4.5 Article

Sensitive detection of trace amounts of KRAS codon 12 mutations by a fast and novel one-step technique

Journal

CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
Volume 47, Issue 16-17, Pages 237-242

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.08.015

Keywords

KRAS mutation detection; Low-level mutation; Colorectal cancer

Funding

  1. Major State Basic Research Development Program of China (973 Program) [2010CB529101]
  2. Chinese 863 Program [2012AA02A201]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: The objective of this study is to develop a novel and sensitive method for KRAS codon 12 mutation testing. Design and methods: We developed a sensitive one-step real-time digestion-and-block TaqMan probe PCR (RTDB-PCR) technique that uses a thermostable endonuclease and a minor groove binder (MGB) blocker to detect KRAS codon 12 mutations. Dilution mimic DNA panels were used to assess the sensitivity of this technique. The RTDB-PCR method was performed and compared with three other methods: PCR sequencing, mutant-enriched PCR sequencing and mutant-enriched PCR-MassArray. A total of 100 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) specimens were also tested by all four methods. Results: The RTDB-PCR was sensitive to as little as 0.01% mutant DNA, significantly higher than other methods. Among the 100 FFPE mCRC specimens examined, 45 tested positive for KRAS codon 12 mutations according to RTDB-PCR, 44 tested positive according to mutant-enriched PCR sequencing and mutant-enriched PCR-MassArray, and only 26 samples tested positive according to PCR sequencing. Conclusions: Compared with mutant-enriched PCR sequencing and mutant-enriched PCR-MassArray, RTDB-PCR is more cost effective, saves time, and is easier to use, making it suitable for the detection of low-level KRAS mutations in the clinic. (C) 2014 The Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available