| Literature DB >> 26752307 |
Elisabeth M C Dequeker1, Cleo Keppens2, Caroline Egele3, Sofie Delen2, Aude Lamy4, Antoinette Lemoine5, Jean-Christophe Sabourin4, Catherine Andrieu6, Marjolijn Ligtenberg7, Dominique Fetique3, Bastiaan Tops7, Clotilde Descarpentries8, Hélène Blons9, Yves Denoux10, Cécile Aube11, Frederique Penault-Llorca11, Paul Hofman12, Karen Leroy13, Cédric Le Marechal14, Laurent Doucet14, Valérie Duranton-Tanneur15, Florence Pedeutour15, Isabelle Soubeyran16, Jean-François Côté17, Jean-François Emile18, Jean-Michel Vignaud19, Nathalie Monhoven19, Véronique Haddad20, Pierre Laurent-Puig9, Han van Krieken7, Frederique Nowak21, Etienne Lonchamp21, Jean-Pierre Bellocq3, Etienne Rouleau6.
Abstract
Personalized medicine has gained increasing importance in clinical oncology, and several clinically important biomarkers are implemented in routine practice. In an effort to guarantee high quality of molecular testing in France, three subsequent external quality assessment rounds were organized at the initiative of the National Cancer Institute between 2012 and 2014. The schemes included clinically relevant biomarkers for metastatic colorectal (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, microsatellite instability) and non-small cell lung cancer (EGFR, KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, ERBB2), and they represent the first multigene/multicancer studies throughout Europe. In total, 56 laboratories coordinated by 28 regional molecular centers participated in the schemes. Laboratories received formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples and were asked to use routine methods for molecular testing to predict patient response to targeted therapies. They were encouraged to return results within 14 calendar days after sample receipt. Both genotyping and reporting were evaluated separately. During the three external quality assessment rounds, mean genotype scores were all above the preset standard of 90% for all biomarkers. Participants were mainly challenged in case of rare insertions or deletions. Assessment of the written reports showed substantial progress between the external quality assessment schemes on multiple criteria. Several essential elements such as the clinical interpretation of test results and the reason for testing still require improvement by continued external quality assessment education.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26752307 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2015.09.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Mol Diagn ISSN: 1525-1578 Impact factor: 5.568