4.3 Article

Pre-analytical processing protocol of breast biopsies affects multigene panel results

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PATHOLOGY
Volume 103, Issue 3, Pages 112-120

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/iep.12444

Keywords

multigene panel; neoplasia; prognosis; recurrence score

Categories

Funding

  1. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) [2017/04611-5]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The creation of multigene panels allows for a more accurate indication of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer patients. Variations in the pre-analytical processing of specimens can significantly affect the results of multigene panel amplification, potentially impacting clinical management.
The creation of multigene panels for prognostic and predictive purposes allows a more accurate indication of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer. In a previous study, we reproduced a multigene panel of 21 genes based on the commercial Oncotype-DX method. We submitted 183 embedded specimens obtained from breast surgery on patients with locoregional disease (stages I to III) between 2005 and 2010 performed at the Hospitals of the Medical School of the ABC Foundation. When we analysed the correlations between the score of the multigene panel and the progression-free interval (PFI) in all patients, we did not find a statistically significant association. However, when we selected only the 71 samples that had amplification of at least eight non-housekeeping genes, we observed that those with scores above the 75th percentile had a significantly lower PFI (p = .0054). Samples processed with nonbuffered formaldehyde were associated with a worse quality of extracted RNA (p = .004) and a significantly higher multigene panel score (p = .021). We conclude that variations in the pre-analytical processing of specimens destined for multigene panel amplification can significantly affect the results, with a potential impact on clinical management.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available