Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21943394›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2011

Clinical pharmacogenomic testing of KRAS, BRAF and EGFR mutations by high resolution melting analysis and ultra-deep pyrosequencing.

Emma Borràs, Ismael Jurado, Imma Hernan, María José Gamundi, Miguel Dias, Isabel Martí, Begoña Mañé, Angels Arcusa, José A G Agúndez, Miguel Blanca and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. High-resolution melting for detectingBiomedical reports · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Main Risk Factors Association with Proto-Oncogene Mutations in Colorectal CancerAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018
    Article
  14. Article
  15. UncommonLung Cancer (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018
    Article
  16. Review
  17. A novelClinical case reports · 2017
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emma BorràsHospital de Terrassa, Ctra, Torrebonica, Terrassa, Spain.
Ismael Jurado
Imma Hernan
María José Gamundi
Miguel Dias
Isabel Martí
Begoña Mañé
Angels Arcusa
José A G Agúndez
Miguel Blanca
Miguel Carballo
Hospital Terrassa · ESUniversidad de Extremadura · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and its downstream factors KRAS and BRAF are mutated in several types of cancer, affecting the clinical response to EGFR inhibitors. Mutations in the EGFR kinase domain predict sensitivity to the tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefitinib and erlotinib in lung adenocarcinoma, while activating point mutations in KRAS and BRAF confer resistance to the anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab in colorectal cancer. The development of new generation methods for systematic mutation screening of these genes will allow more appropriate therapeutic choices.

methodsWe describe a high resolution melting (HRM) assay for mutation detection in EGFR exons 19-21, KRAS codon 12/13 and BRAF V600 using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples. Somatic variation of KRAS exon 2 was also analysed by massively parallel pyrosequencing of amplicons with the GS Junior 454 platform.

resultsWe tested 120 routine diagnostic specimens from patients with colorectal or lung cancer. Mutations in KRAS, BRAF and EGFR were observed in 41.9%, 13.0% and 11.1% of the overall samples, respectively, being mutually exclusive. For KRAS, six types of substitutions were detected (17 G12D, 9 G13D, 7 G12C, 2 G12A, 2 G12V, 2 G12S), while V600E accounted for all the BRAF activating mutations. Regarding EGFR, two cases showed exon 19 deletions (delE746-A750 and delE746-T751insA) and another two substitutions in exon 21 (one showed L858R with the resistance mutation T590M in exon 20, and the other had P848L mutation). Consistent with earlier reports, our results show that KRAS and BRAF mutation frequencies in colorectal cancer were 44.3% and 13.0%, respectively, while EGFR mutations were detected in 11.1% of the lung cancer specimens. Ultra-deep amplicon pyrosequencing successfully validated the HRM results and allowed detection and quantitation of KRAS somatic mutations.

conclusionsHRM is a rapid and sensitive method for moderate-throughput cost-effective screening of oncogene mutations in clinical samples. Rather than Sanger sequence validation, next-generation sequencing technology results in more accurate quantitative results in somatic variation and can be achieved at a higher throughput scale.

Indexed as

MutationBase SequenceDNA Mutational AnalysisErbB ReceptorsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMolecular Sequence DataMolecular Targeted TherapyNeoplasmsProto-Oncogene ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)ras ProteinsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySequence AlignmentBRAF protein, humanEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsKRAS protein, humanProto-Oncogene ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)ras Proteins

Identifiers

PMID21943394
PMCPMC3192787
OpenAlexW2130849650

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.