. Zorraquino-Pina
    • 8
  • M. García-Martínez
    • 9
  • C. Camps-Herrero
    • 6
    • 10
  1. 1.Medical Oncology DepartmentHospital de RequenaRequena (Valencia)Spain
  2. 2.Molecular Oncology Laboratory, CIBERONCFundación Investigación Hospital General Universitario de ValenciaValenciaSpain
  3. 3.Biotechnology Department, CIBERONCUniversitat Politécnica de ValènciaValenciaSpain
  4. 4.Centre for Quality and Change ManagementUniversitat Politècnica de ValènciaValenciaSpain
  5. 5.Department of SurgeryHospital de SaguntoValenciaSpain
  6. 6.Medical Oncology DepartmentHospital General Universitario de ValenciaValenciaSpain
  7. 7.Medical Oncology DepartmentHospital Arnau de VilanovaValenciaSpain
  8. 8.Anatomic Pathology DepartmentHospital de SaguntoValenciaSpain
  9. 9.Medical Oncology Department, Hospital de SaguntoFundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO)ValenciaSpain
  10. 10.Department of Medicine, CIBERONCUniversitat de ValenciaValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations