| Literature DB >> 26936516 |
Di Shao1,2,3, Yongping Lin4,5,6, Jilong Liu1, Liang Wan1, Zu Liu1, Shaomin Cheng1, Lingna Fei1, Rongqing Deng1, Jian Wang1, Xi Chen1, Liping Liu6, Xia Gu6, Wenhua Liang6, Ping He6, Jun Wang2, Mingzhi Ye1,2,3, Jianxing He6.
Abstract
Molecular profiling of lung cancer has become essential for prediction of an individual's response to targeted therapies. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a promising technique for routine diagnostics, but has not been sufficiently evaluated in terms of feasibility, reliability, cost and capacity with routine diagnostic formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) materials. Here, we report the validation and application of a test based on Ion Proton technology for the rapid characterisation of single nucleotide variations (SNVs), short insertions and deletions (InDels), copy number variations (CNVs), and gene rearrangements in 145 genes with FFPE clinical specimens. The validation study, using 61 previously profiled clinical tumour samples, showed a concordance rate of 100% between results obtained by NGS and conventional test platforms. Analysis of tumour cell lines indicated reliable mutation detection in samples with 5% tumour content. Furthermore, application of the panel to 58 clinical cases, identified at least one actionable mutation in 43 cases, 1.4 times the number of actionable alterations detected by current diagnostic tests. We demonstrated that targeted NGS is a cost-effective and rapid platform to detect multiple mutations simultaneously in various genes with high reproducibility and sensitivity.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26936516 PMCID: PMC4776238 DOI: 10.1038/srep22338
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Workflow and turnaround time for molecular profiling of clinical samples using targeted NGS.
Abbreviations: QC, Quality Control; FFPE, Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded; TAT, turnaround time; NGS, next-generation sequencing.
Detection limit of the targeted NGS method.
| Mutation Type | Mutation Frequency | No. of Samples | Detected by NGS |
|---|---|---|---|
| SNV | 1% | ||
| 3% | 3 | 3 | |
| 5% | 8 | 8 | |
| 10% | 3 | 3 | |
| SNV | 1% | ||
| 3% | 3 | 3 | |
| 5% | 8 | 8 | |
| 10% | 3 | 3 | |
| InDel | 1% | 4 | 4 |
| 3% | 3 | 3 | |
| 5% | 8 | 8 | |
Intra-run reproducibility.
| Mutation | barcode samples | mean | SE | Sensitivity (%) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ||||
| Variant frequency (%) | |||||||||||
| 7.50% | 7.30% | 5.30% | 7.00% | 5.70% | 8.80% | 11.50% | 5.80% | 7.36% | 0.019 | 100% | |
| 6.70% | 4.90% | 7.80% | 7.50% | 7.00% | 11.30% | 9.50% | 11.90% | 8.33% | 0.022 | 100% | |
| 5.61% | 6.04% | 8.57% | 8.11% | 8.03% | 7.96% | 8.36% | 5.36% | 7.25% | 0.013 | 100% | |
| Coverage(x) | |||||||||||
| 313 | 262 | 334 | 91 | 260 | 443 | 304 | 330 | 292.13 | 92.816 | ||
| 254 | 178 | 271 | 91 | 213 | 333 | 233 | 226 | 224.88 | 66.139 | ||
| 410 | 530 | 992 | 814 | 872 | 754 | 825 | 784 | 747.63 | 176.173 | ||
Concordance of targeted NGS with conventional platforms.
| Mutation Type | Gene | Platforms | Expected | Detected | % Concordance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SNV | ARMS-PCR | 22 | 22 | 100% | |
| SNV | ARMS-PCR | 16 | 16 | 100% | |
| SNV | ARMS-PCR | 2 | 2 | 100% | |
| Deletion | ARMS-PCR | 16 | 16 | 100% | |
| Insertion | ARMS-PCR | 1 | 1 | 100% | |
| Gene Fusion | FISH | 2 | 2 | 100% | |
| Gene Fusion | FISH | 1 | 1 | 100% | |
| Gene Fusion | FISH | 1 | 1 | 100% | |
| Total | – | – | 61 | 61 | 100% |
Variant classification scheme.
| Pattern | Level | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity to targeted drugs | 1A | Drug is FDA-approved for lung cancers harbouring the variant. |
| 1B | Drug is clinically effective in the biomarker-selected cohort of lung cancer. The variant, which has a definite function feature, belongs to the cohort. | |
| 2A | Drug is FDA-approved for another tumour type harbouring the variant. Clinical trials have proved its effectiveness in lung cancer patients with the variant. | |
| 2B | Drug is FDA-approved for another tumour type harbouring the variant. Case reports have indicated its effectiveness in lung cancer patients with the variant. | |
| 2C | Drug is FDA-approved for another tumour type harbouring the variant. Pre-clinical research has indicated its effectiveness in lung cancer patients with the variant. | |
| Resistance to targeted drugs | 1A | NCCN guideline has clearly indicated that the variant is associated with resistance to the FDA-approved lung cancer drug. |
| 1B | NCCN guideline has indicated drug resistance to the biomarker-selected cohort of lung cancer. The variant, which has a definite function feature, belongs to the cohort. | |
| 2A | Case reports have indicated drug resistance in the lung cancer patients with the variant. | |
| 2B | Pre-clinical research has indicated drug resistance in lung cancer patients with the variant. |
Figure 2Relative proportions of genomic aberrations in lung adenocarcinoma (N = 58).
(A) Actionable variants and gene frequencies detected in 58 prospective samples. (B) Distribution of the patients according to the classification of detected actionable mutations.
Figure 3Gene fusion and CNV detected in archival samples.
(A)ALK-EML4 fusion found in sample #A59. ALK and EML4 break at chr2 29446561 and chr2 42523152, respectively. Then the minus stand of EML4 was reverse conjoined to ALK. (B) Confirmation of ALK-EML4 fusion by FISH. (C) MET amplification found in sample #P46. Gene region from 116435940 to 116436719 on chromosome 7 had a copy number of three. (D) Confirmation of MET amplification by immunohistochemistry.
Demographic and histopathological features of the archived samples.
| Characteristic | N = 61 | % |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Male | 26 | 42.6 |
| Female | 35 | 57.4 |
| Age | ||
| Average | 63.9 | – |
| Range | 41–88 | – |
| Smoker | ||
| Never | 40 | 65.6 |
| Light (pack-year < 30) | 8 | 13.1 |
| Heavy (pack-year > 30) | 13 | 21.3 |
| Grade | ||
| G1 | 11 | 18.0 |
| G2 | 44 | 72.1 |
| G3 | 6 | 9.8 |
| Stage | ||
| I | 13 | 21.3 |
| II | 21 | 34.4 |
| III | 19 | 31.1 |
| V | 8 | 13.1 |
| Tumour content | ||
| 10%–30% | 31 | 50.8 |
| 30%–70% | 28 | 45.9 |
| >70% | 2 | 3.3 |
Demographic and histopathological features of the prospective samples.
| Characteristic | N = 58 | % |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Male | 28 | 48.3 |
| Female | 30 | 51.7 |
| Age | ||
| Average | 61.9 | – |
| Range | 38–81 | – |
| Smoker | ||
| Never | 33 | 56.9 |
| Light (pack-year <30) | 5 | 8.6 |
| Heavy (pack-year >30) | 20 | 34.5 |
| Grade | ||
| G1 | 13 | 22.4 |
| G2 | 38 | 65.5 |
| G3 | 7 | 12.1 |
| Stage | ||
| I | 21 | 36.2 |
| II | 13 | 22.4 |
| III | 17 | 29.3 |
| V | 7 | 12.1 |
| Tumour content | ||
| 10%–30% | 31 | 53.4 |
| 30%–70% | 25 | 43.1 |
| >70% | 2 | 3.4 |