Analysis of Copy Number Variations in Solid Tumors Using a Next Generation Sequencing Custom Panel

M. Vives-Usano, B. García Peláez, Ruth Román Lladó, M. Garzón Ibáñez, E. Aldeguer, S. Rodríguez, A. Aguilar, F. Pons, S. Viteri, C. Cabrera, Maria José Catalán, I. Moya, M. Gonzalez Cao, J. García-Mosquera, A. Martínez-Bueno, Ekaterina Meshoulam, N. Jordana, L. Berrocal, R. Rosell, M. Molina, C. Mayo de las Casas
{"title":"Analysis of Copy Number Variations in Solid Tumors Using a Next Generation Sequencing Custom Panel","authors":"M. Vives-Usano, B. García Peláez, Ruth Román Lladó, M. Garzón Ibáñez, E. Aldeguer, S. Rodríguez, A. Aguilar, F. Pons, S. Viteri, C. Cabrera, Maria José Catalán, I. Moya, M. Gonzalez Cao, J. García-Mosquera, A. Martínez-Bueno, Ekaterina Meshoulam, N. Jordana, L. Berrocal, R. Rosell, M. Molina, C. Mayo de las Casas","doi":"10.3390/JMP2020013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Somatic copy number variations (CNV; i.e., amplifications and deletions) have been implicated in the origin and development of multiple cancers and some of these aberrations are designated targets for therapies. Although FISH is still considered the gold standard for CNV detection, the increasing number of potentially druggable amplifications to be assessed makes a gene-by-gene approach time- and tissue-consuming. Here we investigated the potential of next generation sequencing (NGS) custom panels to simultaneously determine CNVs across FFPE solid tumor samples. DNA was purified from cell lines and FFPE samples and analyzed by NGS sequencing using a 20-gene custom panel in the GeneReader Platform®. CNVs were identified using an in-house algorithm based on the UMI read coverage. Retrospective validation of in-house algorithm to identify CNVs showed 97.1% concordance rate with the NGS custom panel. The prospective analysis was performed in a cohort of 243 FFPE samples from patients arriving at our hospital, which included 74 NSCLC tumors, 148 CRC tumors, and 21 other tumors. Of them, 33% presented CNVs by NGS and in 14 cases (5.9%) the CNV was the only alteration detected. We have identified CNV alterations in about one-third of our cohort, including FGFR1, CDK6, CDK4, EGFR, MET, ERBB2, BRAF, or KRAS. Our work highlights the need to include CNV testing as a part of routine NGS analysis in order to uncover clinically relevant gene amplifications that can guide the selection of therapies.","PeriodicalId":124426,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Molecular Pathology","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Molecular Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/JMP2020013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Somatic copy number variations (CNV; i.e., amplifications and deletions) have been implicated in the origin and development of multiple cancers and some of these aberrations are designated targets for therapies. Although FISH is still considered the gold standard for CNV detection, the increasing number of potentially druggable amplifications to be assessed makes a gene-by-gene approach time- and tissue-consuming. Here we investigated the potential of next generation sequencing (NGS) custom panels to simultaneously determine CNVs across FFPE solid tumor samples. DNA was purified from cell lines and FFPE samples and analyzed by NGS sequencing using a 20-gene custom panel in the GeneReader Platform®. CNVs were identified using an in-house algorithm based on the UMI read coverage. Retrospective validation of in-house algorithm to identify CNVs showed 97.1% concordance rate with the NGS custom panel. The prospective analysis was performed in a cohort of 243 FFPE samples from patients arriving at our hospital, which included 74 NSCLC tumors, 148 CRC tumors, and 21 other tumors. Of them, 33% presented CNVs by NGS and in 14 cases (5.9%) the CNV was the only alteration detected. We have identified CNV alterations in about one-third of our cohort, including FGFR1, CDK6, CDK4, EGFR, MET, ERBB2, BRAF, or KRAS. Our work highlights the need to include CNV testing as a part of routine NGS analysis in order to uncover clinically relevant gene amplifications that can guide the selection of therapies.
使用下一代测序自定义面板分析实体肿瘤的拷贝数变异
体细胞拷贝数变异;例如,扩增和缺失)与多种癌症的起源和发展有关,其中一些畸变是指定的治疗靶点。尽管FISH仍然被认为是CNV检测的金标准,但越来越多的潜在药物扩增物需要评估,这使得逐个基因的方法既耗时又耗时。在这里,我们研究了下一代测序(NGS)定制面板在FFPE实体瘤样本中同时测定CNVs的潜力。从细胞系和FFPE样品中纯化DNA,并使用GeneReader Platform®中的20个基因定制面板进行NGS测序分析。使用基于UMI读取覆盖率的内部算法识别CNVs。回顾性验证的内部算法识别CNVs显示97.1%的一致性与NGS自定义面板。前瞻性分析纳入我院住院患者的243例FFPE样本,包括74例NSCLC肿瘤、148例CRC肿瘤和21例其他肿瘤。其中,33%的人出现了NGS的CNV, 14例(5.9%)的CNV是唯一检测到的改变。我们已经在大约三分之一的队列中发现了CNV改变,包括FGFR1、CDK6、CDK4、EGFR、MET、ERBB2、BRAF或KRAS。我们的工作强调了将CNV检测作为常规NGS分析的一部分的必要性,以便发现临床相关的基因扩增,从而指导治疗的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信