Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32264863›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2020

Comprehensive routine diagnostic screening to identify predictive mutations, gene amplifications, and microsatellite instability in FFPE tumor material.

Elisabeth M P Steeghs, Leonie I Kroeze, Bastiaan B J Tops, Leon C van Kempen, Arja Ter Elst, Annemiek W M Kastner-van Raaij, Sandra J B Hendriks-Cornelissen, Mandy J W Hermsen, Erik A M Jansen, Petra M Nederlof and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

13 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Elisabeth M P SteeghsDepartment of Pathology, Radboud university medical center, PO Box 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Leonie I KroezeDepartment of Pathology, Radboud university medical center, PO Box 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Bastiaan B J TopsDepartment of Pathology, Radboud university medical center, PO Box 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Leon C van KempenDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Arja Ter ElstDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Annemiek W M Kastner-van RaaijDepartment of Pathology, Radboud university medical center, PO Box 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Sandra J B Hendriks-CornelissenDepartment of Pathology, Radboud university medical center, PO Box 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Mandy J W HermsenDepartment of Pathology, Radboud university medical center, PO Box 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Erik A M JansenDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Petra M NederlofDepartment of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ed SchuuringDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marjolijn J L LigtenbergDepartment of Pathology, Radboud university medical center, PO Box 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Astrid EijkelenboomDepartment of Pathology, Radboud university medical center, PO Box 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Astrid.Eijkelenboom@radboudumc.nl.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLRadboud University Medical Center · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLOncode Institute · NLPrincess Máxima Center · NLUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

ZonMw 846001001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSensitive and reliable molecular diagnostics is needed to guide therapeutic decisions for cancer patients. Although less material becomes available for testing, genetic markers are rapidly expanding. Simultaneous detection of predictive markers, including mutations, gene amplifications and MSI, will save valuable material, time and costs.

methodsUsing a single-molecule molecular inversion probe (smMIP)-based targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) approach, we developed an NGS panel allowing detection of predictive mutations in 33 genes, gene amplifications of 13 genes and microsatellite instability (MSI) by the evaluation of 55 microsatellite markers. The panel was designed to target all clinically relevant single and multiple nucleotide mutations in routinely available lung cancer, colorectal cancer, melanoma, and gastro-intestinal stromal tumor samples, but is useful for a broader set of tumor types.

resultsThe smMIP-based NGS panel was successfully validated and cut-off values were established for reliable gene amplification analysis (i.e. relative coverage ≥3) and MSI detection (≥30% unstable loci). After validation, 728 routine diagnostic tumor samples including a broad range of tumor types were sequenced with sufficient sensitivity (2.4% drop-out), including samples with low DNA input (< 10 ng; 88% successful), low tumor purity (5-10%; 77% successful), and cytological material (90% successful). 75% of these tumor samples showed ≥1 (likely) pathogenic mutation, including targetable mutations (e.g. EGFR, BRAF, MET, ERBB2, KIT, PDGFRA). Amplifications were observed in 5.5% of the samples, comprising clinically relevant amplifications (e.g. MET, ERBB2, FGFR1). 1.5% of the tumor samples were classified as MSI-high, including both MSI-prone and non-MSI-prone tumors.

conclusionsWe developed a comprehensive workflow for predictive analysis of diagnostic tumor samples. The smMIP-based NGS analysis was shown suitable for limited amounts of histological and cytological material. As smMIP technology allows easy adaptation of panels, this approach can comply with the rapidly expanding molecular markers.

Indexed as

MutationColorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGastrointestinal Stromal TumorsGene AmplificationHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMelanomaMicrosatellite InstabilityNeoplasm ProteinsNeoplasmsSequence Analysis, DNANeoplasm ProteinsColorectal carcinomaFFPEGene amplificationGISTLung cancerMelanomaMicrosatellite instabilityMutationNext-generation sequencingPredictive analysis

Identifiers

PMID32264863
PMCPMC7137451
OpenAlexW3014230640

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.