Cargando…

Validation of an NGS mutation detection panel for melanoma

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of the genotype of melanoma is important to guide patient management. Identification of mutations in BRAF and c-KIT lead directly to targeted treatment, but it is also helpful to know if there are driver oncogene mutations in NRAS, GNAQ or GNA11 as these patients may benefit fr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Reiman, Anne, Kikuchi, Hugh, Scocchia, Daniela, Smith, Peter, Tsang, Yee Wah, Snead, David, Cree, Ian A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5322598/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28228113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3149-0
_version_ 1782509878147809280
author Reiman, Anne
Kikuchi, Hugh
Scocchia, Daniela
Smith, Peter
Tsang, Yee Wah
Snead, David
Cree, Ian A
author_facet Reiman, Anne
Kikuchi, Hugh
Scocchia, Daniela
Smith, Peter
Tsang, Yee Wah
Snead, David
Cree, Ian A
author_sort Reiman, Anne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Knowledge of the genotype of melanoma is important to guide patient management. Identification of mutations in BRAF and c-KIT lead directly to targeted treatment, but it is also helpful to know if there are driver oncogene mutations in NRAS, GNAQ or GNA11 as these patients may benefit from alternative strategies such as immunotherapy. METHODS: While polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods are often used to detect BRAF mutations, next generation sequencing (NGS) is able to determine all of the necessary information on several genes at once, with potential advantages in turnaround time. We describe here an Ampliseq hotspot panel for melanoma for use with the IonTorrent Personal Genome Machine (PGM) which covers the mutations currently of most clinical interest. RESULTS: We have validated this in 151 cases of skin and uveal melanoma from our files, and correlated the data with PCR based assessment of BRAF status. There was excellent agreement, with few discrepancies, though NGS does have greater coverage and picks up some mutations that would be missed by PCR. However, these are often rare and of unknown significance for treatment. CONCLUSIONS: PCR methods are rapid, less time-consuming and less expensive than NGS, and could be used as triage for patients requiring more extensive diagnostic workup. The NGS panel described here is suitable for clinical use with formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3149-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5322598
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53225982017-03-01 Validation of an NGS mutation detection panel for melanoma Reiman, Anne Kikuchi, Hugh Scocchia, Daniela Smith, Peter Tsang, Yee Wah Snead, David Cree, Ian A BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: Knowledge of the genotype of melanoma is important to guide patient management. Identification of mutations in BRAF and c-KIT lead directly to targeted treatment, but it is also helpful to know if there are driver oncogene mutations in NRAS, GNAQ or GNA11 as these patients may benefit from alternative strategies such as immunotherapy. METHODS: While polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods are often used to detect BRAF mutations, next generation sequencing (NGS) is able to determine all of the necessary information on several genes at once, with potential advantages in turnaround time. We describe here an Ampliseq hotspot panel for melanoma for use with the IonTorrent Personal Genome Machine (PGM) which covers the mutations currently of most clinical interest. RESULTS: We have validated this in 151 cases of skin and uveal melanoma from our files, and correlated the data with PCR based assessment of BRAF status. There was excellent agreement, with few discrepancies, though NGS does have greater coverage and picks up some mutations that would be missed by PCR. However, these are often rare and of unknown significance for treatment. CONCLUSIONS: PCR methods are rapid, less time-consuming and less expensive than NGS, and could be used as triage for patients requiring more extensive diagnostic workup. The NGS panel described here is suitable for clinical use with formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3149-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-02-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5322598/ /pubmed/28228113 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3149-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Reiman, Anne
Kikuchi, Hugh
Scocchia, Daniela
Smith, Peter
Tsang, Yee Wah
Snead, David
Cree, Ian A
Validation of an NGS mutation detection panel for melanoma
title Validation of an NGS mutation detection panel for melanoma
title_full Validation of an NGS mutation detection panel for melanoma
title_fullStr Validation of an NGS mutation detection panel for melanoma
title_full_unstemmed Validation of an NGS mutation detection panel for melanoma
title_short Validation of an NGS mutation detection panel for melanoma
title_sort validation of an ngs mutation detection panel for melanoma
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5322598/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28228113
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3149-0
work_keys_str_mv AT reimananne validationofanngsmutationdetectionpanelformelanoma
AT kikuchihugh validationofanngsmutationdetectionpanelformelanoma
AT scocchiadaniela validationofanngsmutationdetectionpanelformelanoma
AT smithpeter validationofanngsmutationdetectionpanelformelanoma
AT tsangyeewah validationofanngsmutationdetectionpanelformelanoma
AT sneaddavid validationofanngsmutationdetectionpanelformelanoma
AT creeiana validationofanngsmutationdetectionpanelformelanoma