Comparison of the Clinical Sensitivity of the Idylla Platform and the OncoBEAM RAS CRC Assay for KRAS Mutation Detection in Liquid Biopsy Samples.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 06 2019
20 06 2019
Historique:
received:
28
02
2019
accepted:
07
06
2019
entrez:
22
6
2019
pubmed:
22
6
2019
medline:
22
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
KRAS mutations are common in colorectal cancer (CRC). In this setting, mutation status determination in circulating-free DNA from blood samples (liquid biopsy) has been shown to be a viable alternative to tissue testing. The objective of this study was to compare the sensitivity of two liquid biopsy methods for detecting KRAS mutations in plasma samples from metastatic CRC patients. Samples with a positive (KRAS-MUT+) result and a mutant allelic fraction (MAF) < 5% according to the OncoBEAM RAS CRC assay were pairly analyzed by the Idylla ctKRAS Mutation Test (n = 116). In a cohort of 71 patients with at least 1 year of follow-up, the progression-free survival (PFS) was determined according to MAF values. Idylla detected KRAS mutations in 81/116 OncoBEAM KRAS-MUT+ samples with MAF < 5% and in 48/79 samples with MAF < 1%. Concordance between OncoBEAM and Idylla significantly improved at higher MAF values. PFS rates at 6 and 12 months tended to be lower in patients with MAF levels between 1% and 5% than in those with levels <1%. OncoBEAM demonstrated greater sensitivity for plasma detection of KRAS mutations than Idylla. Importantly, our data identified a "gray zone" below 1% MAF where Idylla showed reduced KRAS mutation detection, highlighting the importance of an accurate method to provide the mutational status of CRC patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31222012
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-45616-y
pii: 10.1038/s41598-019-45616-y
pmc: PMC6586620
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Cell-Free Nucleic Acids
0
KRAS protein, human
0
Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)
EC 3.6.5.2
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
8976Références
N Engl J Med. 2008 Oct 23;359(17):1757-65
pubmed: 18946061
Ann Oncol. 2018 Feb 1;29(2):490-496
pubmed: 29112704
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2013 Aug;10(8):472-84
pubmed: 23836314
J Oncol Pract. 2016 Feb;12(2):180-1
pubmed: 26443838
Dis Colon Rectum. 2011 Sep;54(9):1170-8
pubmed: 21825899
BMC Cancer. 2012 Aug 09;12:347
pubmed: 22876814
Front Med (Lausanne). 2018 Jan 30;5:9
pubmed: 29441349
Ann Oncol. 2017 Jun 1;28(6):1325-1332
pubmed: 28419195
Nature. 2012 Jun 28;486(7404):532-6
pubmed: 22722830
Gastroenterology. 2008 Aug;135(2):489-98
pubmed: 18602395
Oncotarget. 2017 May 23;8(21):35289-35300
pubmed: 27852040
Ann Oncol. 2016 Aug;27(8):1386-422
pubmed: 27380959
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Nov 8;102(45):16368-73
pubmed: 16258065
Br J Cancer. 2018 Dec;119(12):1464-1470
pubmed: 30467411
Ann Oncol. 2015 Jan;26(1):13-21
pubmed: 25115304
Oncol Lett. 2016 Jul;12(1):150-156
pubmed: 27347117
Clin Cancer Res. 2010 Feb 1;16(3):790-9
pubmed: 20103678
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Apr 1;26(10):1626-34
pubmed: 18316791
Sci Transl Med. 2016 Jul 6;8(346):346ra92
pubmed: 27384348
Transl Oncol. 2018 Apr;11(2):213-220
pubmed: 29367069
Genome Biol. 2014 Aug 30;15(8):449
pubmed: 25222559
Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Feb 15;18(4):1177-85
pubmed: 22228631
Mol Oncol. 2017 Feb;11(2):208-219
pubmed: 28106345
Cancer Med. 2017 Jan;6(1):154-162
pubmed: 28000387
Int J Cancer. 2013 Jul;133(1):130-41
pubmed: 23233388
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Jan 10;34(2):179-85
pubmed: 26438111
Ann Oncol. 2017 Sep 1;28(9):2149-2159
pubmed: 28911069
Ann Oncol. 2015 Apr;26(4):731-736
pubmed: 25628445
Nat Med. 2014 Apr;20(4):430-5
pubmed: 24658074
Ann Oncol. 2017 Jun 1;28(6):1294-1301
pubmed: 28368441
N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 12;369(11):1023-34
pubmed: 24024839
Nature. 2014 Jul 31;511(7511):524-6
pubmed: 25079538