Cargando…

RAS screening in colorectal cancer: a comprehensive analysis of the results from the UK NEQAS colorectal cancer external quality assurance schemes (2009–2016)

Evidence strongly indicates that extended RAS testing should be undertaken in mCRC patients, prior to prescribing anti-EGFR therapies. With more laboratories implementing testing, the requirement for External Quality Assurance schemes increases, thus ensuring high standards of molecular analysis. Da...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Richman, Susan D., Fairley, Jennifer, Butler, Rachel, Deans, Zandra C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711992/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28653203
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00428-017-2162-7
_version_ 1783283136603357184
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 Evidence strongly indicates that extended RAS testing should be undertaken in mCRC patients, prior to prescribing anti-EGFR therapies. With more laboratories implementing testing, the requirement for External Quality Assurance schemes increases, thus ensuring high standards of molecular analysis. Data was analysed from 15 United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Service (UK NEQAS) for Molecular Genetics Colorectal cancer external quality assurance (EQA) schemes, delivered between 2009 and 2016. Laboratories were provided annually with nine colorectal tumour samples for genotyping. Information on methodology and extent of testing coverage was requested, and scores given for genotyping, interpretation and clerical accuracy. There has been a sixfold increase in laboratory participation (18 in 2009 to 108 in 2016). For RAS genotyping, fewer laboratories now use Roche cobas®, pyrosequencing and Sanger sequencing, with more moving to next generation sequencing (NGS). NGS is the most commonly employed technology for BRAF and PIK3CA mutation screening. KRAS genotyping errors were seen in ≤10% laboratories, until the 2014–2015 scheme, when there was an increase to 16.7%, corresponding to a large increase in scheme participants. NRAS genotyping errors peaked at 25.6% in the first 2015–2016 scheme but subsequently dropped to below 5%. Interpretation and clerical accuracy scores have been consistently good throughout. Within this EQA scheme, we have observed that the quality of molecular analysis for colorectal cancer has continued to improve, despite changes in the required targets, the volume of testing and the technologies employed. It is reassuring to know that laboratories clearly recognise the importance of participating in EQA schemes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5711992
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57119922017-12-07 RAS screening in colorectal cancer: a comprehensive analysis of the results from the UK NEQAS colorectal cancer external quality assurance schemes (2009–2016) Richman, Susan D. Fairley, Jennifer Butler, Rachel Deans, Zandra C. Virchows Arch Original Article Evidence strongly indicates that extended RAS testing should be undertaken in mCRC patients, prior to prescribing anti-EGFR therapies. With more laboratories implementing testing, the requirement for External Quality Assurance schemes increases, thus ensuring high standards of molecular analysis. Data was analysed from 15 United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Service (UK NEQAS) for Molecular Genetics Colorectal cancer external quality assurance (EQA) schemes, delivered between 2009 and 2016. Laboratories were provided annually with nine colorectal tumour samples for genotyping. Information on methodology and extent of testing coverage was requested, and scores given for genotyping, interpretation and clerical accuracy. There has been a sixfold increase in laboratory participation (18 in 2009 to 108 in 2016). For RAS genotyping, fewer laboratories now use Roche cobas®, pyrosequencing and Sanger sequencing, with more moving to next generation sequencing (NGS). NGS is the most commonly employed technology for BRAF and PIK3CA mutation screening. KRAS genotyping errors were seen in ≤10% laboratories, until the 2014–2015 scheme, when there was an increase to 16.7%, corresponding to a large increase in scheme participants. NRAS genotyping errors peaked at 25.6% in the first 2015–2016 scheme but subsequently dropped to below 5%. Interpretation and clerical accuracy scores have been consistently good throughout. Within this EQA scheme, we have observed that the quality of molecular analysis for colorectal cancer has continued to improve, despite changes in the required targets, the volume of testing and the technologies employed. It is reassuring to know that laboratories clearly recognise the importance of participating in EQA schemes. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-06-26 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5711992/ /pubmed/28653203 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00428-017-2162-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This 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.
spellingShingle Original Article
Richman, Susan D.
Fairley, Jennifer
Butler, Rachel
Deans, Zandra C.
RAS screening in colorectal cancer: a comprehensive analysis of the results from the UK NEQAS colorectal cancer external quality assurance schemes (2009–2016)
title RAS screening in colorectal cancer: a comprehensive analysis of the results from the UK NEQAS colorectal cancer external quality assurance schemes (2009–2016)
title_full RAS screening in colorectal cancer: a comprehensive analysis of the results from the UK NEQAS colorectal cancer external quality assurance schemes (2009–2016)
title_fullStr RAS screening in colorectal cancer: a comprehensive analysis of the results from the UK NEQAS colorectal cancer external quality assurance schemes (2009–2016)
title_full_unstemmed RAS screening in colorectal cancer: a comprehensive analysis of the results from the UK NEQAS colorectal cancer external quality assurance schemes (2009–2016)
title_short RAS screening in colorectal cancer: a comprehensive analysis of the results from the UK NEQAS colorectal cancer external quality assurance schemes (2009–2016)
title_sort ras screening in colorectal cancer: a comprehensive analysis of the results from the uk neqas colorectal cancer external quality assurance schemes (2009–2016)
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711992/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28653203
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00428-017-2162-7
work_keys_str_mv AT richmansusand rasscreeningincolorectalcanceracomprehensiveanalysisoftheresultsfromtheukneqascolorectalcancerexternalqualityassuranceschemes20092016
AT fairleyjennifer rasscreeningincolorectalcanceracomprehensiveanalysisoftheresultsfromtheukneqascolorectalcancerexternalqualityassuranceschemes20092016
AT butlerrachel rasscreeningincolorectalcanceracomprehensiveanalysisoftheresultsfromtheukneqascolorectalcancerexternalqualityassuranceschemes20092016
AT deanszandrac rasscreeningincolorectalcanceracomprehensiveanalysisoftheresultsfromtheukneqascolorectalcancerexternalqualityassuranceschemes20092016