F Rothé1, J-F Laes2, D Lambrechts3, D Smeets3, D Vincent1, M Maetens1, D Fumagalli1, S Michiels4, S Drisis5, C Moerman5, J-P Detiffe2, D Larsimont6, A Awada7, M Piccart7, C Sotiriou8, M Ignatiadis9. 1. Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory J.C. Heuson, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels. 2. OncoDNA, Gosselies, KU Leuven, Leuven. 3. Laboratory of Translational Genetics, KU Leuven, Leuven; Vesalius Research Center, VIB, Leuven, Belgium. 4. Department of Biostatistic and Epidemiology, Gustave Roussy, Univ. Paris-Sud, Villejuif, France. 5. Department of Radiology, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels. 6. Department of Pathology, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels. 7. Department of Medical Oncology, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels. 8. Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory J.C. Heuson, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels; Department of Medical Oncology, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels. Electronic address: michail.ignatiadis@bordet.be. 9. Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory J.C. Heuson, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels; Department of Medical Oncology, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Molecular screening programs use next-generation sequencing (NGS) of cancer gene panels to analyze metastatic biopsies. We interrogated whether plasma could be used as an alternative to metastatic biopsies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Ion AmpliSeq™ Cancer Hotspot Panel v2 (Ion Torrent), covering 2800 COSMIC mutations from 50 cancer genes was used to analyze 69 tumor (primary/metastases) and 31 plasma samples from 17 metastatic breast cancer patients. The targeted coverage for tumor DNA was ×1000 and for plasma cell-free DNA ×25 000. Whole blood normal DNA was used to exclude germline variants. The Illumina technology was used to confirm observed mutations. RESULTS: Evaluable NGS results were obtained for 60 tumor and 31 plasma samples from 17 patients. When tumor samples were analyzed, 12 of 17 (71%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 44% to 90%) patients had ≥1 mutation (median 1 mutation per patient, range 0-2 mutations) in either p53, PIK3CA, PTEN, AKT1 or IDH2 gene. When plasma samples were analyzed, 12 of 17 (71%, 95% CI: 44-90%) patients had ≥1 mutation (median 1 mutation per patient, range 0-2 mutations) in either p53, PIK3CA, PTEN, AKT1, IDH2 and SMAD4. All mutations were confirmed. When we focused on tumor and plasma samples collected at the same time-point, we observed that, in four patients, no mutation was identified in either tumor or plasma; in nine patients, the same mutations was identified in tumor and plasma; in two patients, a mutation was identified in tumor but not in plasma; in two patients, a mutation was identified in plasma but not in tumor. Thus, in 13 of 17 (76%, 95% CI 50% to 93%) patients, tumor and plasma provided concordant results whereas in 4 of 17 (24%, 95% CI 7% to 50%) patients, the results were discordant, providing complementary information. CONCLUSION: Plasma can be prospectively tested as an alternative to metastatic biopsies in molecular screening programs.
BACKGROUND: Molecular screening programs use next-generation sequencing (NGS) of cancer gene panels to analyze metastatic biopsies. We interrogated whether plasma could be used as an alternative to metastatic biopsies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Ion AmpliSeq™ Cancer Hotspot Panel v2 (Ion Torrent), covering 2800 COSMIC mutations from 50 cancer genes was used to analyze 69 tumor (primary/metastases) and 31 plasma samples from 17 metastatic breast cancer patients. The targeted coverage for tumor DNA was ×1000 and for plasma cell-free DNA ×25 000. Whole blood normal DNA was used to exclude germline variants. The Illumina technology was used to confirm observed mutations. RESULTS: Evaluable NGS results were obtained for 60 tumor and 31 plasma samples from 17 patients. When tumor samples were analyzed, 12 of 17 (71%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 44% to 90%) patients had ≥1 mutation (median 1 mutation per patient, range 0-2 mutations) in either p53, PIK3CA, PTEN, AKT1 or IDH2 gene. When plasma samples were analyzed, 12 of 17 (71%, 95% CI: 44-90%) patients had ≥1 mutation (median 1 mutation per patient, range 0-2 mutations) in either p53, PIK3CA, PTEN, AKT1, IDH2 and SMAD4. All mutations were confirmed. When we focused on tumor and plasma samples collected at the same time-point, we observed that, in four patients, no mutation was identified in either tumor or plasma; in nine patients, the same mutations was identified in tumor and plasma; in two patients, a mutation was identified in tumor but not in plasma; in two patients, a mutation was identified in plasma but not in tumor. Thus, in 13 of 17 (76%, 95% CI 50% to 93%) patients, tumor and plasma provided concordant results whereas in 4 of 17 (24%, 95% CI 7% to 50%) patients, the results were discordant, providing complementary information. CONCLUSION: Plasma can be prospectively tested as an alternative to metastatic biopsies in molecular screening programs.
Authors: Kara N Maxwell; Danielle Soucier-Ernst; Emin Tahirovic; Andrea B Troxel; Candace Clark; Michael Feldman; Christopher Colameco; Bijal Kakrecha; Melissa Langer; David Lieberman; Jennifer J D Morrissette; Matt R Paul; Tien-Chi Pan; Stephanie Yee; Natalie Shih; Erica Carpenter; Lewis A Chodosh; Angela DeMichele Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Nick Beije; Jean C Helmijr; Marjolein J A Weerts; Corine M Beaufort; Matthew Wiggin; Andre Marziali; Cornelis Verhoef; Stefan Sleijfer; Maurice P H M Jansen; John W M Martens Journal: Mol Oncol Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 6.603
Authors: P A Fasching; S Y Brucker; T N Fehm; F Overkamp; W Janni; M Wallwiener; P Hadji; E Belleville; L Häberle; F-A Taran; D Lüftner; M P Lux; J Ettl; V Müller; H Tesch; D Wallwiener; A Schneeweiss Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 2.915
Authors: Mary D Chamberlin; Jason D Wells; Kevin Shee; Jennifer R Bean; Jonathan D Marotti; Wendy A Wells; Heidi W Trask; Fred W Kolling; Ananta Bhatt; Peter A Kaufman; Gary N Schwartz; John M Gemery; Nancy J McNulty; Michael J Tsapakos; Richard J Barth; Bradley A Arrick; Jiang Gui; Todd W Miller Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020-06-19 Impact factor: 4.872