4.7 Article

KRAS mutation detection and prognostic potential in sporadic colorectal cancer using high-resolution melting analysis

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 103, Issue 10, Pages 1627-1636

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605959

Keywords

colorectal cancer; high-resolution melting analysis; prognosis; KRAS; survival analysis

Categories

Funding

  1. University of Antwerp, Belgium

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: The development of targeted therapies has created a pressing clinical need for molecular characterisation of cancers. In this retrospective study, high-resolution melting analysis (HRMA) was validated and implemented for screening of 164 colorectal cancer (CRC) patients to detect KRAS hot-spot mutations and to evaluate its prognostic value. Direct sequencing was used to confirm and characterise HRMA results. METHODS: After establishing its sensitivity, HRMA was validated on seven cell lines and inter-and intra-variation were analysed. The prognostic value of KRAS mutations in CRC was evaluated using survival analysis. RESULTS: HRMA revealed abnormal melting patterns in 34.1% CRC samples. Kaplan-Meier survival curves revealed a significantly shorter overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) for CRC patients harbouring a KRAS mutation. In the Cox regression analysis, only when colon and rectal cancer were analysed separately, KRAS mutation was a negative predictor for OS in patients with rectal cancer and DFS in those with stage II colon cancer. CONCLUSIONS: HRMA was found to be a valid screening method for KRAS mutation detection. The KRAS mutation came forward as a negative predictive factor for OS in patients with rectal cancer and for DFS in stage II colon cancer patients. British Journal of Cancer (2010) 103, 1627-1636. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605959 www.bjcancer.com Published online 19 October 2010 (C) 2010 Cancer Research UK

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available