4.4 Article

Improvement strategies for successful next-generation sequencing analysis of lung cancer

Journal

FUTURE ONCOLOGY
Volume 16, Issue 22, Pages 1597-+

Publisher

FUTURE MEDICINE LTD
DOI: 10.2217/fon-2020-0332

Keywords

lung cancer; next-generation sequence; precision medicine; sampling; success rate

Categories

Funding

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [JP19K176974]
  2. Takeda Science Foundation
  3. KAKENHI
  4. Chugai Pharma
  5. Novartis
  6. Lilly
  7. Merck Serono
  8. MSD
  9. Boehringer Ingelheim
  10. Ono Pharmaceutical
  11. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  12. AstraZeneca
  13. Chugai
  14. Ono
  15. MSD KK
  16. Chugai Pharceutical Co. Ltd AstraZeneca KK Takeda Pharmaceutical Companey Limited
  17. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
  18. Merck Serono Co., Ltd
  19. Pfizer Japan Inc.
  20. Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd
  21. Nippon Boehringer lngelheim Co., Ltd
  22. Eli Lilly Japan K.K.
  23. Novartis Pharma KK
  24. AbbVie GK.
  25. Delta-Fly Pharma, Inc.
  26. Osaka Foundation for The Prevention of Cancer and Life-style related Diseases

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: We aimed to improve the success rate of NGS (next-generation sequencing) analysis through improved strategies of lung cancer sampling. Materials & methods: The improvement strategies are as follows. Surgically resected specimens were preferentially submitted in cooperation with pathologists and surgeons. In bronchoscopic samples, the size of the sample collection device and the number of samples collected was increased. Results: The strategies increased the success rate of NGS analysis of DNA from 69.3 to 91.1%, and that of RNA from 64.6 to 90.0%. Discussion: The introduction of strategies aimed at improving the success of NGS analysis resulted in an improvement in the success rate and brought us closer to the delivery of effective precision medicine in cancer therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available