Cargando…
How close are we to standardised extended RAS gene mutation testing? The UK NEQAS evaluation
AIMS: Since 2008, KRAS mutation status in exon 2 has been used to predict response to anti-EGFR therapies. Recent evidence has demonstrated that NRAS status is also predictive of response. Several retrospective ‘extended RAS’ analyses have been performed on clinical trial material. Despite this, are...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5256378/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27681846 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2016-203822 |
_version_ | 1782498703188164608 |
---|---|
author | Richman, Susan D Fairley, Jennifer Butler, Rachel Deans, Zandra C |
author_facet | Richman, Susan D Fairley, Jennifer Butler, Rachel Deans, Zandra C |
author_sort | Richman, Susan D |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: Since 2008, KRAS mutation status in exon 2 has been used to predict response to anti-EGFR therapies. Recent evidence has demonstrated that NRAS status is also predictive of response. Several retrospective ‘extended RAS’ analyses have been performed on clinical trial material. Despite this, are we really moving towards such extended screening practice in reality? METHODS: Data were analysed from four consecutive UK National External Quality Assessment Service for Molecular Genetics Colorectal cancer External Quality Assessment schemes (during the period 2014–2016), with up to 110 laboratories (worldwide) participating in each scheme. Testing of four or five tumour samples is required per scheme. Laboratories provided information on which codons were routinely screened, and provided genotyping and interpretation results for each sample. RESULTS: At least 85% of laboratories routinely tested KRAS codons 12, 13 and 61. Over the four schemes, an increasing number of laboratories routinely tested KRAS codons 59, 117 and 146. Furthermore, more laboratories were introducing next generation sequencing technologies. The pattern of ‘extended testing’ was reassuringly similar for NRAS, although fewer laboratories currently test for mutations in this gene. Alarmingly, still only 36.1% and 24.1% of participating laboratories met the ACP Molecular Pathology and Diagnostics Group and American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines, respectively, for extended RAS testing in the latest assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite recommendations in the UK and USA on extended RAS testing, there has clearly been, based on these results, a delay in implementation. Inadequate testing results in patients being subjected to harmful treatment regimens, which would not be the case, were routine practice altered, in line with evidence-based guidelines. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5256378 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-52563782017-01-25 How close are we to standardised extended RAS gene mutation testing? The UK NEQAS evaluation Richman, Susan D Fairley, Jennifer Butler, Rachel Deans, Zandra C J Clin Pathol Original Article AIMS: Since 2008, KRAS mutation status in exon 2 has been used to predict response to anti-EGFR therapies. Recent evidence has demonstrated that NRAS status is also predictive of response. Several retrospective ‘extended RAS’ analyses have been performed on clinical trial material. Despite this, are we really moving towards such extended screening practice in reality? METHODS: Data were analysed from four consecutive UK National External Quality Assessment Service for Molecular Genetics Colorectal cancer External Quality Assessment schemes (during the period 2014–2016), with up to 110 laboratories (worldwide) participating in each scheme. Testing of four or five tumour samples is required per scheme. Laboratories provided information on which codons were routinely screened, and provided genotyping and interpretation results for each sample. RESULTS: At least 85% of laboratories routinely tested KRAS codons 12, 13 and 61. Over the four schemes, an increasing number of laboratories routinely tested KRAS codons 59, 117 and 146. Furthermore, more laboratories were introducing next generation sequencing technologies. The pattern of ‘extended testing’ was reassuringly similar for NRAS, although fewer laboratories currently test for mutations in this gene. Alarmingly, still only 36.1% and 24.1% of participating laboratories met the ACP Molecular Pathology and Diagnostics Group and American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines, respectively, for extended RAS testing in the latest assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite recommendations in the UK and USA on extended RAS testing, there has clearly been, based on these results, a delay in implementation. Inadequate testing results in patients being subjected to harmful treatment regimens, which would not be the case, were routine practice altered, in line with evidence-based guidelines. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-01 2016-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5256378/ /pubmed/27681846 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2016-203822 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Original Article Richman, Susan D Fairley, Jennifer Butler, Rachel Deans, Zandra C How close are we to standardised extended RAS gene mutation testing? The UK NEQAS evaluation |
title | How close are we to standardised extended RAS gene mutation testing? The UK NEQAS evaluation |
title_full | How close are we to standardised extended RAS gene mutation testing? The UK NEQAS evaluation |
title_fullStr | How close are we to standardised extended RAS gene mutation testing? The UK NEQAS evaluation |
title_full_unstemmed | How close are we to standardised extended RAS gene mutation testing? The UK NEQAS evaluation |
title_short | How close are we to standardised extended RAS gene mutation testing? The UK NEQAS evaluation |
title_sort | how close are we to standardised extended ras gene mutation testing? the uk neqas evaluation |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5256378/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27681846 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2016-203822 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT richmansusand howclosearewetostandardisedextendedrasgenemutationtestingtheukneqasevaluation AT fairleyjennifer howclosearewetostandardisedextendedrasgenemutationtestingtheukneqasevaluation AT butlerrachel howclosearewetostandardisedextendedrasgenemutationtestingtheukneqasevaluation AT deanszandrac howclosearewetostandardisedextendedrasgenemutationtestingtheukneqasevaluation |