BACKGROUND: The presence of somatic mutations in the KRAS gene has been identified as a reliable strong negative predictor for the response to targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and the use of anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies such as Cetuximab and Panitumumab is now restricted to patients with no detectable KRAS mutations. Between 30 and 40 % of colorectal cancers contain a mutated KRAS oncogene. The aim of this study was to evaluate concordance between three methods to analyze KRAS mutational status in regard to clinical testing. METHODS: We analyzed KRAS mutations in codons 12 and 13 of exon 2 in one hundred formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) colorectal cancer samples by three different methods: Direct Sequencing and two commercial kits on allele-specific oligonucleotide hybridization (KRAS StripAssay, Vienna Lab.) and Amplification Refractory Mutation System/Scorpions (ARMS/S; TheraScreen KRAS Mutation kit DxS) based on q-PCR. RESULTS: We have found similar frequencies of KRAS mutations by TheraScreen and Strip-Assay (44 and 48 %), with a κ value of 0.90, indicating almost perfect agreement between methods. The frequency by direct sequencing was much lower (26 %) and the κ values were 0.67 (compared to TheraScreen) and 0.57 (compared to Strip-Assay) indicating low sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: On analyzing KRAS mutation in FFPE tumor samples, direct sequencing sensitivity is too low to be used in a clinical setting. Choosing between ARMS/S; TheraScreen KRAS Mutation kit DxS and KRAS StripAssay, Vienna Lab, will depend on laboratory facilities and expertise.
BACKGROUND: The presence of somatic mutations in the KRAS gene has been identified as a reliable strong negative predictor for the response to targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and the use of anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies such as Cetuximab and Panitumumab is now restricted to patients with no detectable KRAS mutations. Between 30 and 40 % of colorectal cancers contain a mutated KRAS oncogene. The aim of this study was to evaluate concordance between three methods to analyze KRAS mutational status in regard to clinical testing. METHODS: We analyzed KRAS mutations in codons 12 and 13 of exon 2 in one hundred formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) colorectal cancer samples by three different methods: Direct Sequencing and two commercial kits on allele-specific oligonucleotide hybridization (KRAS StripAssay, Vienna Lab.) and Amplification Refractory Mutation System/Scorpions (ARMS/S; TheraScreen KRAS Mutation kit DxS) based on q-PCR. RESULTS: We have found similar frequencies of KRAS mutations by TheraScreen and Strip-Assay (44 and 48 %), with a κ value of 0.90, indicating almost perfect agreement between methods. The frequency by direct sequencing was much lower (26 %) and the κ values were 0.67 (compared to TheraScreen) and 0.57 (compared to Strip-Assay) indicating low sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: On analyzing KRAS mutation in FFPE tumor samples, direct sequencing sensitivity is too low to be used in a clinical setting. Choosing between ARMS/S; TheraScreen KRAS Mutation kit DxS and KRAS StripAssay, Vienna Lab, will depend on laboratory facilities and expertise.
Authors: C R Newton; A Graham; L E Heptinstall; S J Powell; C Summers; N Kalsheker; J C Smith; A F Markham Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 1989-04-11 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Astrid Lièvre; Jean-Baptiste Bachet; Delphine Le Corre; Valérie Boige; Bruno Landi; Jean-François Emile; Jean-François Côté; Gorana Tomasic; Christophe Penna; Michel Ducreux; Philippe Rougier; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Pierre Laurent-Puig Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2006-04-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Kelly Oliner; Todd Juan; Sid Suggs; Michael Wolf; Ildiko Sarosi; Daniel J Freeman; Tibor Gyuris; Will Baron; Andreas Bakker; Alex Parker; Scott D Patterson Journal: Diagn Pathol Date: 2010-04-16 Impact factor: 2.644
Authors: Rafael G Amado; Michael Wolf; Marc Peeters; Eric Van Cutsem; Salvatore Siena; Daniel J Freeman; Todd Juan; Robert Sikorski; Sid Suggs; Robert Radinsky; Scott D Patterson; David D Chang Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-03-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Christoph Ausch; Veronika Buxhofer-Ausch; Christian Oberkanins; Barbara Holzer; Michael Minai-Pour; Stephan Jahn; Nadia Dandachi; Robert Zeillinger; Gernot Kriegshäuser Journal: J Mol Diagn Date: 2009-10-01 Impact factor: 5.568
Authors: Carmen J Allegra; J Milburn Jessup; Mark R Somerfield; Stanley R Hamilton; Elizabeth H Hammond; Daniel F Hayes; Pamela K McAllister; Roscoe F Morton; Richard L Schilsky Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-02-02 Impact factor: 44.544