BACKGROUND: Increasing data from clinical trials support EGFR and K-ras mutation status as predictive markers of tumour response to EGFR-targeted therapies. Consequently, rapid and reliable mutation screening assays are demanded to guide rational use of EGFR-targeted therapies. METHODS: In this study, we describe the development of high resolution melting (HRM) technology-based assays with direct sequencing confirmation possibility for mutation screening of the EGFR gene (exons 19, 20 and 21) in routine diagnostic specimens, and compared assay findings to those of conventional nested-PCR following cycle-sequencing. RESULTS: In reconstruction experiments, each HRM assay following sequencing demonstrated a sensitivity of < or =5% of mutated DNA in a background of wild-type DNA. The panel of EGFR HRM assays following sequencing applied to a series of genomic DNA samples isolated from 68 FFPE NSCLC specimens correctly identified all EGFR mutations that were previously found by nested-PCR following cycle-sequencing. The HRM approach additionally scored two mutations not detected by the conventional assay. Complementary HRM following sequencing for K-ras revealed three mutations. EGFR and K-ras mutations were mutually exclusive. CONCLUSIONS: The panel of designed HRM assays with direct reflex sequencing possibility provides an effective method for mutation screening of EGFR and K-ras genes in routine diagnostic specimens, thereby allowing the selection of the treatment of choice in clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: Increasing data from clinical trials support EGFR and K-ras mutation status as predictive markers of tumour response to EGFR-targeted therapies. Consequently, rapid and reliable mutation screening assays are demanded to guide rational use of EGFR-targeted therapies. METHODS: In this study, we describe the development of high resolution melting (HRM) technology-based assays with direct sequencing confirmation possibility for mutation screening of the EGFR gene (exons 19, 20 and 21) in routine diagnostic specimens, and compared assay findings to those of conventional nested-PCR following cycle-sequencing. RESULTS: In reconstruction experiments, each HRM assay following sequencing demonstrated a sensitivity of < or =5% of mutated DNA in a background of wild-type DNA. The panel of EGFR HRM assays following sequencing applied to a series of genomic DNA samples isolated from 68 FFPE NSCLC specimens correctly identified all EGFR mutations that were previously found by nested-PCR following cycle-sequencing. The HRM approach additionally scored two mutations not detected by the conventional assay. Complementary HRM following sequencing for K-ras revealed three mutations. EGFR and K-ras mutations were mutually exclusive. CONCLUSIONS: The panel of designed HRM assays with direct reflex sequencing possibility provides an effective method for mutation screening of EGFR and K-ras genes in routine diagnostic specimens, thereby allowing the selection of the treatment of choice in clinical practice.
Authors: Daoud Sie; Peter J F Snijders; Gerrit A Meijer; Marije W Doeleman; Marinda I H van Moorsel; Hendrik F van Essen; Paul P Eijk; Katrien Grünberg; Nicole C T van Grieken; Erik Thunnissen; Henk M Verheul; Egbert F Smit; Bauke Ylstra; Daniëlle A M Heideman Journal: Cell Oncol (Dordr) Date: 2014-09-11 Impact factor: 6.730
Authors: Renée C G de Bruin; John P Veluchamy; Sinéad M Lougheed; Famke L Schneiders; Silvia Lopez-Lastra; Roeland Lameris; Anita G Stam; Zsolt Sebestyen; Jürgen Kuball; Carla F M Molthoff; Erik Hooijberg; Rob C Roovers; James P Di Santo; Paul M P van Bergen En Henegouwen; Henk M W Verheul; Tanja D de Gruijl; Hans J van der Vliet Journal: Oncoimmunology Date: 2017-10-20 Impact factor: 8.110
Authors: F Jeroen Vogelaar; Felice N van Erning; Marlies S Reimers; Hans van der Linden; Hans Pruijt; Adriaan J C van den Brule; Koop Bosscha Journal: Mol Med Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 6.354
Authors: Erik Thunnissen; Evan Boers; Daniëlle A M Heideman; Katrien Grünberg; Dirk J Kuik; Arnold Noorduin; Matthijs van Oosterhout; Divera Pronk; Cees Seldenrijk; Hannie Sietsma; Egbert F Smit; Robertjan van Suylen; Jan von der Thusen; Bart Vrugt; Anne Wiersma; Birgit I Witte; Michael den Bakker Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2012-10-12 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Isabel López-Villar; Rosa Ayala; Jan Wesselink; Juan Diego Morillas; Elena López; José Carlos Marín; José Díaz-Tasende; Sara González; Luis Robles; Joaquín Martínez-López Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2010-08-05 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Neal I Lindeman; Philip T Cagle; Mary Beth Beasley; Dhananjay Arun Chitale; Sanja Dacic; Giuseppe Giaccone; Robert Brian Jenkins; David J Kwiatkowski; Juan-Sebastian Saldivar; Jeremy Squire; Erik Thunnissen; Marc Ladanyi Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Neal I Lindeman; Philip T Cagle; Mary Beth Beasley; Dhananjay Arun Chitale; Sanja Dacic; Giuseppe Giaccone; Robert Brian Jenkins; David J Kwiatkowski; Juan-Sebastian Saldivar; Jeremy Squire; Erik Thunnissen; Marc Ladanyi Journal: Arch Pathol Lab Med Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 5.534