Pan-cancer prevalence, molecular landscape, and prognostic impact of <i>CCNE1</i> amplification across 76,046 malignancies.

3125 Background: CCNE1 amplification ( CCNE1 amp) is an oncogenic driver that confers synthetic-lethal vulnerability to agents targeting cell cycle and replication stress. While CCNE1 amp is a poor prognostic marker in some solid tumor types, pan-tumor data are limited. We used the MSK Clinical Sequencing Cohort to characterize its pan-tumor prevalence, molecular landscape, and prognostic impact. Methods: We analyzed data from consented patients with solid tumors sequenced by MSK-IMPACT between July 2014 and August 2025. CCNE1 amp was defined as an amplification or gain per clinical report. Tumor-level prevalence was calculated and reported for histologies with ≥10 CCNE1amp tumors. Co-occurring alterations were evaluated using the first CCNE1 amp sample per tumor type in each patient, with Fisher’s exact test and Benjamini-Hochberg correction. Overall survival was measured from the date of first sequencing to death or last contact. Results: Among 76,046 tumors, the prevalence of CCNE1amp was 2.7% (n = 2,036). Our CCNE1 amp cohort comprised predominantly ovarian (21%, n=435), uterine (15%, n=301), non-small cell lung (11%, n=231), esophagogastric (10%, n=206), and breast cancers (8%, n=168). Prevalence rates were highest in uterine carcinosarcoma (25.6%); ovarian carcinosarcoma (20%); uterine serous carcinoma (16.2%); high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (15.4%); osteosarcoma (11.9%); gallbladder adenocarcinoma (9.7%); and esophageal adenocarcinoma (9.1%). Prevalence rates in breast cancer were 2.1% and in non-small cell lung cancer 2.6%. Among 67 patients with paired pre- and post-treatment samples of purity ≥30%, CCNE1 amp was reported in all samples in 42% of patients. The most frequently co-mutated genes were TP53 (87%), PIK3CA (12%), KRAS (8%), and RB1 (7%). Most common amplifications included the 19q neighbors CEBPA (31%), KMT2B (22%), and AKT2 (22%); as well as MYC (14%); and ERBB2 (13%). The most significant co-occurrences (q&lt;0.05) were TP53 mutations (OR 11.5) and MYC amplifications (OR 3.5); CCNE1amp was mutually exclusive with PTEN (OR 0.37) and KRAS mutations (OR 0.55). CCNE1amp samples had a higher median fraction of genome altered (median 0.35 vs. 0.12; p&lt;0.001). CCNE1 amp was associated with worsened overall survival in a multivariate Cox model stratified by cancer type and adjusted for age, stage and TP53 status (adjusted HR 1.25; 95% CI 1.17-1.33). Its adverse prognostic impact was more pronounced in TP53 wt (HR 1.62; 95% CI 1.38-1.91) vs. TP53 mut tumors (HR 1.19; 95% CI 1.11-1.27; p for interaction &lt;0.001). Conclusions: CCNE1 amplification defines a pan-cancer genomic subset associated with poor prognosis, genomic instability, and few co-occurring actionable alterations, supporting its relevance as a therapeutic target. Discordance between paired samples suggests that a single negative biopsy may not rule out CCNE1amp.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2026-05-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.3125
Primary Topic
Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Pan-cancer prevalence, molecular landscape, and prognostic impact of CCNE1 amplification across 76,046 malignancies.

Allison L. Richards, Ricardo Dahmer Tiecher, Vignesh Ravichandran, Alison M. Schram et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
article

Pan-cancer prevalence, molecular landscape, and prognostic impact of CCNE1 amplification across 76,046 malignancies.

Allison L. Richards, Ricardo Dahmer Tiecher, Vignesh Ravichandran, Alison M. Schram, Ezra Rosen, Mark Donoghue
article en

Abstract

3125 Background: CCNE1 amplification ( CCNE1 amp) is an oncogenic driver that confers synthetic-lethal vulnerability to agents targeting cell cycle and replication stress. While CCNE1 amp is a poor prognostic marker in some solid tumor types, pan-tumor data are limited. We used the MSK Clinical Sequencing Cohort to characterize its pan-tumor prevalence, molecular landscape, and prognostic impact. Methods: We analyzed data from consented patients with solid tumors sequenced by MSK-IMPACT between July 2014 and August 2025. CCNE1 amp was defined as an amplification or gain per clinical report. Tumor-level prevalence was calculated and reported for histologies with ≥10 CCNE1amp tumors. Co-occurring alterations were evaluated using the first CCNE1 amp sample per tumor type in each patient, with Fisher’s exact test and Benjamini-Hochberg correction. Overall survival was measured from the date of first sequencing to death or last contact. Results: Among 76,046 tumors, the prevalence of CCNE1amp was 2.7% (n = 2,036). Our CCNE1 amp cohort comprised predominantly ovarian (21%, n=435), uterine (15%, n=301), non-small cell lung (11%, n=231), esophagogastric (10%, n=206), and breast cancers (8%, n=168). Prevalence rates were highest in uterine carcinosarcoma (25.6%); ovarian carcinosarcoma (20%); uterine serous carcinoma (16.2%); high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (15.4%); osteosarcoma (11.9%); gallbladder adenocarcinoma (9.7%); and esophageal adenocarcinoma (9.1%). Prevalence rates in breast cancer were 2.1% and in non-small cell lung cancer 2.6%. Among 67 patients with paired pre- and post-treatment samples of purity ≥30%, CCNE1 amp was reported in all samples in 42% of patients. The most frequently co-mutated genes were TP53 (87%), PIK3CA (12%), KRAS (8%), and RB1 (7%). Most common amplifications included the 19q neighbors CEBPA (31%), KMT2B (22%), and AKT2 (22%); as well as MYC (14%); and ERBB2 (13%). The most significant co-occurrences (q&lt;0.05) were TP53 mutations (OR 11.5) and MYC amplifications (OR 3.5); CCNE1amp was mutually exclusive with PTEN (OR 0.37) and KRAS mutations (OR 0.55). CCNE1amp samples had a higher median fraction of genome altered (median 0.35 vs. 0.12; p&lt;0.001). CCNE1 amp was associated with worsened overall survival in a multivariate Cox model stratified by cancer type and adjusted for age, stage and TP53 status (adjusted HR 1.25; 95% CI 1.17-1.33). Its adverse prognostic impact was more pronounced in TP53 wt (HR 1.62; 95% CI 1.38-1.91) vs. TP53 mut tumors (HR 1.19; 95% CI 1.11-1.27; p for interaction &lt;0.001). Conclusions: CCNE1 amplification defines a pan-cancer genomic subset associated with poor prognosis, genomic instability, and few co-occurring actionable alterations, supporting its relevance as a therapeutic target. Discordance between paired samples suggests that a single negative biopsy may not rule out CCNE1amp.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 44(16_suppl)
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.