Comparative analysis of the mutational status of non-muscle-invasive and muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Aim. To identify mutational profile differences of non-muscle-invasive (NMIUC) and muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma (MIUC) of the bladder, assessed through isolating alterations in deoxyribonucleic (DNA) and ribonucleic (RNA) acids by a next-generation sequencing (NGS) method using a panel of 523 genes.

Materials and methods. Tumor tissue and medical data of 72 patients with histologically confirmed bladder UC were studied. NMIUC was diagnosed in 40 (55.6%) patients, and MIUC in 32 (44.4%) patients. In 25 (34.7%) samples the tumor grade was assessed as low: 24 (33.3%) with NMIUC and 1 (1.4%) with MIUC, and in 47 (65.3%) as high: 16 (22.2%) with NMIUC, 31 (43.1%) with MIUC. In isolated tumor cells DNA and RNA alterations were detected by NGS using a panel of 523 genes.

Results. NMIUC, compared to MIUC, was characterized by a lower median mutational burden (9.9 mut/Mb vs. 11.8 mut/Mb, respectively; p=0.037) and was associated with a higher rate of mutations of the FGFR/FGF (p=0.059) and STAG2/IRF (p=0.055) signaling pathways genes, as well as the FGFR3 (p=0.001) and STAG2 (p=0.026) genes with a lower rate of aberrations of the p53 signaling pathway genes (p=0.005), TP53 (p=0.001) and FGF4 (p=0.057). The low grade NMIUC samples had a lower rate of high mutational burden (vs. high grade NMIUC, p=0.004; vs high grade MIUC, p=0.067) and were also associated with a higher rate of FGF/FGFR signaling pathway gene mutations (vs. high grade MIUC, p<0.0001; vs. high grade NMIUC, p<0.0001), mainly due to FGFR3 alterations (vs. high grade NMIUC; p<0.0001; vs. high grade MIUC; p<0.0001). Low grade NMIUC, compared to high grade MIUC, had a higher rate of PIK3CA (p=0.027) and KDM6A (p=0.001) mutations. The mutational profile of high grade NMIUC and high grade MIUC did not differ significantly. High grade MIUC, compared to low grade NMIUC had a higher rate of mutations of the p53 pathway genes (p=0.008), including TP53 (p=0.001), and a significantly lower rate of alterations of the FGF/FGFR signal pathway genes (p<0.0001), including FGFR3 (p<0.0001), as well as the STAG2/IRF pathway genes (p=0.035) and the PIK3CA gene (p=0.027).

Conclusion. Differences of the histological structure and natural history of low grade NMIUC, high grade NMIUC, and high grade MIUC are due to significant differences in their mutational status. NMIUC has a high rate of mutations in genes of the FGF/FGFR signaling pathway and inactivating mutations in STAG2 and KDM6A genes. MIUC typically has driver mutations that inactivate the p53 signal pathway. High grade NMIUC has alterations typical for both NMIUC (FGF/FGFR pathway gene mutations) and MIUC (p53 pathway gene mutations).

About the authors

Maria I. Volkova

Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution “Moscow City Hospital named after S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department”; Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education

Author for correspondence.
Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7754-6624

D. Sci. (Med.), Prof., Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution “Oncological Center No. 1 of Moscow City Hospital named after S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department”, Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

Darya N. Khmelkova

Center of Genetics and Reproductive Medicine Genetico PJSC; ITGen Labs LLC

Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4673-1031

Deputy Director, Center of Genetics and Reproductive Medicine Genetico PJSC, Director, ITGen Labs LLC

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

Yana V. Gridneva

Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution “Moscow City Hospital named after S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department”; Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education; Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9015-2002
SPIN-code: 4189-6387

Cand. Sci. (Med.), Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution “Oncological Center No. 1 of Moscow City Hospital named after S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department”, Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow; Moscow

Konstantin A. Blagodatskikh

Center of Genetics and Reproductive Medicine Genetico PJSC

Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8732-0300

Cand. Sci. (Biol.)

Russian Federation, Moscow

Anna A. Zheludkevich

Center of Genetics and Reproductive Medicine Genetico PJSC

Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com

Leading Specialist

Russian Federation, Moscow

Irina V. Mironova

Center of Genetics and Reproductive Medicine Genetico PJSC

Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com

Laboratory Head

Russian Federation, Moscow

Anna B. Semenova

Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution “Moscow City Hospital named after S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department”

Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8433-0837

D. Sci. (Med.); “Oncological Center No. 1

Russian Federation, Moscow

Alexander A. Veshchevailov

Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution “Moscow City Hospital named after S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department”

Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0009-0003-4372-6135

pathologist; “Oncological Center No. 1

Russian Federation, Moscow

Alexandra V. Babkina

Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution “Moscow City Hospital named after S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department”

Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5485-5803

pathologist, Oncological Center No. 1

Russian Federation, Moscow

Sergey A. Bondarev

Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution “Moscow City Hospital named after S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department”

Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0009-0000-6205-3106

D. Sci. (Med.), Oncological Center No.

Russian Federation, Moscow

Vsevolod N. Galkin

Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution “Moscow City Hospital named after S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department”; Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Email: mivolkova6@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6619-6179

D. Sci. (Med.), Prof., Moscow State Budgetary Healthcare Institution “Oncological Center No. 1 of Moscow City Hospital named after S.S. Yudin, Moscow Healthcare Department”, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Réunion, Moscow; Moscow

References

  1. Румянцев А.А., Булычкин П.В., Волкова М.И. и др. Рак мочевого пузыря. Практические рекомендации RUSSCO, часть 1.2. Злокачественные опухоли. 2024;14(3s2):221-41 [Rumiantsev AA, Bulychkin PV, Volkova MI, et al. Bladder Cancer. Practical Recommendations of RUSSCO, part 1.2. Malignant Tumors. 2024;14(3s2):221-41 (in Russian)].
  2. Audenet F, Attalla K, Sfakianos JP. The evolution of bladder cancer genomics: What have we learned and how can we use it? Urol Oncol. 2018;36(7):313-20. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.02.017
  3. Van Batavia J, Yamany T, Molotkov A, et al. Bladder cancers arise from distinct urothelial sub-populations. Nat Cell Biol. 2014;16(10):982-91, 1-5. doi: 10.1038/ncb3038
  4. Illumina, Inc. Available at: https://support.illumina.com/content/dam/illuminasupport/documents/documentation/software_documentation/trusight/trusight-oncology500/trusight-oncology-500-local-app-v2.2-user-guide-1000000137777-01.pdf. Accessed: 05.06.2025.
  5. ClinVar. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar. Accessed: 05.06.2025.
  6. Li MM, Datto M, Duncavage EJ, et al. Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation and Reporting of Sequence Variants in Cancer: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and College of American Pathologists. J Mol Diagn. 2017;19(1):4-23. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2016.10.002
  7. Chakravarty D, Gao J, Phillips SM, et al. OncoKB: A precision oncology knowledge base. JCO Precis Oncol. 2017;2017:PO.17.00011. doi: 10.1200/PO.17.00011
  8. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Comprehensive Molecular Characterization of Urothelial Bladder Carcinoma. Nature. 2014;507(7492): 315-22. doi: 10.1038/nature12965
  9. Prip F, Lamy P, Lindskrog SV, et al. Comprehensive genomic characterization of early-stage bladder cancer. Nat Genet. 2025;57(1):115-25. doi: 10.1038/s41588-024-02030-z
  10. Гриднева Я.В., Хмелькова Д.Н., Волкова М.И., и др. Опыт исследования образцов уротелиальной карциномы с помощью панели секвенирования нового поколения на 523 гена. Современная онкология. 2024;26(4):489-94 [Gridneva YaV, Khmelkova DN, Volkova MI, et al. Experience of Next-Generation Sequencing in urothelial carcinoma specimens with panel for 523 genes. Journal of Modern Oncology. 2024;26(4):489-94 (in Russian)]. doi: 10.26442/18151434.2024.4.203018
  11. Alexandrov LB, Nik-Zainal S, Wedge DC, et al. Signatures of mutational processes in human cancer. Nature. 2013;500(7463):415-21. doi: 10.1038/nature12477
  12. Chalmers ZR, Connelly CF, Fabrizio D, et al. Analysis of 100,000 human cancer genomes reveals the landscape of tumor mutational burden. Genome Med. 2017;9(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s13073-017-0424-2
  13. Klempner SJ, Fabrizio D, Bane S, et al. Tumor mutational burden as a predictive biomarker for response to immune checkpoint inhibitors: A review of current evidence. Oncologist. 2020;25:e147-59. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0244
  14. Chandran EBA, Iannantuono GM, Atiq SO, et al. Mismatch repair deficiency and microsatellite instability in urothelial carcinoma: A systematic review and metaanalysis. BMJ Oncol. 2024;3(1):e000335. doi: 10.1136/bmjonc-2024-000335
  15. Al-Ahmadie H, Netto GJ. Updates on the genomics of bladder cancer and novel molecular taxonomy. Adv Anatomic Pathol. 2020;27(1):36-43. doi: 10.1097/PAP.0000000000000252
  16. Loriot Y, Kamal M, Syx L, et al. The genomic and transcriptomic landscape of metastastic urothelial cancer. Nat Commun. 2024;15(1):8603. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-52915-0
  17. Li Y, Sun L, Guo X, et al. Frontiers in bladder cancer genomic research. Front Oncol. 2021;11:670729. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.670729
  18. Nassar AH, Umeton R, Kim J, et al. mutational analysis of 472 urothelial carcinoma across grades and anatomic sites. Clin Cancer Res. 2019;25(8):2458-70. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-3147
  19. Wang F, Dong X, Yang F, Xing N. Comparative analysis of differentially mutated genes in non-muscle and muscle-invasive bladder cancer in the chinese population by whole exome sequencing. Front Genet. 2022;13:831146. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2022.831146
  20. Solomon DA, Kim JS, Bondaruk J, et al. Frequent truncating mutations of STAG2 in bladder cancer. Nat Genet. 2013;45(12):1428-30. doi: 10.1038/ng.2800
  21. Sjödahl G, Eriksson P, Patschan O, et al. Molecular changes during progression from nonmuscle invasive to advanced urothelial carcinoma. Int J Cancer. 2020;146(9):2636-47. doi: 10.1002/ijc.32737
  22. Neuzillet Y, Paoletti X, Ouerhani S, et al. A meta-analysis of the relationship between FGFR3 and TP53 mutations in bladder cancer. PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e48993. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048993
  23. Loriot Y, Necchi A, Park SH, et al. Erdafitinib in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(4):338-48. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1817323
  24. Catto JWF, Tran B, Rouprêt M, et al.; THOR-2 Cohort 1 Investigators. Erdafitinib in BCG-treated high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Ann Oncol. 2024;35(1):98-106. doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2023.09.3116
  25. Athans SR, Withers H, Stablewski A, et al. STAG2 expression imparts distinct therapeutic vulnerabilities in muscle-invasive bladder cancer cells. Oncogenesis. 2025;14(1):4. doi: 10.1038/s41389-025-00548-3
  26. Gui Y, Guo G, Huang Y. Frequent mutations of chromatin remodeling genes in transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Nat Genet. 2011;43(9):875-8. doi: 10.1038/ng.907
  27. Andricovich J, Perkail S, Kai Y, et al. Loss of KDM6A activates super-enhancers to induce gender-specific squamous-like pancreatic cancer and confers sensitivity to BET inhibitors. Cancer Cell. 2018;33(3):512-26.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2018.02.003
  28. Chen X, Lin X, Pang G, et al. Significance of KDM6A mutation in bladder cancer immune escape. BMC Cancer. 2021;21(1):635. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08372-9
  29. Jindal T, Zhu X, Bose R, et al. Somatic alterations of TP53 and MDM2 associated with response to enfortumab vedotin in patients with advanced urothelial cancer. Front Oncol. 2023;13:1161089. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1161089
  30. Faltas BM, Osman M, Evans MG, et al. CLONEVO: Preoperative abemaciclib for cisplatin-ineligible muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) with molecular response assessment. J Clin Oncol. 2024;43(Suppl. 16). Abstract 4520. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.4520

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2026 Consilium Medicum

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
 


Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).