ArticleTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2015
Performance comparison of three BRAF V600E detection methods in malignant melanoma and colorectal cancer specimens.
Article in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 81 citations in OpenAlex.
- Proficiency test of BRAF immunohistochemistry as a surrogate marker of p.V600E mutation: Assessment of staining and interpretation quality in Taiwan.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Comparative efficiency of differential diagnostic methods for the identification of BRAF V600E gene mutation in papillary thyroid cancer (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2024Review
- Molecular Modeling Unveils the Effective Interaction of B-RAF Inhibitors with Rare B-RAF Insertion Variants.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Prevalence of theJournal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research · 2020Article
- Detection of BRAF V600E Mutation in Ganglioglioma and Pilocytic Astrocytoma by Immunohistochemistry and Real-Time PCR-Based Idylla Test.Disease markers · 2020Article
- Stemness underpinning all steps of human colorectal cancer defines the core of effective therapeutic strategies.EBioMedicine · 2019Article
- Immunohistochemistry with Anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) Mouse Monoclonal Antibody is a Sensitive Method for Detection of the BRAF V600E Mutation in Colon Cancer: Evaluation of 120 Cases with and without KRAS Mutation and Literature Review.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2019Review
- Utility of BRAF VE1 Immunohistochemistry as a Screening Tool for Colorectal Cancer HarboringJournal of pathology and translational medicine · 2018Article
- Induction of immunoglobulin transcription factor 2 and resistance to MEK inhibitor in melanoma cells.Oncotarget · 2017Article
- Comparison of Five Different Assays for the Detection of BRAF Mutations in Formalin-Fixed Paraffin Embedded Tissues of Patients with Metastatic Melanoma.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2017Article
- Tumor testing to identify lynch syndrome in two Australian colorectal cancer cohorts.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2017Article
- Is immunohistochemistry of BRAF V600E useful as a screening tool and during progression disease of melanoma patients?BMC cancer · 2016Article
- Impact of KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, TP53 status and intraindividual mutation heterogeneity on outcome after liver resection for colorectal cancer metastases.International journal of cancer · 2016Article
- Article
- Deficient mismatch repair: Read all about it (Review).International journal of oncology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Personalized cancer care requires reliable biomarkers. While the BRAF V600E mutation is implemented in the clinic, no method for its detection has so far been established as reference. We aimed to perform a comprehensive comparison of three methods currently being used for V600E detection in clinical samples. We analysed genomic DNA from 127 malignant melanomas (77 patients) and 389 tumours from 141 colorectal cancer patients (383 liver metastases and 6 primary tumours) by Sanger sequencing and a single probe-based high-resolution melting assay (LightMix). Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue from a subset of these lesions (n = 77 and 304, respectively) was analysed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) using the V600E-specific antibody VE1. In a dilution series of V600E-mutated DNA in wild-type DNA, the detection limit for the LightMix assay was 1:1000 mutated alleles while it was 1:10 for Sanger sequencing. In line with this, we detected 15 additional mutated melanoma samples and two additional mutated metastatic colorectal cancer samples by the LightMix assay compared to Sanger sequencing. For the melanoma samples, we observed high concordance between DNA-based methods and analysis by IHC. However, in colorectal samples, IHC performed poorly with 12 samples being scored as V600E positive exclusively by IHC and nine samples being scored as V600E negative exclusively by IHC. In conclusion, the VE1 antibody is not recommendable for clinical tests of colorectal cancer samples. For melanoma samples, IHC may be useful as a screening tool guiding further analytical approaches.
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.