ArticlePloS one2016
Validation and Application of a Custom-Designed Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing Panel for the Diagnostic Mutational Profiling of Solid Tumors.
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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Genomic Exploration to Personalized Treatment: Next-Generation Sequencing in Oncology.Current issues in molecular biology · 2024Review
- Novel gene fusion discovery in Spitz tumours and its relevance in diagnostics.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2024Article
- Diagnostic Validation of a Comprehensive Targeted Panel for Broad Mutational and Biomarker Analysis in Solid Tumors.Cancers · 2022Article
- Article
- Development and Analytical Validation of a Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing Panel to Detect Actionable Mutations for Targeted Therapy.OncoTargets and therapy · 2021Article
- Highly multiplexed quantifications of 299 somatic mutations in colorectal cancer patients by automated MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry.BMC medical genomics · 2020Article
- Development and validation of a targeted gene sequencing panel for application to disparate cancers.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Analytical Evaluation of an NGS Testing Method for Routine Molecular Diagnostics on Melanoma Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Tumor-Derived DNA.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Detecting Somatic Mutations in Normal Cells.Trends in genetics : TIG · 2018Review
- Frequency of Somatic TP53 Mutations in Combination with Known Pathogenic Mutations in Colon Adenocarcinoma, Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma, and Gliomas as Identified by Next-Generation Sequencing.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2018Article
- From Clinical Standards to Translating Next-Generation Sequencing Research into Patient Care Improvement for Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Cancers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Review
- Clinical Application of Targeted Next Generation Sequencing for Colorectal Cancers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2016Review
- Integrating next-generation sequencing into clinical oncology: strategies, promises and pitfalls.ESMO open · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.