Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27101000›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Validation and Application of a Custom-Designed Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing Panel for the Diagnostic Mutational Profiling of Solid Tumors.

Guy Froyen, An Broekmans, Femke Hillen, Karin Pat, Ruth Achten, Jeroen Mebis, Jean-Luc Rummens, Johan Willemse, Brigitte Maes

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Novel gene fusion discovery in Spitz tumours and its relevance in diagnostics.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Detecting Somatic Mutations in Normal Cells.Trends in genetics : TIG · 2018
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Guy FroyenDepartment of Clinical Biology, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium.
An BroekmansDepartment of Clinical Biology, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium.
Femke HillenDepartment of Clinical Biology, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium.
Karin PatDepartment of Pneumology, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium.
Ruth AchtenDepartment of Pathology, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium.
Jeroen MebisDepartment of Medical Oncology, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium.
Jean-Luc RummensDepartment of Clinical Biology, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium.
Johan WillemseDepartment of Clinical Biology, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium.
Brigitte MaesDepartment of Clinical Biology, Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium.
Jessa Hospital · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The inevitable switch from standard molecular methods to next-generation sequencing for the molecular profiling of tumors is challenging for most diagnostic laboratories. However, fixed validation criteria for diagnostic accreditation are not in place because of the great variability in methods and aims. Here, we describe the validation of a custom panel of hotspots in 24 genes for the detection of somatic mutations in non-small cell lung carcinoma, colorectal carcinoma and malignant melanoma starting from FFPE sections, using 14, 36 and 5 cases, respectively. The targeted hotspots were selected for their present or future clinical relevance in solid tumor types. The target regions were enriched with the TruSeq approach starting from limited amounts of DNA. Cost effective sequencing of 12 pooled libraries was done using a micro flow cell on the MiSeq and subsequent data analysis with MiSeqReporter and VariantStudio. The entire workflow was diagnostically validated showing a robust performance with maximal sensitivity and specificity using as thresholds a variant allele frequency >5% and a minimal amplicon coverage of 300. We implemented this method through the analysis of 150 routine diagnostic samples and identified clinically relevant mutations in 16 genes including KRAS (32%), TP53 (32%), BRAF (12%), APC (11%), EGFR (8%) and NRAS (5%). Importantly, the highest success rate was obtained when using also the low quality DNA samples. In conclusion, we provide a workflow for the validation of targeted NGS by a custom-designed pan-solid tumor panel in a molecular diagnostic lab and demonstrate its robustness in a clinical setting.

Indexed as

High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMutationHumansLimit of DetectionNeoplasmsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID27101000
PMCPMC4839685
OpenAlexW2339617883

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.