ArticleThe Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD2010
KRAS mutation: comparison of testing methods and tissue sampling techniques in colon cancer.
Article in The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
48 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 110 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular Biomarkers for the Evaluation of Colorectal Cancer: Guideline From the American Society for Clinical Pathology, College of American Pathologists, Association for Molecular Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2017Guideline
- Molecular Biomarkers for the Evaluation of Colorectal Cancer.American journal of clinical pathology · 2017Guideline
- Japanese Society of Medical Oncology Clinical Guidelines: RAS (KRAS/NRAS) mutation testing in colorectal cancer patients.Cancer science · 2015Guideline
- Diagnostic accuracy of high resolution melting analysis for detection of KRAS mutations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2014Pooled it
- Is high resolution melting analysis (HRMA) accurate for detection of human disease-associated mutations? A meta analysis.PloS one · 2011Pooled it
- ROS1 and ALK fusions in colorectal cancer, with evidence of intratumoral heterogeneity for molecular drivers.Molecular cancer research : MCR · 2014Trial
- Phase II selection design trial of concurrent chemotherapy and cetuximab versus chemotherapy followed by cetuximab in advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer: Southwest Oncology Group study S0342.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2010Trial
- Review
- KRAS mutations detection methodology: from RFLP to CRISPR/Cas based methods.Functional & integrative genomics · 2024Review
- Antineoplastic effect of compounds C14 and P8 on TNBC and radioresistant TNBC cells by stabilizing the K-Ras4BFrontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Combining the amplification refractory mutation system and high-resolution melting analysis for KRAS mutation detection in clinical samples.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2023Article
- Untangling the KRAS mutated lung cancer subsets and its therapeutic implications.Molecular biomedicine · 2021Review
- Current therapy of advanced colorectal cancer according to RAS/RAF mutational status.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2020Review
- KRAS and NRAS pyrosequencing screening in Tunisian colorectal cancer patients in 2015.Heliyon · 2019Article
- Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas: Clinical association with KRAS.Molecular medicine reports · 2018Article
- Genotyping of KRAS Mutational Status by the In-Check Lab-on-Chip Platform.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- Rapid and accurate detection ofOncotarget · 2017Article
- Amplification of EGFR and cyclin D1 genes associated with human papillomavirus infection in oral squamous cell carcinoma.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2017Article
- Current companion diagnostics in advanced colorectal cancer; getting a bigger and better piece of the pie.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2017Review
- Key differences between 13 KRAS mutation detection technologies and their relevance for clinical practice.ESMO open · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Treatment of colon carcinoma with the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody Cetuximab is reported to be ineffective in KRAS-mutant tumors. Mutation testing techniques have therefore become an urgent concern. We have compared three methods for detecting KRAS mutations in 59 cases of colon carcinoma: 1) high resolution melting, 2) the amplification refractory mutation system using a bifunctional self-probing primer (ARMS/Scorpion, ARMS/S), and 3) direct sequencing. We also evaluated the effects of the methods of sectioning and coring of paraffin blocks to obtain tumor DNA on assay sensitivity and specificity. The most sensitive and specific combination of block sampling and mutational analysis was ARMS/S performed on DNA derived from 1-mm paraffin cores. This combination of tissue sampling and testing method detected KRAS mutations in 46% of colon tumors. Four samples were positive by ARMS/S, but initially negative by direct sequencing. Cloned DNA samples were retested by direct sequencing, and in all four cases KRAS mutations were identified in the DNA. In six cases, high resolution melting abnormalities could not be confirmed as specific mutations either by ARMS/S or direct sequencing. We conclude that coring of the paraffin blocks and testing by ARMS/S is a sensitive, specific, and efficient method for KRAS testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.