PURPOSE: Next generation DNA sequencing (NGS) holds promise for diagnostic applications, yet implementation in routine molecular pathology practice requires performance evaluation on DNA derived from routine formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue specimens. The current study presents a comprehensive analysis of TruSeq Amplicon Cancer Panel-based NGS using a MiSeq Personal sequencer (TSACP-MiSeq-NGS) for somatic mutation profiling. METHODS: TSACP-MiSeq-NGS (testing 212 hotspot mutation amplicons of 48 genes) and a data analysis pipeline were evaluated in a retrospective learning/test set approach (n = 58/n = 45 FFPE-tumor DNA samples) against 'gold standard' high-resolution-melting (HRM)-sequencing for the genes KRAS, EGFR, BRAF and PIK3CA. Next, the performance of the validated test algorithm was assessed in an independent, prospective cohort of FFPE-tumor DNA samples (n = 75). RESULTS: In the learning set, a number of minimum parameter settings was defined to decide whether a FFPE-DNA sample is qualified for TSACP-MiSeq-NGS and for calling mutations. The resulting test algorithm revealed 82% (37/45) compliance to the quality criteria and 95% (35/37) concordant assay findings for KRAS, EGFR, BRAF and PIK3CA with HRM-sequencing (kappa = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.81-1.03) in the test set. Subsequent application of the validated test algorithm to the prospective cohort yielded a success rate of 84% (63/75), and a high concordance with HRM-sequencing (95% (60/63); kappa = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.84-1.01). TSACP-MiSeq-NGS detected 77 mutations in 29 additional genes. CONCLUSION: TSACP-MiSeq-NGS is suitable for diagnostic gene mutation profiling in oncopathology.
PURPOSE: Next generation DNA sequencing (NGS) holds promise for diagnostic applications, yet implementation in routine molecular pathology practice requires performance evaluation on DNA derived from routine formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue specimens. The current study presents a comprehensive analysis of TruSeq Amplicon Cancer Panel-based NGS using a MiSeq Personal sequencer (TSACP-MiSeq-NGS) for somatic mutation profiling. METHODS: TSACP-MiSeq-NGS (testing 212 hotspot mutation amplicons of 48 genes) and a data analysis pipeline were evaluated in a retrospective learning/test set approach (n = 58/n = 45 FFPE-tumor DNA samples) against 'gold standard' high-resolution-melting (HRM)-sequencing for the genes KRAS, EGFR, BRAF and PIK3CA. Next, the performance of the validated test algorithm was assessed in an independent, prospective cohort of FFPE-tumor DNA samples (n = 75). RESULTS: In the learning set, a number of minimum parameter settings was defined to decide whether a FFPE-DNA sample is qualified for TSACP-MiSeq-NGS and for calling mutations. The resulting test algorithm revealed 82% (37/45) compliance to the quality criteria and 95% (35/37) concordant assay findings for KRAS, EGFR, BRAF and PIK3CA with HRM-sequencing (kappa = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.81-1.03) in the test set. Subsequent application of the validated test algorithm to the prospective cohort yielded a success rate of 84% (63/75), and a high concordance with HRM-sequencing (95% (60/63); kappa = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.84-1.01). TSACP-MiSeq-NGS detected 77 mutations in 29 additional genes. CONCLUSION: TSACP-MiSeq-NGS is suitable for diagnostic gene mutation profiling in oncopathology.
Authors: Volker Endris; Roland Penzel; Arne Warth; Alexander Muckenhuber; Peter Schirmacher; Albrecht Stenzinger; Wilko Weichert Journal: J Mol Diagn Date: 2013-08-21 Impact factor: 5.568
Authors: Pablo Cingolani; Viral M Patel; Melissa Coon; Tung Nguyen; Susan J Land; Douglas M Ruden; Xiangyi Lu Journal: Front Genet Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 4.599
Authors: D A M Heideman; F B Thunnissen; M Doeleman; D Kramer; H M Verheul; E F Smit; P E Postmus; C J L M Meijer; G A Meijer; P J F Snijders Journal: Cell Oncol Date: 2009 Impact factor: 6.730
Authors: Rosalind J Hastings; Nick Bown; Maria G Tibiletti; Maria Debiec-Rychter; Roberta Vanni; Blanca Espinet; Nadine van Roy; Paul Roberts; Eva van den Berg-de-Ruiter; Alain Bernheim; Jacqueline Schoumans; Steve Chatters; Zuzana Zemanova; Marian Stevens-Kroef; Annet Simons; Sverre Heim; Marta Salido; Bauke Ylstra; David R Betts Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Annemarie Boleij; Bastiaan B J Tops; Paul D M Rombout; Elizabeth M Dequeker; Marjolijn J L Ligtenberg; J Han van Krieken Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2015-06-20
Authors: Evert van den Broek; Maurits J J Dijkstra; Oscar Krijgsman; Daoud Sie; Josien C Haan; Joleen J H Traets; Mark A van de Wiel; Iris D Nagtegaal; Cornelis J A Punt; Beatriz Carvalho; Bauke Ylstra; Sanne Abeln; Gerrit A Meijer; Remond J A Fijneman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-09-16 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Vincenza Precone; Valentina Del Monaco; Maria Valeria Esposito; Fatima Domenica Elisa De Palma; Anna Ruocco; Francesco Salvatore; Valeria D'Argenio Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-11-19 Impact factor: 3.411