Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız

özkan karacaer, kübra; SILAN, Fatma; ALBUZ, BURCU; ŞAHİN, Hacı Öztürk

doi:10.32708/uutfd.731913

Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız

Hacı Öztürk ŞAHİN, (Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Anabilim Dalı, Çanakkale, Türkiye)

Kübra ÖZKAN KARACAER, (Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Anabilim Dalı, Çanakkale, Türkiye)

Burcu ALBUZ, (Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Tıbbi Genetik Anabilim Dalı, Çanakkale, Türkiye)

Fatma SILAN (Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Tıbbi Genetik Anabilim Dalı, Çanakkale, Türkiye)

Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi

6 1

Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 46 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 349 - 356 Metin Dili: Türkçe DOI: 10.32708/uutfd.731913 İndeks Tarihi: 24-09-2021

Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız

Öz:

Amacımız, yaş ve aile hikayesinden bağımsız olarak merkezimizde over (OC) ve endometriyum kanseri (EC) tanısı ile cerrahisi ve ardındangenetik mutasyon analizi uygulanan hastalarımızın mutasyon sıklığını ve sekanslarını araştırmaktır. Son yıllarda önleyici stratejilerin gelişimidışında tedavi seçeneklerindeki fırsatlar ve genetik çalışmaların artışı herediter kanserlere ilgiyi arttırmıştır. En sık görülen herediter jinekolojik kanserler; herediter meme over kanseri (HBOC) ve Lynch Sendromu (LS) dur. Hastalığın düşük prevalansı, test pahalılığı ve etiksebepler popülasyon bazlı taramayı kullanışsız hale getirmektedir. Birimimizde 01.04.2018-01.10.2019 tarihleri arasında genetik araştırmasıyapılan 37 EC ve 15 OC tanısı almış hastamız çalışmaya dahil edilmiştir. BRCA1/2 ve LS genlerini de içeren (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2) 25 genden oluşan geniş ailevi panel testi uygulanmıştır. Ailevi gen paneli testi yapılan 27 EC hastamızda, 1 MLH1 ve 1 ATM genindepatolojik mutasyon saptandı (%3.7 LS,%3.7 non LS). 11 hastada önemi belirsiz varyant mutasyon (VUS) görüldü (%40.7). BRCA mutasyonaraştırması yapılan 20 EC’li hastamızda patolojik mutasyon saptanmadı. BRCA mutasyonu araştırılan 14 OC’lu hastamızda 3 patolojikvaryant identifiye edildi ve hepsi BRCA1 genindeydi (HBOC %21,4). Ailevi kanser paneli değerlendirilen 4 OC’lu hastada 1 MSH6 ve 1ATM geninde patolojik mutasyonlar izlendi. Over ve endometriyum kanserlerinde ailevi geniş mutasyon verilerinin çoğalması ve literatürdepaylaşımı VUS oranlarını azaltacak, BRCA ve LS dışındaki genlerin jinekolojik kanserlerdeki rolünü ortaya çıkartacak ve yeni tarama algoritmalarını oluşturacaktır.

Anahtar Kelime:

Mutation Profiles Detected by New Generation DNA Sequence Analysis in Gynecological Cancers, Single Centre Case Series Results ABSTRACT

Öz:

Our objective is to investigate the mutation frequency and sequences of our patients, who underwent surgery with a diagnosis of ovarian (OC) and endometrial cancer (EC) and subsequently underwent genetic mutation analysis, regardless of age and family history. In recent years, apart from the development of preventive strategies, opportunities in treatment options and increase in genetic studies have increased the interest in hereditary cancers. The most common hereditary gynecological cancers are hereditary breast ovarian cancer (HBOC) and Lynch Syndrome (LS). The low prevalence of the disease, cost of testing, and ethical reasons make population-based screening impractical. 37 patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer and 15 patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer were included in the study, and their genetic research was conducted in our department between 01.04.2018 and 01.10.2019. A large familial panel test consisting of 25 genes including BRCA1/2 and LS genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS 2) was performed. Pathological mutation was found in 1 MLH1 and 1 ATM genes in 27 patients with endometrial cancer who underwent familial gene panel test (3.7% LS, 3.7% non LS). Eleven patients had a variant mutation of uncertain significance (VUS) (40.7%). No pathological mutation was found in our 20 patients with endometrial cancer who were investigated for BRCA mutation. In our 14 patients with ovarian cancer whose BRCA mutation was investigated, 3 pathological variants were identified, and all of them were in BRCA1 gene (HBOC 21.4%). Pathological mutations in 1 MSH6 and 1 ATM genes were observed in 4 patients with ovarian cancer whose familial cancer panel was evaluated. The proliferation of comprehensive familial mutation data in ovarian and endometrial cancers and their sharing in the literature will reduce VUS rates, reveal the role of genes other than BRCA and LS in gynecological cancers, and create new screening algorithms.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Harper P. Practical Genetic Counselling. Sixth Edition. London: Hodder Arnold; 2004.
2. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 2015;136(5):E359-86.
3. M.S. Daniels. Genetic testing by cancer site: uterus. Cancer J 2012;18:338-342.
4. Lamberti C, Kruse R, Ruelfs C, et al. Microsatellite instabilitya useful diagnostic tool to select patients at high risk for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: a study in different groups of patients with colorectal cancer. Gut 1999;44:839–843.
5. Resnick KE, Hampel H, Fishel R, Cohn DE. Current and emerging trends in Lynch syndrome identification in women with endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2009;114:128–134.
6. Provenzale D, Gupta S, Ahnen DJ,et al. Genetic/Familial HighRisk Assessment: Colorectal Version 1.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2016;14(8):1010-30.
7. Tiwari AK, Roy HK, Lynch HT. Lynch syndrome in the 21st century: clinical perspectives. QJM 2016 Mar;109(3):151-8.
8. Hampel H, Frankel W, Panescu J, et al. Screening for Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer) among endometrial cancer patients. Cancer Res 2006;66(15):7810-7.
9. H.Hampel, W.L. Frankel, E. Martin ,et al. Screening for the Lynch syndrome (hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer). N Engl J Med.,2005;352:1851-56.
10. M.J. Berends, Y. Wu, R.H. Sijmons, et al.Toward new strategies to select young endometrial cancer patients for mis- match repair gene mutation analysis. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:4364-70.
11. K.H. Lu, J.O. Schorge, K.J. Rodabaugh, et al. Prospective determination of prev- alence of lynch syndrome in young women with endometrial cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:5158-64.
12. V. Pinol, A. Castells, M. Andreu, et al.Accuracy of revised Bethesda guidelines, microsatellite instability, and immunohistochemistry for the identification of patients with hereditary nonpolypo- sis colorectal cancer. Gastrointestinal Oncology Group of the Spanish Gastroenterological Association. JAMA 2005;293:1986-94.
13. Pål Møller, Toni Seppälä, Inge Bernstein, et al. Cancer incidence and survival in Lynch syndrome patients receiving colonoscopic and gynaecological surveillance: first report from the prospective Lynch syndrome database. Gut 2017;66:464–472.
14. K.H. Lu, M. Dinh, W. Kohlmann, et al. Gynecologic cancer as a “sentinel cancer” for women with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:569-74.
15. Cousineau I, Abaji C, Belmaaza A. BRCA1 regulates RAD51 function in response to DNA damage and suppresses spontaneous sister chromatid replication slippage:implications for sister chromatid cohesion, genome stability, and carcinogenesis. Cancer Res 2005;65(24):11384-91.
16. T. Walsh, S. Casadei, M.K. Lee, et al., Mutations in 12 genes for inherited ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal carcinoma identified by massively parallel sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2011;108:18032-37.
17. Z.K. Stadler, E. Salo-Mullen, S.M. Patil, et al. Prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish families with breast and pancreatic cancer. Cancer 2012;118: 493-99.
18. J.Mersch, M.A. Jackson, M. Park, et al.Cancers associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations other than breast and ovarian. Cancer 2015;121:269-75.
19. C.A. Shu, M.C. Pike, A.R. Jotwani, et al. Uterine cancer after risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy without hysterectomy in women with BRCA mutations. JAMA Oncol 2016;2: 1434-40.
20. Lakhani SR, Manek S, Penault-Llorca F, et al. Pathology of ovarian cancers in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10(7):2473–81.
21. Risch HA, McLaughlin JR, Cole DE, et al.Prevalence and penetrance of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a population series of 649 women with ovarian cancer. Am J Hum Genet 2001;68(3):700–10.
22. Ferla R, Calo V, Cascio S, et al. Founder mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Ann Oncol 2007;18:93-8.
23. Shanmughapriya S, Nachiappan V, Natarajaseenivasan K. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in the ovarian cancer population across race and ethnicity: special reference to Asia. Oncology 2013;84(4):226–32.
24. D.Ford, D.F.Easton, M.Stratton, et al.Genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. Am J Hum Genet 1998;62:676-89.
25. A.Antoniou, P.D.P. Pharoah, S. Narod, et al.Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies. Am J Hum Genet 2003;72:1117-30.
26. King MC, Marks JH, Mandell JB; New York Breast Cancer Study Group. Breast and ovarian cancer risks due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Science 2003;302(5645):643-6.
27. Biron-Shental T, Drucker L, Altaras M, Bernheim J, Fishman A. High incidence of BRCA1-2 germline mutations, previous breast cancer and familial cancer history in Jewish patients with uterine serous papillary carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 2006;32:1097–100.
28. Lavie O, Ben-Arie A, Segev Y, et al. BRCA germline mutations in women with uterine serous carcinoma--still a debate. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2010;20:1531–4.
29. Goshen R, Chu W, Elit L, et al. Is uterine papillary serous adenocarcinoma a manifestation of the hereditary breastovarian cancer syndrome? Gynecologic oncology 2000;79:477–81.
30. J.M. Lancaster, C.B. Powell, L.M. Chen, D.L. Richardson. SGO Clinical Practice Committee Society of Gynecologic Oncology statement on risk assessment for inherited gynecologic cancer predispositions. Gynecol Oncol 2015;136 (1):3-7.
31. Hampel H, Bennett RL, Buchanan A, Pearlman R, Wiesner GL; Guideline Development Group, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics Professional Practice and Guidelines Committee and National Society of Genetic Counselors Practice Guidelines Committee. A practice guideline from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the National Society of Genetic Counselors: referral indications for cancer predisposition assessment. Genet Med 2015;17:70–87.
32. Myriad Genetic Laboratories.Mutation prevalance table for HNPCC. [Retrieved October 2005]; Available at:myriadtests.com/provider/mutprevhnpcc.htm.
33. Trainer AH, Meiser B, Watts K, et al. Moving toward personalized medicine: Treatment-focused genetic testing of women newly diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2010;5:704–16.
34. M.B. Daly, R. Pilarski, J.E. Axilbund,et al. Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian. Version 2. J Natl. Compr Cancer Netw 2016;14(2):153-62.
35. K.H. Lu, M.E. Wood, M. Daniels, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology. American Society of Clinical Oncology Expert Statement: collection and use of a cancer family history for oncology providers. J Clin Oncol 2014;32(8):833-40.
36. K.P. Pennington, E.M. Swisher Hereditary ovarian cancer: beyond the usual suspects. Gynecol Oncol 2012;124(2):347- 353.
37. B.Kaufman, R. Shapira-Frommer, R.K. Schmutzler, et al.Olaparib monotherapy in patients with advanced cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation. J Clin Oncol 2015;33(3): 244- 50.
38. Dung T. Le, Jennifer N. Uram, Hao Wang, et al. PD-1 blockade in tumors with mismatch repair deficiency. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2509-20.
39. Richards S., Aziz N., Bale S.,et al. Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation of Sequence Variants: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Genet Med 2015;17(5):405-23.
40. Eccles DM, Balmaña J, Clune J, et al. Selecting Patients with Ovarian Cancer for Germline BRCA Mutation Testing: Findings from Guidelines and a Systematic Literature Review. Adv Ther 2016;33(2):129-50.
41. Bell, D., Berchuck, A., Birrer, M, et al. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature 2011; 474: 609–15.
42. Maistro S, Teixeira N, Encinas G, et al. Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 in epithelial ovarian cancer patients in Brazil. BMC Cancer 2016;16(1):934.
43. George A, Riddell D, Seal S, et al. Implementing rapid, robust, cost-effective, patient-centred, routine genetic testing in ovarian cancer patients. Sci Rep 2016;6:29506.
44. Alhuqail AJ, Alzahrani A, Almubarak H, et al.High prevalence of deleterious BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations in arab breast and ovarian cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2018;168(3):695-702.
45. Li A, Xie R, Zhi Q, et al. BRCA germline mutations in an unselected nationwide cohort of Chinese patients with ovarian cancer and healthy controls. Gynecol Oncol 2018;151(1):145- 152.
46. Yazıcı H, Kılıç S, Akdeniz D, et al. Frequency of Rearrangements Versus Small Indels Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Genes in Turkish Patients with High Risk Breast and Ovarian Cancer. Eur J Breast Health 2018;14(2):93-99.
47. Laitman Y, Michaelson-Cohen R, Levi E, et al. Israeli Consortium of Hereditary Breast Cancer. Uterine cancer in Jewish Israeli BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Cancer 2019;125(5):698-703.
48. Segev Y, Iqbal J, Lubinski J, et al. The incidence of endometrial cancer in women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: an international prospective cohort study. Gynecol Oncol 2013;130:127–31.
49. Tan David SP, Rothermundt C, Thomas K, et al. “BRCAness” syndrome in ovarian cancer: a case–control study describing the clinical features and outcome of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. J Clin Oncol 2008;26(34):5530–6.
50. Quinn JE, James CR, Stewart GE, et al. BRCA1 mRNA expression levels predict for overall survival in ovarian cancer after chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13(24):7413–20.
51. Cuppone F, Bria E, Carlini P, et al. Taxanes as primary chemotherapy for early breast cancer: meta-analysis of randomized trials. Cancer 2008;113(2):238–46.
52. Chen Y, Zhang L, Hao Q. Olaparib: a promising PARP inhibitor in ovarian cancer therapy. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013;288(2):367–74.
53. Lee J, Ledermann JA, Kohn EC. PARP inhibitors for BRCA1/2 mutation-associated and BRCA-like malignancies. Ann Oncol 2014;25(1):32–40.
54. C.H.M. Leenen, M.G.F. van Lier, H.C. van Doorn, et al.Prospective evaluation of molecular screening for Lynch syndrome in patients with endometrial cancer ≤70 years. Gynecol Oncol 2012;125:414-20.
55. F.J. Backes, D.E. Cohn Lynch syndrome. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2011;54:199-214.
56. M.-H. Tan, J.L. Mester, J. Ngeow, et al. Cancer risks in individuals with germline PTEN mutations. Clin Cancer Res 2012;18:400-7.
57. E. Barrow, J. Hill, D.G. Evans Cancer risk in Lynch syndrome. Fam Cancer 2013;12:229-40.
58. Özdemir TR, Alan M, Sancı M, Koç A. Targeted NextGeneration Sequencing of MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 Genes in Patients with Endometrial Carcinoma under 50 Years of Age. Balkan Med J 2019;36(1):37-42.
59. M.H. Chui, C.B. Gilks, K. Cooper, B.A. Clarke. Identifying Lynch syndrome in patients with ovarian carcinoma: the significance of tumor subtype. Adv Anat Pathol 2013;20:378-86.
60. M.H. Chui, P. Ryan, J. Radigan, et al. The histomorphology of Lynch syndrome–associated ovarian carcinomas: toward a subtype-specific screening strategy. Am J Surg hol 2014;38:1173-81.
61. C.Loveday, C. Turnbull, E. Ruark, et al. Germline RAD51C mutations confer susceptibility to ovarian cancer. Nat net 2012,44:475-76.
62. C. Loveday, C. Turnbull, E. Ramsay, et al. Germline mutations in RAD51D confer susceptibility to ovarian cancer. Nat Genet 2011,43:879-82.
63. H.T. Lynch, M.J. Casey, C.L. Snyder, et al. Hereditary ovarian carcinoma: heterogeneity, molecular genetics, pathology, and management. Mol Oncol, 2009;3:97-137.
64. Daly MB, Pilarski R, Berry M,et al. NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian, Version 2.2017. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2017;15(1):9-20.
65. C. Palles, J.-B. Cazier, K.M. Howarth, et al. Germline mutations affecting the proofreading domains of POLE and POLD1 predispose to colorectal adenomas and carcinomas. Nat Genet 2013;45:136-44.
66. T.J. McGarrity, H.E. Kulin, R.J. Zaino. Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95:596-604.
67. Hans F A Vasen, Ignacio Blanco, Katja Aktan-Collan, et al. Revised guidelines for the clinical management of Lynch syndrome (HNPCC): recommendations by a group of European experts(the Mallorca group). Gut 2013;62(6): 812–23.
68. Nielsen SM, Eccles DM, Romero IL, Al-Mulla F, et al. Genetic Testing and Clinical Management Practices for Variants in Non-BRCA1/2 Breast (and Breast/Ovarian)Cancer Susceptibility Genes: An International Survey by the EvidenceBasedNetwork for the Interpretation of Germline Mutant Alleles (ENIGMA) ClinicalWorking Group. JCO Precis Oncol 2018;2:10.1200/PO.
69. Kurian AW. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations across race and ethnicity: distribution and clinical implications. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2010;22(1):72-8.
70. Eccles DM, Mitchell G, Monteiro AN, et al. ENIGMA Clinical Working Group. BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing-pitfalls and recommendations for managing variants of uncertain clinical significance. Ann Oncol 2015;10:2057-65.
71. J.M. Eggington, K.R. Bowles, K. Moyes, et al. A comprehensive laboratory-based program for classification of variants of uncertain significance in hereditary cancer genes. Clin Genet 2014;86:229-37.
72. Frey MK, Kim SH, Bassett RY, et al. Rescreening for genetic mutations using multi-gene panel testing in patients who previously underwent non-informative genetic screening. Gynecol Oncol 2015;139(2):211-5.
73. Ahmed M, Rahman N. ATM and breast cancer susceptibility. Oncogene 2006;25(43):5906-11.
74. Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA,(eds). Gene Reviews.University of Washington ,Seattle: 2016.
75. ClinVar aggregates information about genomic variation and its relationship to human health. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/clinvar/
76. Southey MC, Goldgar DE, Winqvist R, et al. PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM rare variants and cancer risk: data from COGS. J Med Genet 2016;53(12):800-811.

APA	ŞAHİN H, özkan karacaer k, ALBUZ B, SILAN F (2020). Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız. , 349 - 356. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
Chicago	ŞAHİN Hacı Öztürk,özkan karacaer kübra,ALBUZ BURCU,SILAN Fatma Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız. (2020): 349 - 356. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
MLA	ŞAHİN Hacı Öztürk,özkan karacaer kübra,ALBUZ BURCU,SILAN Fatma Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız. , 2020, ss.349 - 356. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
AMA	ŞAHİN H,özkan karacaer k,ALBUZ B,SILAN F Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız. . 2020; 349 - 356. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
Vancouver	ŞAHİN H,özkan karacaer k,ALBUZ B,SILAN F Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız. . 2020; 349 - 356. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
IEEE	ŞAHİN H,özkan karacaer k,ALBUZ B,SILAN F "Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız." , ss.349 - 356, 2020. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
ISNAD	ŞAHİN, Hacı Öztürk vd. "Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız". (2020), 349-356. https://doi.org/10.32708/uutfd.731913

APA	ŞAHİN H, özkan karacaer k, ALBUZ B, SILAN F (2020). Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, 46(3), 349 - 356. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
Chicago	ŞAHİN Hacı Öztürk,özkan karacaer kübra,ALBUZ BURCU,SILAN Fatma Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 46, no.3 (2020): 349 - 356. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
MLA	ŞAHİN Hacı Öztürk,özkan karacaer kübra,ALBUZ BURCU,SILAN Fatma Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, vol.46, no.3, 2020, ss.349 - 356. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
AMA	ŞAHİN H,özkan karacaer k,ALBUZ B,SILAN F Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi. 2020; 46(3): 349 - 356. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
Vancouver	ŞAHİN H,özkan karacaer k,ALBUZ B,SILAN F Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi. 2020; 46(3): 349 - 356. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
IEEE	ŞAHİN H,özkan karacaer k,ALBUZ B,SILAN F "Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız." Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, 46, ss.349 - 356, 2020. 10.32708/uutfd.731913
ISNAD	ŞAHİN, Hacı Öztürk vd. "Jinekolojik Kanserlerde Yeni Nesil DNA Dizi Analizi ile Saptanan Mutasyon Profilleri: Tek Merkez Vaka Serisi Sonuçlarımız". Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 46/3 (2020), 349-356. https://doi.org/10.32708/uutfd.731913