非小细胞肺癌EGFR突变检测方法的比较。

Elizabeth C Young, Martina M Owens, Idowu Adebiyi, Tina Bedenham, Rachel Butler, Jonathan Callaway, Treena Cranston, Charlene Crosby, Ian A Cree, Laura Dutton, Catherine Faulkes, Claire Faulkner, Emma Howard, Julia Knight, Yuanxue Huang, Louise Lavender, Lazarus P Lazarou, Hongxiang Liu, Debbie Mair, Antonio Milano, Stacey Sandell, Alison Skinner, Andrew Wallace, Maggie Williams, Vicky Spivey, John Goodall, Jonathan Frampton, Sian Ellard
{"title":"非小细胞肺癌EGFR突变检测方法的比较。","authors":"Elizabeth C Young,&nbsp;Martina M Owens,&nbsp;Idowu Adebiyi,&nbsp;Tina Bedenham,&nbsp;Rachel Butler,&nbsp;Jonathan Callaway,&nbsp;Treena Cranston,&nbsp;Charlene Crosby,&nbsp;Ian A Cree,&nbsp;Laura Dutton,&nbsp;Catherine Faulkes,&nbsp;Claire Faulkner,&nbsp;Emma Howard,&nbsp;Julia Knight,&nbsp;Yuanxue Huang,&nbsp;Louise Lavender,&nbsp;Lazarus P Lazarou,&nbsp;Hongxiang Liu,&nbsp;Debbie Mair,&nbsp;Antonio Milano,&nbsp;Stacey Sandell,&nbsp;Alison Skinner,&nbsp;Andrew Wallace,&nbsp;Maggie Williams,&nbsp;Vicky Spivey,&nbsp;John Goodall,&nbsp;Jonathan Frampton,&nbsp;Sian Ellard","doi":"10.1097/PDM.0b013e318294936c","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>EGFR mutation testing of tumor samples is routinely performed to predict sensitivity to treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors for patients with non-small cell lung cancer. At least 9 different methodologies are employed in UK laboratories, and the aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity of different methods for the detection of EGFR mutations. Participating laboratories were sent coded samples with varying mutation loads (from 0% to 15%) to be tested for the p.Leu858Arg (p.L858R) missense mutation and c.2235_2249del exon 19 deletion. The p.L858R mutation and deletions within exon 19 of the EGFR gene account for ∼90% of mutation-positive cases. The 11 laboratories used their standard testing method(s) and submitted 15 sets of results for the p.L858R samples and 10 for the exon 19 deletion. The p.Leu858Arg (p.L858R) mutation was detected at levels between 1% and 7.5% by Sanger sequencing, pyrosequencing, real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), amplification refractory mutation system, and capillary electrophoresis single-strand conformation analysis. The c.2235_2249del mutation was detected at 1% to 5% by fragment size analysis, Sanger sequencing or real-time PCR. A mutation was detected in 24/25 (96%) of the samples tested which contained 5% mutated DNA. The 1% sensitivity claimed for commercial real-time PCR-targeted EGFR tests was achieved and our results show greater sensitivity for the Sanger sequencing and pyrosequencing screening methods compared to the 10% to 20% detection levels cited on clinical diagnostic reports. We conclude that multiple methodologies are suitable for the detection of acquired EGFR mutations. </p>","PeriodicalId":11235,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostic Molecular Pathology","volume":"22 4","pages":"190-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/PDM.0b013e318294936c","citationCount":"23","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of methods for EGFR mutation testing in non-small cell lung cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth C Young,&nbsp;Martina M Owens,&nbsp;Idowu Adebiyi,&nbsp;Tina Bedenham,&nbsp;Rachel Butler,&nbsp;Jonathan Callaway,&nbsp;Treena Cranston,&nbsp;Charlene Crosby,&nbsp;Ian A Cree,&nbsp;Laura Dutton,&nbsp;Catherine Faulkes,&nbsp;Claire Faulkner,&nbsp;Emma Howard,&nbsp;Julia Knight,&nbsp;Yuanxue Huang,&nbsp;Louise Lavender,&nbsp;Lazarus P Lazarou,&nbsp;Hongxiang Liu,&nbsp;Debbie Mair,&nbsp;Antonio Milano,&nbsp;Stacey Sandell,&nbsp;Alison Skinner,&nbsp;Andrew Wallace,&nbsp;Maggie Williams,&nbsp;Vicky Spivey,&nbsp;John Goodall,&nbsp;Jonathan Frampton,&nbsp;Sian Ellard\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/PDM.0b013e318294936c\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>EGFR mutation testing of tumor samples is routinely performed to predict sensitivity to treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors for patients with non-small cell lung cancer. At least 9 different methodologies are employed in UK laboratories, and the aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity of different methods for the detection of EGFR mutations. Participating laboratories were sent coded samples with varying mutation loads (from 0% to 15%) to be tested for the p.Leu858Arg (p.L858R) missense mutation and c.2235_2249del exon 19 deletion. The p.L858R mutation and deletions within exon 19 of the EGFR gene account for ∼90% of mutation-positive cases. The 11 laboratories used their standard testing method(s) and submitted 15 sets of results for the p.L858R samples and 10 for the exon 19 deletion. The p.Leu858Arg (p.L858R) mutation was detected at levels between 1% and 7.5% by Sanger sequencing, pyrosequencing, real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), amplification refractory mutation system, and capillary electrophoresis single-strand conformation analysis. The c.2235_2249del mutation was detected at 1% to 5% by fragment size analysis, Sanger sequencing or real-time PCR. A mutation was detected in 24/25 (96%) of the samples tested which contained 5% mutated DNA. The 1% sensitivity claimed for commercial real-time PCR-targeted EGFR tests was achieved and our results show greater sensitivity for the Sanger sequencing and pyrosequencing screening methods compared to the 10% to 20% detection levels cited on clinical diagnostic reports. We conclude that multiple methodologies are suitable for the detection of acquired EGFR mutations. </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11235,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diagnostic Molecular Pathology\",\"volume\":\"22 4\",\"pages\":\"190-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/PDM.0b013e318294936c\",\"citationCount\":\"23\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diagnostic Molecular Pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/PDM.0b013e318294936c\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostic Molecular Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PDM.0b013e318294936c","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

摘要

对于非小细胞肺癌患者,常规进行肿瘤样本EGFR突变检测,以预测对酪氨酸激酶抑制剂治疗的敏感性。英国实验室至少采用了9种不同的方法,本研究的目的是比较不同方法检测EGFR突变的敏感性。参与实验室发送不同突变负荷(从0%到15%)的编码样本,检测p.Leu858Arg (p.L858R)错义突变和c.2235_2249del外显子19缺失。p.L858R突变和EGFR基因外显子19内的缺失占突变阳性病例的约90%。11个实验室采用各自的标准检测方法,提交了15组p.L858R样品和10组外显子19缺失样品的检测结果。通过Sanger测序、焦磷酸测序、实时聚合酶链反应(PCR)、扩增难解突变系统和毛细管电泳单链构象分析,检测到p.Leu858Arg (p.L858R)突变水平在1% ~ 7.5%之间。通过片段大小分析、Sanger测序或real-time PCR检测到c.2235_2249del突变,突变率为1% ~ 5%。在24/25(96%)的检测样本中检测到突变,其中含有5%的突变DNA。商业实时pcr靶向EGFR检测达到了1%的灵敏度,我们的结果表明,与临床诊断报告中引用的10%至20%的检测水平相比,Sanger测序和焦磷酸测序筛选方法的灵敏度更高。我们得出结论,多种方法适用于检测获得性EGFR突变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparison of methods for EGFR mutation testing in non-small cell lung cancer.

EGFR mutation testing of tumor samples is routinely performed to predict sensitivity to treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors for patients with non-small cell lung cancer. At least 9 different methodologies are employed in UK laboratories, and the aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity of different methods for the detection of EGFR mutations. Participating laboratories were sent coded samples with varying mutation loads (from 0% to 15%) to be tested for the p.Leu858Arg (p.L858R) missense mutation and c.2235_2249del exon 19 deletion. The p.L858R mutation and deletions within exon 19 of the EGFR gene account for ∼90% of mutation-positive cases. The 11 laboratories used their standard testing method(s) and submitted 15 sets of results for the p.L858R samples and 10 for the exon 19 deletion. The p.Leu858Arg (p.L858R) mutation was detected at levels between 1% and 7.5% by Sanger sequencing, pyrosequencing, real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), amplification refractory mutation system, and capillary electrophoresis single-strand conformation analysis. The c.2235_2249del mutation was detected at 1% to 5% by fragment size analysis, Sanger sequencing or real-time PCR. A mutation was detected in 24/25 (96%) of the samples tested which contained 5% mutated DNA. The 1% sensitivity claimed for commercial real-time PCR-targeted EGFR tests was achieved and our results show greater sensitivity for the Sanger sequencing and pyrosequencing screening methods compared to the 10% to 20% detection levels cited on clinical diagnostic reports. We conclude that multiple methodologies are suitable for the detection of acquired EGFR mutations.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Diagnostic Molecular Pathology focuses on providing clinical and academic pathologists with coverage of the latest molecular technologies, timely reviews of established techniques, and papers on the applications of these methods to all aspects of surgical pathology and laboratory medicine. It publishes original, peer-reviewed contributions on molecular probes for diagnosis, such as tumor suppressor genes, oncogenes, the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and in situ hybridization. Articles demonstrate how these highly sensitive techniques can be applied for more accurate diagnosis.
×
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