Cargando…
Evaluation of a new panel of six mononucleotide repeat markers for the detection of DNA mismatch repair-deficient tumours
BACKGROUND: Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a molecular phenotype due to defective DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system. It is used to predict outcome of colorectal tumours and to screen tumours for Lynch syndrome (LS). A pentaplex panel composed of five mononucleotide markers has been largely recom...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3670492/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23652311 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.213 |
_version_ | 1782271857722916864 |
---|---|
author | Pagin, A Zerimech, F Leclerc, J Wacrenier, A Lejeune, S Descarpentries, C Escande, F Porchet, N Buisine, M-P |
author_facet | Pagin, A Zerimech, F Leclerc, J Wacrenier, A Lejeune, S Descarpentries, C Escande, F Porchet, N Buisine, M-P |
author_sort | Pagin, A |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a molecular phenotype due to defective DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system. It is used to predict outcome of colorectal tumours and to screen tumours for Lynch syndrome (LS). A pentaplex panel composed of five mononucleotide markers has been largely recommended for determination of the MSI status. However, its sensitivity may be taken in default in occasional situations. The aim of the study was to optimise this panel for the detection of MSI. METHODS: We developed an assay allowing co-amplification of six mononucleotide repeat markers (BAT25, BAT26, BAT40, NR21, NR22, NR27) and one polymorphic dinucleotide marker (D3S1260) in a single reaction. Performances of the new panel were evaluated on a cohort of patients suspected of LS. RESULTS: We demonstrate that our assay is technically as easy to use as the pentaplex assay. The hexaplex panel shows similar performances for the identification of colorectal and non-MSH6-deficient tumours. On the other hand, the hexaplex panel has higher sensitivity for the identification of MSH6-deficient tumours (94.7% vs 84.2%) and MMR-deficient tumours other than colorectal cancer (92.9% vs 85.7%). CONCLUSION: The hexaplex panel could thus be an attractive alternative to the pentaplex panel for the identification of patients with LS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3670492 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-36704922014-05-28 Evaluation of a new panel of six mononucleotide repeat markers for the detection of DNA mismatch repair-deficient tumours Pagin, A Zerimech, F Leclerc, J Wacrenier, A Lejeune, S Descarpentries, C Escande, F Porchet, N Buisine, M-P Br J Cancer Molecular Diagnostics BACKGROUND: Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a molecular phenotype due to defective DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system. It is used to predict outcome of colorectal tumours and to screen tumours for Lynch syndrome (LS). A pentaplex panel composed of five mononucleotide markers has been largely recommended for determination of the MSI status. However, its sensitivity may be taken in default in occasional situations. The aim of the study was to optimise this panel for the detection of MSI. METHODS: We developed an assay allowing co-amplification of six mononucleotide repeat markers (BAT25, BAT26, BAT40, NR21, NR22, NR27) and one polymorphic dinucleotide marker (D3S1260) in a single reaction. Performances of the new panel were evaluated on a cohort of patients suspected of LS. RESULTS: We demonstrate that our assay is technically as easy to use as the pentaplex assay. The hexaplex panel shows similar performances for the identification of colorectal and non-MSH6-deficient tumours. On the other hand, the hexaplex panel has higher sensitivity for the identification of MSH6-deficient tumours (94.7% vs 84.2%) and MMR-deficient tumours other than colorectal cancer (92.9% vs 85.7%). CONCLUSION: The hexaplex panel could thus be an attractive alternative to the pentaplex panel for the identification of patients with LS. Nature Publishing Group 2013-05-28 2013-05-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3670492/ /pubmed/23652311 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.213 Text en Copyright © 2013 Cancer Research UK http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ From twelve months after its original publication, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ |
spellingShingle | Molecular Diagnostics Pagin, A Zerimech, F Leclerc, J Wacrenier, A Lejeune, S Descarpentries, C Escande, F Porchet, N Buisine, M-P Evaluation of a new panel of six mononucleotide repeat markers for the detection of DNA mismatch repair-deficient tumours |
title | Evaluation of a new panel of six mononucleotide repeat markers for the detection of DNA mismatch repair-deficient tumours |
title_full | Evaluation of a new panel of six mononucleotide repeat markers for the detection of DNA mismatch repair-deficient tumours |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of a new panel of six mononucleotide repeat markers for the detection of DNA mismatch repair-deficient tumours |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of a new panel of six mononucleotide repeat markers for the detection of DNA mismatch repair-deficient tumours |
title_short | Evaluation of a new panel of six mononucleotide repeat markers for the detection of DNA mismatch repair-deficient tumours |
title_sort | evaluation of a new panel of six mononucleotide repeat markers for the detection of dna mismatch repair-deficient tumours |
topic | Molecular Diagnostics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3670492/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23652311 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.213 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pagina evaluationofanewpanelofsixmononucleotiderepeatmarkersforthedetectionofdnamismatchrepairdeficienttumours AT zerimechf evaluationofanewpanelofsixmononucleotiderepeatmarkersforthedetectionofdnamismatchrepairdeficienttumours AT leclercj evaluationofanewpanelofsixmononucleotiderepeatmarkersforthedetectionofdnamismatchrepairdeficienttumours AT wacreniera evaluationofanewpanelofsixmononucleotiderepeatmarkersforthedetectionofdnamismatchrepairdeficienttumours AT lejeunes evaluationofanewpanelofsixmononucleotiderepeatmarkersforthedetectionofdnamismatchrepairdeficienttumours AT descarpentriesc evaluationofanewpanelofsixmononucleotiderepeatmarkersforthedetectionofdnamismatchrepairdeficienttumours AT escandef evaluationofanewpanelofsixmononucleotiderepeatmarkersforthedetectionofdnamismatchrepairdeficienttumours AT porchetn evaluationofanewpanelofsixmononucleotiderepeatmarkersforthedetectionofdnamismatchrepairdeficienttumours AT buisinemp evaluationofanewpanelofsixmononucleotiderepeatmarkersforthedetectionofdnamismatchrepairdeficienttumours |