Cargando…
Comparison of Testing Methods for the Detection of BRAF V600E Mutations in Malignant Melanoma: Pre-Approval Validation Study of the Companion Diagnostic Test for Vemurafenib
BACKGROUND: The cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test is a CE-marked and FDA-approved in vitro diagnostic assay used to select patients with metastatic melanoma for treatment with the selective BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib. We describe the pre-approval validation of this test in two external laboratories...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3542342/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23326492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053733 |
_version_ | 1782255499173953536 |
---|---|
author | Lopez-Rios, Fernando Angulo, Barbara Gomez, Belen Mair, Debbie Martinez, Rebeca Conde, Esther Shieh, Felice Vaks, Jeffrey Langland, Rachel Lawrence, H. Jeffrey de Castro, David Gonzalez |
author_facet | Lopez-Rios, Fernando Angulo, Barbara Gomez, Belen Mair, Debbie Martinez, Rebeca Conde, Esther Shieh, Felice Vaks, Jeffrey Langland, Rachel Lawrence, H. Jeffrey de Castro, David Gonzalez |
author_sort | Lopez-Rios, Fernando |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test is a CE-marked and FDA-approved in vitro diagnostic assay used to select patients with metastatic melanoma for treatment with the selective BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib. We describe the pre-approval validation of this test in two external laboratories. METHODS: Melanoma specimens were tested for BRAF V600 mutations at two laboratories with the: cobas BRAF Mutation Test; ABI BRAF test; and bidirectional direct sequencing. Positive (PPA) and negative (NPA) percent agreements were determined between the cobas test and the other assays. Specimens with discordant results were tested with massively parallel pyrosequencing (454). DNA blends with 5% mutant alleles were tested to assess detection rates. RESULTS: Invalid results were observed in 8/116 specimens (6·9%) with Sanger, 10/116 (8·6%) with ABI BRAF, and 0/232 (0%) with the cobas BRAF test. PPA was 97·7% for V600E mutation for the cobas BRAF test and Sanger, and NPA was 95·3%. For the cobas BRAF test and ABI BRAF, PPA was 71·9% and NPA 83·7%. For 16 cobas BRAF test-negative/ABI BRAF-positive specimens, 454 sequencing detected no codon 600 mutations in 12 and variant codon 600 mutations in four. For eight cobas BRAF test-positive/ABI BRAF-negative specimens, four were V600E and four V600K by 454 sequencing. Detection rates for 5% mutation blends were 100% for the cobas BRAF test, 33% for Sanger, and 21% for the ABI BRAF. Reproducibility of the cobas BRAF test was 111/116 (96%) between the two sites. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to evaluate potential companion diagnostic tests in external laboratories simultaneously to the pivotal clinical trial validation. The health authority approved assay had substantially better performance characteristics than the two other methods. The overall success of the cobas BRAF test is a proof of concept for future biomarker development. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3542342 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-35423422013-01-16 Comparison of Testing Methods for the Detection of BRAF V600E Mutations in Malignant Melanoma: Pre-Approval Validation Study of the Companion Diagnostic Test for Vemurafenib Lopez-Rios, Fernando Angulo, Barbara Gomez, Belen Mair, Debbie Martinez, Rebeca Conde, Esther Shieh, Felice Vaks, Jeffrey Langland, Rachel Lawrence, H. Jeffrey de Castro, David Gonzalez PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: The cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test is a CE-marked and FDA-approved in vitro diagnostic assay used to select patients with metastatic melanoma for treatment with the selective BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib. We describe the pre-approval validation of this test in two external laboratories. METHODS: Melanoma specimens were tested for BRAF V600 mutations at two laboratories with the: cobas BRAF Mutation Test; ABI BRAF test; and bidirectional direct sequencing. Positive (PPA) and negative (NPA) percent agreements were determined between the cobas test and the other assays. Specimens with discordant results were tested with massively parallel pyrosequencing (454). DNA blends with 5% mutant alleles were tested to assess detection rates. RESULTS: Invalid results were observed in 8/116 specimens (6·9%) with Sanger, 10/116 (8·6%) with ABI BRAF, and 0/232 (0%) with the cobas BRAF test. PPA was 97·7% for V600E mutation for the cobas BRAF test and Sanger, and NPA was 95·3%. For the cobas BRAF test and ABI BRAF, PPA was 71·9% and NPA 83·7%. For 16 cobas BRAF test-negative/ABI BRAF-positive specimens, 454 sequencing detected no codon 600 mutations in 12 and variant codon 600 mutations in four. For eight cobas BRAF test-positive/ABI BRAF-negative specimens, four were V600E and four V600K by 454 sequencing. Detection rates for 5% mutation blends were 100% for the cobas BRAF test, 33% for Sanger, and 21% for the ABI BRAF. Reproducibility of the cobas BRAF test was 111/116 (96%) between the two sites. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to evaluate potential companion diagnostic tests in external laboratories simultaneously to the pivotal clinical trial validation. The health authority approved assay had substantially better performance characteristics than the two other methods. The overall success of the cobas BRAF test is a proof of concept for future biomarker development. Public Library of Science 2013-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC3542342/ /pubmed/23326492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053733 Text en © 2013 Lopez-Rios et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Lopez-Rios, Fernando Angulo, Barbara Gomez, Belen Mair, Debbie Martinez, Rebeca Conde, Esther Shieh, Felice Vaks, Jeffrey Langland, Rachel Lawrence, H. Jeffrey de Castro, David Gonzalez Comparison of Testing Methods for the Detection of BRAF V600E Mutations in Malignant Melanoma: Pre-Approval Validation Study of the Companion Diagnostic Test for Vemurafenib |
title | Comparison of Testing Methods for the Detection of BRAF V600E Mutations in Malignant Melanoma: Pre-Approval Validation Study of the Companion Diagnostic Test for Vemurafenib |
title_full | Comparison of Testing Methods for the Detection of BRAF V600E Mutations in Malignant Melanoma: Pre-Approval Validation Study of the Companion Diagnostic Test for Vemurafenib |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Testing Methods for the Detection of BRAF V600E Mutations in Malignant Melanoma: Pre-Approval Validation Study of the Companion Diagnostic Test for Vemurafenib |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Testing Methods for the Detection of BRAF V600E Mutations in Malignant Melanoma: Pre-Approval Validation Study of the Companion Diagnostic Test for Vemurafenib |
title_short | Comparison of Testing Methods for the Detection of BRAF V600E Mutations in Malignant Melanoma: Pre-Approval Validation Study of the Companion Diagnostic Test for Vemurafenib |
title_sort | comparison of testing methods for the detection of braf v600e mutations in malignant melanoma: pre-approval validation study of the companion diagnostic test for vemurafenib |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3542342/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23326492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053733 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lopezriosfernando comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib AT angulobarbara comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib AT gomezbelen comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib AT mairdebbie comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib AT martinezrebeca comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib AT condeesther comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib AT shiehfelice comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib AT vaksjeffrey comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib AT langlandrachel comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib AT lawrencehjeffrey comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib AT decastrodavidgonzalez comparisonoftestingmethodsforthedetectionofbrafv600emutationsinmalignantmelanomapreapprovalvalidationstudyofthecompaniondiagnostictestforvemurafenib |