4.6 Article

Comparison of Molecular Testing Modalities for Detection of ROS1 Rearrangements in a Cohort of Positive Patient Samples

期刊

JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY
卷 13, 期 10, 页码 1474-1482

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2018.05.041

关键词

ROS1; molecular testing; next-generation sequencing; FISH; lung cancer

资金

  1. Molecular Pathology Shared Resource of the University of Colorado (National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Support Grant) [P30-CA046934]
  2. University of Colorado Center for Personalized Medicine
  3. University of Colorado Lung Cancer SPORE [P50 CA058187]
  4. Christine J. Burge Endowment for Lung Cancer Research at the University of Colorado Cancer Center
  5. Burge family
  6. Miramont Cares Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: ROS1 gene fusions are a well-characterized class of oncogenic driver found in approximately 1% to 2% of NSCLC patients. ROS1-directed therapy in these patients is more efficacious and is associated with fewer side effects compared to chemotherapy and is thus now considered standard-of-care for patients with advanced disease. Consequently, accurate detection of ROS1 rearrangements/fusions in clinical tumor samples is vital. In this study, we compared the performance of three common molecular testing approaches on a cohort of ROS1 rearrangement/fusion-positive patient samples. Methods: Twenty-three ROS1 rearrangement/fusion-positive clinical samples were assessed by at least two of the following molecular testing methodologies: break-apart fluorescence in situ hybridization, DNA-based hybrid capture library preparation followed by next-generation sequencing (NGS), and RNA-based anchored multiplex polymerase chain reaction library preparation followed by NGS. Results: None of the testing methodologies demonstrated 100% sensitivity in detection of ROS1 rearrangements/fusions. Fluorescence in situ hybridization results were negative in 2 of 20 tested samples, the DNA-based NGS assay was negative in 4 of 18 tested samples, and the RNA-based NGS assay was negative in 3 of 19 tested samples. For all three testing approaches, we identified assay characteristics that likely contributed to false-negative results. Additionally, we report that genomic breakpoints are an unreliable predictor of breakpoints at the transcript level, likely due to alternative splicing. Conclusions: ROS1 rearrangement/fusion detection in the clinical setting is complex and all methodologies have inherent limitations of which users must be aware to correctly interpret results. (C) 2018 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据