Mitra Mehrad, Somak Roy, Humberto Trejo Bittar, Sanja Dacic1. 1. From the Department of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee (Dr Mehrad); and the Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Drs Roy, Trejo Bittar, and Dacic).
Abstract
CONTEXT: - Different testing algorithms and platforms for EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangements in advanced-stage lung adenocarcinoma exist. The multistep approach with single-gene assays has been challenged by more efficient next-generation sequencing (NGS) of a large number of gene alterations. The main criticism of the NGS approach is the detection of genomic alterations of uncertain significance. OBJECTIVE: - To determine the best testing algorithm for patients with lung cancer in our clinical practice. DESIGN: - Two testing approaches for metastatic lung adenocarcinoma were offered between 2012-2015. One approach was reflex testing for an 8-gene panel composed of DNA Sanger sequencing for EGFR, KRAS, PIK3CA, and BRAF and fluorescence in situ hybridization for ALK, ROS1, MET, and RET. At the oncologist's request, a subset of tumors tested by the 8-gene panel was subjected to a 50-gene Ion AmpliSeq Cancer Panel. RESULTS: - Of 1200 non-small cell lung carcinomas (NSCLCs), 57 including 46 adenocarcinomas and NSCLCs, not otherwise specified; 7 squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs); and 4 large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas (LCNECs) were subjected to Ion AmpliSeq Cancer Panel. Ion AmpliSeq Cancer Panel detected 9 potentially actionable variants in 29 adenocarcinomas that were wild type by the 8-gene panel testing (9 of 29, 31.0%) in the following genes: ERBB2 (3 of 29, 10.3%), STK11 (2 of 29, 6.8%), PTEN (2 of 29, 6.8%), FBXW7 (1 of 29, 3.4%), and BRAF G469A (1 of 29, 3.4%). Four SCCs and 2 LCNECs showed investigational genomic alterations. CONCLUSIONS: - The NGS approach would result in the identification of a significant number of actionable gene alterations, increasing the therapeutic options for patients with advanced NSCLCs.
CONTEXT: - Different testing algorithms and platforms for EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangements in advanced-stage lung adenocarcinoma exist. The multistep approach with single-gene assays has been challenged by more efficient next-generation sequencing (NGS) of a large number of gene alterations. The main criticism of the NGS approach is the detection of genomic alterations of uncertain significance. OBJECTIVE: - To determine the best testing algorithm for patients with lung cancer in our clinical practice. DESIGN: - Two testing approaches for metastatic lung adenocarcinoma were offered between 2012-2015. One approach was reflex testing for an 8-gene panel composed of DNA Sanger sequencing for EGFR, KRAS, PIK3CA, and BRAF and fluorescence in situ hybridization for ALK, ROS1, MET, and RET. At the oncologist's request, a subset of tumors tested by the 8-gene panel was subjected to a 50-gene Ion AmpliSeq Cancer Panel. RESULTS: - Of 1200 non-small cell lung carcinomas (NSCLCs), 57 including 46 adenocarcinomas and NSCLCs, not otherwise specified; 7 squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs); and 4 large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas (LCNECs) were subjected to Ion AmpliSeq Cancer Panel. Ion AmpliSeq Cancer Panel detected 9 potentially actionable variants in 29 adenocarcinomas that were wild type by the 8-gene panel testing (9 of 29, 31.0%) in the following genes: ERBB2 (3 of 29, 10.3%), STK11 (2 of 29, 6.8%), PTEN (2 of 29, 6.8%), FBXW7 (1 of 29, 3.4%), and BRAFG469A (1 of 29, 3.4%). Four SCCs and 2 LCNECs showed investigational genomic alterations. CONCLUSIONS: - The NGS approach would result in the identification of a significant number of actionable gene alterations, increasing the therapeutic options for patients with advanced NSCLCs.
Authors: Paul Zarogoulidis; Vasilis Papadopoulos; Elena Maragouli; George Papatsibas; Ilias Karapantzos; Chong Bai; Haidong Huang Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res Date: 2018-02
Authors: S Yip; A Christofides; S Banerji; M R Downes; I Izevbaye; B Lo; A MacMillan; J McCuaig; T Stockley; G M Yousef; A Spatz Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Daan van den Broek; T Jeroen N Hiltermann; Bonne Biesma; Winand N M Dinjens; Nils A 't Hart; John W J Hinrichs; Mathie P G Leers; Kim Monkhorst; Matthijs van Oosterhout; Volkher Scharnhorst; Ed Schuuring; Ernst-Jan M Speel; Michel M van den Heuvel; Ron H N van Schaik; Jan von der Thüsen; Stefan M Willems; Leonie de Visser; Marjolijn J L Ligtenberg Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2020-01-22 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Parneet K Cheema; Shantanu O Banerji; Normand Blais; Quincy S-C Chu; Patrice Desmeules; Rosalyn A Juergens; Natasha B Leighl; Brandon S Sheffield; Paul F Wheatley-Price; Barbara L Melosky Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 3.677