Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 1, 2026

Discovery of Driver Genes in Colorectal HT29-derived Cancer Stem-Like Tumorspheres
Published on: July 22, 2020
Concurrent driver mutations induce distinct tumour morphologies on radiological imaging
Diana Ivonne Rodríguez Sánchez1, Thera Vanneste2, Julian Middelkoop2
1GROW Research Institute for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Background:
Most radiogenomic studies examine single driver mutations in isolation, despite evidence that co-occurring driver alterations are common and functionally interacting in cancer. Whether concurrent mutations produce distinct imaging phenotypes or simply average single-mutation effects remains unknown.
Methods:
A multi-cancer cohort of 1235 patients with 8633 segmented lesions from contrast-enhanced CT scans and matched genomic profiling was retrospectively assembled. Patients with no driver mutations, TP53 + other mutations, TP53-only, EGFR-only, KRAS-only, and strictly TP53 + EGFR or TP53 + KRAS mutations were compared. Primary analyses were conducted in the original feature space at the patient level (via median aggregation). Separation between mutation groups was quantified using centroid distance and cross-group inter-patient distance with 1000 patient-aware label-stratified bootstraps. Lesion-level dimensionality reduction was used for descriptive visualisation and mixed-effects models adjusted for tumour site. A cross-validated parental-axis geometry analysis tested emergence beyond additivity.
Results:
Single-mutant cohorts formed distinct phenotypes: EGFR-only versus KRAS-only centroid distance 18.4 (95% CI = 12.0-23.8); TP53-only versus EGFR-only 16.9 (12.3-21.3). Co-mutated tumours were separate from parents in the patient-level and lesion-level space. Patient-level centroid distances were TP53-only versus TP53 + EGFR = 13.4 (10.1-16.9); EGFR-only versus TP53 + EGFR = 7.7 (5.3-11.6); TP53-only versus TP53 + KRAS = 6.4 (4.5-9.1). Co-mutated lesions were morphologically closer to TP53-only than to the EGFR-only or KRAS-only cohort (Mahalanobis p < 0.001). Emergence beyond additivity was supported for TP53 + EGFR (off-axis p = 0.009) and trended for TP53 + KRAS (p = 0.062).
Conclusions:
Across different cancers, CT radiomics identified genotype-specific phenotypes and showed that co-mutations produce distinct morphologies. Co-mutation context should be modelled explicitly in radiogenomics and prospectively validated for non-invasive molecular stratification.
Related Concept Videos
Cancers Originate from Somatic Mutations in a Single Cell
Tumor Progression
Colon cancer is one of the best-documented examples of tumor progression. Early mutation in the APC gene in colon cells causes a small growth on the colon wall called a polyp. With time, this polyp grows into a benign, pre-cancerous tumor. Further...
Cancer-Critical Genes I: Proto-oncogenes
When the function of certain critical genes, especially those involved in cell cycle regulation and cell growth signaling cascades, gets disrupted, it upsets the cell cycle progression. Such cells with unchecked cell cycles start proliferating uncontrollably and eventually develop into tumors.
Such genes that act...
Cancer-Critical Genes II: Tumor Suppressor Genes
When the function of certain critical genes, especially those involved in cell cycle regulation and cell growth signaling cascades, gets disrupted, it upsets the cell cycle progression. Such cells with unchecked cell cycles start proliferating uncontrollably and eventually develop into tumors.
Such genes that act...
Adaptive Mechanisms in Cancer Cells
Some of the advantages that cancer cells have on normal cells include - enhanced ability to divide without terminally differentiating, induce new blood vessel formation,...
Cancer

