Clinical Significance of Pathogenicity of Somatic Mutations in Oral Leukoplakia: a Prospective Observational Study

Background. The vast majority of malignant neoplasms of the oral mucosa refer to squamous cell carcinomas. The development of squamous cell carcinoma of the oral mucosa is often promoted by previous potentially malignant diseases, with oral leukoplakia dominating among them.

Objective. To determine the clinical significance of the pathogenicity of somatic mutations in oral mucosal leukoplakia.

Methods. The study material included 24 samples of abnormal epithelium of the oral mucosa from leukoplakia patients. QIAamp DNA FFPE Tissue Kit (Qiagen, Germany) was used for deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) extraction from the samples. DNA sequencing was performed using IlluminaNextSeq 550 sequencer and TruSight™ Oncology 500 DNA Kit For Use with NextSeq (Illumina, USA). All DNA extractions from biological samples, preparation and sequencing of DNA libraries were performed step-by-step in strict accordance with the guidelines provided with the respective reagent kits. Bioinformatics analysis was carried out using specific software Illumina Base Space (Illumina, USA) and Galaxy Project (The Galaxy Community, a non-profit international project) according to current guidelines. The desired power of the study accounted for 90%. Two Proportions Z test was performed by means of The Sample Size Calculation of Statistica 12 (StatSoft, Inc.) with the set option “one-tailed hypothesis”, because it was initially assumed that pathogenic (oncogenic) genetic variants occur in the tissue of oral leukoplakia much more frequently than in the human reference genome used for sequence alignment.

Results. The pathogenic somatic mutations in the TP53, KRAS, APC, NRAs and BRAF genes, identified in this study, alone or in combination, are highly likely (hazard ratio 3000-11000) to be associated with the development of oral mucosal leukoplakia and low-grade epithelial dysplasia. The multiplicity of pathogenic and likely pathogenic genetic variants associated with epithelial dysplasia, as well as the fact that a number of variants do not occur in all patients, suggests that the same histotype of oral mucosal dysplasia may develop under the influence of different mutations.

Conclusion. The pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants of the TP53, KRAS, APC, NRAS and BRAF genes, identified in this study, alone or in combination, are highly likely (hazard ratio 3000–11000) to be associated with the development of leukoplakia and low-grade epithelial dysplasia.

1. Kalavrezos N, Scully C. Mouth Cancer for Clinicians. Part 1: Cancer. Dent Update. 2015;42(3):250–252, 255–256, 259–260. https://doi.org/10.12968/denu.2015.42.3.250

2. van der Waal I. Oral leukoplakia, the ongoing discussion on definition and terminology.Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2015;20(6):e685-e692. https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.21007

3. Scheifele C, Schlechte H, Bethke G, Reichart PA. Nachweis von TP53-Mutationen mittels Exfoliativzytologie (brush biopsy) oraler Leukoplakien [Detection of TP53-mutations in brush biopsies from oral leukoplakias]. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2002;6(6):410–414. German. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-002-0425-0

4. Ogmundsdóttir HM, Hilmarsdóttir H, Björnsson J, Holbrook WP. Longitudinal study of TP53 mutations in eight patients with potentially malignant oral mucosal disorders. J Oral Pathol Med. 2009;38(9):716–721. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0714.2009.00767.x

5. Suwasini S, Chatterjee K, Purkait SK, Samaddar D, Chatterjee A, Kumar M. Expression of P53 Protein and Ki-67 Antigen in Oral Leukoplakia with Different Histopathological Grades of Epithelial Dysplasia. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2018;8(6):513–522. https://doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_241_18

6. Deshmukh AV, Gupta A, Chaudhari AG, Gangane NM. Correlation of p53 expression with Clinical Presentation and Prognosis of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients: A Pilot Study. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022;74(Suppl 2):1836–1840. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-020-01859-0

7. Izumchenko E, Sun K, Jones S, Brait M, Agrawal N, Koch W, McCord CL, Riley DR, Angiuoli SV, Velculescu VE, Jiang WW, Sidransky D. Notch1 mutations are drivers of oral tumorigenesis. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2015;8(4):277–286. https://doi.org/10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-14-0257

8. Broner EC, Trujillo JA, Korzinkin M, Subbannayya T, Agrawal N, Ozerov IV, Zhavoronkov A, Rooper L, Kotlov N, Shen L, Pearson AT, Rosenberg AJ, Savage PA, Mishra V, Chatterjee A, Sidransky D, Izumchenko E. Doublecortin-Like Kinase 1 (DCLK1) Is a Novel NOTCH Pathway Signaling Regulator in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Front Oncol. 2021;11:677051. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.677051

9. Warnakulasuriya S, Ariyawardana A. Malignant transformation of oral leukoplakia: a systematic review of observational studies. J Oral Pathol Med. 2016;45(3):155–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/jop.12339

10. Kanzi AM, San JE, Chimukangara B, Wilkinson E, Fish M, Ramsuran V, de Oliveira T. Next Generation Sequencing and Bioinformatics Analysis of Family Genetic Inheritance.Front Genet. 2020;11:544162. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2020.544162

11. Feltes BC, Poloni JF, Nunes IJG, Faria SS, Dorn M. Multi-Approach Bioinformatics Analysis of Curated Omics Data Provides a Gene Expression Panorama for Multiple Cancer Types. Front Genet. 2020;11:586602. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2020.586602

12. Fox AJ, Hiemenz MC, Lieberman DB, Sukhadia S, Li B, Grubb J, Candrea P, Ganapathy K, Zhao J, Roth D, Alley E, Loren A, Morrissette JJ. Next Generation Sequencing for the Detection of Actionable Mutations in Solid and Liquid Tumors. J Vis Exp. 2016;(115):52758. https://doi.org/10.3791/52758

13. Buzdugan L, Kalisch M, Navarro A, Schunk D, Fehr E, Bühlmann P. Assessing statistical significance in multivariable genome wide association analysis. Bioinformatics. 2016;32(13):1990–2000. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btw128

14. Mai TT, Turner P, Corander J. Boosting heritability: estimating the genetic component of phenotypic variation with multiple sample splitting. BMC Bioinformatics. 2021;22(1):164. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-021-04079-7

15. Ajay SS, Parker SC, Abaan HO, Fajardo KV, Margulies EH. Accurate and comprehensive sequencing of personal genomes. Genome Res. 2011;21(9):1498–1505. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.123638.111

16. Landrum MJ, Lee JM, Benson M, Brown GR, Chao C, Chitipiralla S, Gu B, Hart J, Hoffman D, Jang W, Karapetyan K, Katz K, Liu C, Maddipatla Z, Malheiro A, McDaniel K, Ovetsky M, Riley G, Zhou G, Holmes JB, Kattman BL, Maglott DR. ClinVar: improving access to variant interpretations and supporting evidence. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018;46(D1):D1062–D1067. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkx1153

17. Landrum MJ, Chitipiralla S, Brown GR, Chen C, Gu B, Hart J, Hoffman D, Jang W, Kaur K, Liu C, Lyoshin V, Maddipatla Z, Maiti R, Mitchell J, O’Leary N, Riley GR, Shi W, Zhou G, Schneider V, Maglott D, Holmes JB, Kattman BL. ClinVar: improvements to accessing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48(D1):D835–D844. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkz972

18. Loeb LA, Loeb KR, Anderson JP. Multiple mutations and cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100(3):776–781. https://doi.org/1073/pnas.0334858100. Epub 2003 Jan 27. PMID: 12552134; PMCID: PMC298677

19. Saito Y, Koya J, Kataoka K. Multiple mutations within individual oncogenes. Cancer Sci. 2021;112(2):483–489. https://doi.org/10.1111/cas.14699

20. Nussinov R, Tsai CJ, Jang H. How can same-gene mutations promote both cancer and developmental disorders? Sci Adv. 2022;8(2):eabm2059. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abm2059