全基因组和转录组测序在精准肿瘤学中的转化和临床比较。

IF 6.8 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Irina A Kerle, Thomas Gross, Anja Kögler, Jonas S Arnold, Maximilian Werner, Jan-Niklas Eckardt, Elena E Möhrmann, Marie Arlt, Barbara Hutter, Jennifer Hüllein, Daniela Richter, Martin M K Schneider, Mario Hlevnjak, Lino Möhrmann, Dorothea Hanf, Christoph E Heilig, Simon Kreutzfeldt, Maria-Veronica Teleanu, Evelin Schröck, Daniel Hübschmann, Peter Horak, Christoph Heining, Stefan Fröhling, Hanno Glimm
{"title":"全基因组和转录组测序在精准肿瘤学中的转化和临床比较。","authors":"Irina A Kerle, Thomas Gross, Anja Kögler, Jonas S Arnold, Maximilian Werner, Jan-Niklas Eckardt, Elena E Möhrmann, Marie Arlt, Barbara Hutter, Jennifer Hüllein, Daniela Richter, Martin M K Schneider, Mario Hlevnjak, Lino Möhrmann, Dorothea Hanf, Christoph E Heilig, Simon Kreutzfeldt, Maria-Veronica Teleanu, Evelin Schröck, Daniel Hübschmann, Peter Horak, Christoph Heining, Stefan Fröhling, Hanno Glimm","doi":"10.1038/s41698-024-00788-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Precision oncology offers new cancer treatment options, yet sequencing methods vary in type and scope. In this study, we compared whole-exome/whole-genome (WES/WGS) and transcriptome sequencing (TS) with broad panel sequencing by resequencing the same tumor DNA and RNA as well as normal tissue DNA for germline assessment, from 20 patients with rare or advanced tumors, who were originally sequenced by WES/WGS ± TS within the DKFZ/NCT/DKTK MASTER program from 2015 to 2020. Molecular analyses resulted in a median number of 2.5 (gene panel) to 3.5 (WES/WGS ± TS) treatment recommendations per patient. Our results showed that approximately half of the therapy recommendations (TRs) of both sequencing programs were identical, while approximately one-third of the TRs in WES/WGS ± TS relied on biomarkers not covered by the panel. Eight of 10 molecularly informed therapy implementations were supported by the panel, the remaining two were based on biomarkers absent from the panel, highlighting the potential additional clinical benefit of WGS and TS.</p>","PeriodicalId":19433,"journal":{"name":"NPJ Precision Oncology","volume":"9 1","pages":"9"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11724059/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Translational and clinical comparison of whole genome and transcriptome to panel sequencing in precision oncology.\",\"authors\":\"Irina A Kerle, Thomas Gross, Anja Kögler, Jonas S Arnold, Maximilian Werner, Jan-Niklas Eckardt, Elena E Möhrmann, Marie Arlt, Barbara Hutter, Jennifer Hüllein, Daniela Richter, Martin M K Schneider, Mario Hlevnjak, Lino Möhrmann, Dorothea Hanf, Christoph E Heilig, Simon Kreutzfeldt, Maria-Veronica Teleanu, Evelin Schröck, Daniel Hübschmann, Peter Horak, Christoph Heining, Stefan Fröhling, Hanno Glimm\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41698-024-00788-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Precision oncology offers new cancer treatment options, yet sequencing methods vary in type and scope. In this study, we compared whole-exome/whole-genome (WES/WGS) and transcriptome sequencing (TS) with broad panel sequencing by resequencing the same tumor DNA and RNA as well as normal tissue DNA for germline assessment, from 20 patients with rare or advanced tumors, who were originally sequenced by WES/WGS ± TS within the DKFZ/NCT/DKTK MASTER program from 2015 to 2020. Molecular analyses resulted in a median number of 2.5 (gene panel) to 3.5 (WES/WGS ± TS) treatment recommendations per patient. Our results showed that approximately half of the therapy recommendations (TRs) of both sequencing programs were identical, while approximately one-third of the TRs in WES/WGS ± TS relied on biomarkers not covered by the panel. Eight of 10 molecularly informed therapy implementations were supported by the panel, the remaining two were based on biomarkers absent from the panel, highlighting the potential additional clinical benefit of WGS and TS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NPJ Precision Oncology\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11724059/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NPJ Precision Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41698-024-00788-3\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NPJ Precision Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41698-024-00788-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

精准肿瘤学提供了新的癌症治疗方案,但测序方法的类型和范围各不相同。在这项研究中,我们比较了全外显子/全基因组(WES/WGS)测序和转录组测序(TS)与广谱基因组测序,方法是对20名罕见或晚期肿瘤患者的相同肿瘤DNA和RNA以及正常组织DNA进行重新测序,以进行种系评估,这些患者最初是在2015年至2020年期间在DKFZ/NCT/DKTK MASTER项目中通过WES/WGS ± TS测序的。分子分析为每位患者提出了2.5(基因面板)至3.5(WES/WGS ± TS)项治疗建议。我们的结果显示,两个测序计划中约有一半的治疗建议(TR)是相同的,而WES/WGS±TS中约有三分之一的TR依赖于基因面板未涵盖的生物标志物。在 10 项分子信息疗法中,有 8 项得到了专家小组的支持,其余两项则基于专家小组未涵盖的生物标志物,这凸显了 WGS 和 TS 潜在的额外临床益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Translational and clinical comparison of whole genome and transcriptome to panel sequencing in precision oncology.

Precision oncology offers new cancer treatment options, yet sequencing methods vary in type and scope. In this study, we compared whole-exome/whole-genome (WES/WGS) and transcriptome sequencing (TS) with broad panel sequencing by resequencing the same tumor DNA and RNA as well as normal tissue DNA for germline assessment, from 20 patients with rare or advanced tumors, who were originally sequenced by WES/WGS ± TS within the DKFZ/NCT/DKTK MASTER program from 2015 to 2020. Molecular analyses resulted in a median number of 2.5 (gene panel) to 3.5 (WES/WGS ± TS) treatment recommendations per patient. Our results showed that approximately half of the therapy recommendations (TRs) of both sequencing programs were identical, while approximately one-third of the TRs in WES/WGS ± TS relied on biomarkers not covered by the panel. Eight of 10 molecularly informed therapy implementations were supported by the panel, the remaining two were based on biomarkers absent from the panel, highlighting the potential additional clinical benefit of WGS and TS.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.90
自引率
1.30%
发文量
87
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: Online-only and open access, npj Precision Oncology is an international, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to showcasing cutting-edge scientific research in all facets of precision oncology, spanning from fundamental science to translational applications and clinical medicine.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信