Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5539_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
02.09.2026
Размер:
19 Мб
Скачать
Clinical Next-Generation Sequencing for Somatic Mutation Detection...
ultra-sensitive design of CancerIntercept, the assay is able to function as an early screening test for common tumors. Post enrichment sequencing is performed on Illumina instruments. www.pathway.com/cancerintercept­liquid-biopsy/
Personal Genome Diagnostics launched the rst liquid biopsy panel for tumor proling called PlasmaSelect-R. They sequence libraries from
this panel using Illumina sequencing. The current version of the test is
designed for research use with a clinical (CLIA certied) test scheduled
for release later this year. main.personalgenome.com/wp-content/ uploads/2015/04/PGDx_ PlasmaSelect-R_Product_Information.pdf
67
CHALLENGES
The presence of genome heterogeneity (genetic mosaicism) and heterogeneous tissue provoke some of the larger biological problems for clinical laboratories. Genetic mosaicism is an unavoidable characteristic of tumor biology; however, improvements to bioinformatics processes can greatly reduce the burden this phenomenon imposes on clinical interpretation. Indeed, as population genetics data become more plentiful, mutation rate algorithms can be further optimized and accuracy subsequently improved. Heterogeneous tissue—the various normal cells mixed in with a tumor mass—impose difficulty on wet lab procedures resulting in reduced efficiency and accuracy of sample sequences. To combat this challenge, significant progress is being made in the field of single cell genomics, which will substantially reduce neighboring cell contamination [25]. As it stands, there are a number of problems that must be resolved before single molecule sequencing can be used as a comprehensive diagnostic tool [26]. For example, Pacific Biosciences’ RS II sequencer produces a relatively low output of 1GB per run with a relatively high instrument cost of roughly $700,000 dollars and a considerably high error rate of 14% (compared to 0.1-1.0% for current leading technologies). Detection of CNV is another persistent issue for Next-generation sequencing. Although read depth-based methods for CNV detection are utilized for clinical testing, the methods are limited to high amplification (>6 copies), homozygous deletions and are sensitive to sample purity [20,21]. Despite these challenges, advancements in mutation enrichment of liquid biopsies are enabling genetic testing labs
68
to march forward not only with increased diagnostic sensitivity, but a viable method of cancer treatment monitoring.
software used for somatic mutation detection and their adoption by the
diagnostic industry, the difculties of reimbursement and coverage of
such tests cannot be ignored. Diagnostic testing for medical treatment and management needs to go hand in hand with reimbursement to address the market need thereby driving further advancements. Two major complications for reimbursement according to Genome.gov are
insufcient data regarding the economics of such testing and evaluating
the costs of technologies used for testing. While this data will become available with time as more and more genetics laboratories continue providing information, other, more intricate problems will persist.
Insurance plans differ considerably on what qualies for reimbursement
regarding genetic tests and many even use “evidence-based coverage” plans that attempt to justify the accuracy of tests and the availability of treatments. Dissimilarity not only between insurance providers but also between laboratory protocols, the technology used and the purpose of testing determined by the patient’s physicians as well as clinical utility of the test makes this an incredibly complicated issue.
Advances in Molecular Diagnostics
While the scope of this review aims to detail the technologies and
CONCLUSION
In the past, cancer and other somatic diseases with mosaic presentations were, for the most part, limited to germline risk assessment. Today, sequencing and computing technology permit targeting and identification of complex and low abundant variation, which is forever changing the diagnostic landscape in medicine. Clinicians now have rapid access to accurate, low-cost genetic information and can therefore develop thorough, highly personalized treatment plans and track the progress through non-invasive serial testing.
There is still a great deal of work to be done, however. While clinicians make use of what is currently available, laboratory and bioinformatics scientists need to design scalable, high throughput processes that can handle commercial volume with high reproducibility.
Clinical Next-Generation Sequencing for Somatic Mutation Detection...
69
REFERENCES
1. Foulkes WD, Real FX (2013) Many Mosaic Mutations. Current
Oncology 20: 85-87.
2. Fukui T, Ohe Y, Tsuta K, Furuta K, Sakamoto H, et al. (2008)
Prospective study of the accuracy of EGFR mutational analysis by high-resolution melting analysis in small samples obtained from patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res 14: 4751­4757
3. Milbury CA, Li J, Makrigiorgos GM (2010) Ice-COLD-PCR enables
rapid amplication and robust enrichment for low-abundance
unknown DNA mutations. Nucleic Acids Res 3: e2.
4. Xuan J, Yu Y, Qing T, Guo L, Shi L, et al. (2013) Next-Generation
Sequencing in the Clinic: Promises and Challenges. Cancer Letters 340: 284-295
5. Tsiatis AC, Norris-Kirby A, Rich RG, Hafez MJ, Gocke CD, et al.
(2010) Comparison of Sanger Sequencing, Pyrosequencing, and Melting Curve Analysis for the Detection of KRAS Mutations: Diagnostic and Clinical Implications. The J MolDiagn 12: 425-432.
6. Crowley E, Di Nicolantonio F, Loupakis F, Bardelli A (2013) Liquid
biopsy: monitoring Cancer-Genetics in the Blood. Nature Reviews: Clinical Oncology 10: 472-484.
7. Anderson RF, Spindler KL, Jacobsen A, Pallisgaard N (2012)
Plasma is Superior to Serum for CfDNA Mutation Detection and Monitoring.European Journal of Cancer 48: 148-149
8. Alix-Panabieres C and Pierga JY (2014) Circulating tumor cells:
liquid biopsy. Bull Cancer 101: 17-23.
9. Gundry M, Vijg J (2012) Direct Mutation Analysis by High-
throughput Sequencing: From Germline to Low-abundant, Somatic Variants. Mutat Res 729(1-2): 1-15.
10. Keogh MJ, Chinnery PF (2013) Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery
115: 948-953.
11. Izawa K, Hijikata A, Tanaka N, Kawai T, Saito MK, et al. (2012)
Detection of Base Substitution-Type Somatic Mosaicism of the
NLRP3 Gene with >99.9% Statistical Condence by Massively
Parallel Sequencing. DNA Research 19: 143-152.
70
Advances in Molecular Diagnostics
12. Koboldt DC, Zhang Q, Larson DE, Shen D, McLellan MD, et al.
(2012) VarScan 2: Somatic mutation and copy number alteration discovery in cancer by exome sequencing. Genome Res 22: 568-
576.
13. Peterson JD, De Abreu F, Gallagher TL, Burchard PR, Amos CI,
et al. (2013) Targeted next generation sequencing for somatic mutations in human cancer [abstract]. Proceedings of the AACR­NCI-EORTC International Conference.
14. Meldrum C, Doyle MA, Tothill RW (2011) Next-Generation
Sequencing for Cancer Diagnostics: A Practical Perspective. The Clinical Biochemist Reviews 32: 177-95.
15. Singh RR, Patel KP, Routbort MJ, Aldape K, Lu X, et al. (2014)
Clinical Massively Parallel next-Generation Sequencing Analysis of 409 Cancer-Related Genes for Mutations and Copy Number Variations in Solid Tumours. Br J Cancer 111: 2014-2023.
16. Milbury CA, Li J, Makrigiorgos GM (2009) PCR-based Methods for
Enrichment of Minority Alleles and Mutations. Clinical Chemistry: 632-640.
17. Kim SY, Speed TP (2013) Comparing Somatic Mutation-Callers:
Beyond Venn Diagrams. BMC Bioinformatics 14: 189.
18. Pabinger S, Dander A, Fischer M, Snajder R, Sperk M, et al. (2014)
A Survey of Tools for Variant Analysis of next-Generation Genome
Sequencing Data. Briengs in Bioinformatics 15: 256-278.
19. Wang Q, Peilin J, Fei L, Haiquan C, Hongbin J, et al. (2013)
Detecting Somatic Point Mutations in Cancer Genome Sequencing Data: A Comparison of Mutation Callers. Genome Medicine 5: 91.
20. Ananda G, Mockus S, Lundquist M, Spotlow V, Simons A, et al.
(2015) Development and validation of the JAX Cancer Treatment
Prole™ for detection of clinically actionable mutations in solid
tumors. Experimental and Molecular Pathology 98: 106-112.
21. Frampton GM, Fichtenholtz A, Otto GA, Wang K, Downing SR, et
al. (2013) Development and validation of a clinical cancer genomic
proling test based on massively parallel DNA sequencing. Nature
Biotechnology 31: 1023-1031.
22. Cheng DT, Mitchell TN, Zehir A, Shah RH, Benayed R, et al.
(2015) Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Proling of
Clinical Next-Generation Sequencing for Somatic Mutation Detection...
71
Actionable Cancer Targets (MSK-IMPACT). J MolDiagn 17: 251-
64.
23. Pritchard CC, Salipante SJ, Koehler K, Smith C, Scroggins S, et
al. (2014) Validation and Implementation of Targeted Capture and Sequencing for the Detection of Actionable Mutation, Copy Number Variation, and Gene Rearrangement in Clinical Cancer Specimens. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics 16: 56-67.
24. Nikiforova MN, Wald AI, Roy S, Durso MB, Nikiforov YE, et al.
(2013) Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing Panel (ThyroSeq) for Detection of Mutations in Thyroid Cancer. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 98: E1852-1860.
25. Freed D, Stevens EL, Pevsner J (2014) Somatic Mosaicism in the
Human Genome. Genes (Basel) 5: 1064-1094.
26. De Bourcy CF, De Vlaminck I, Kanbar JN, Wang J, Gawad C, et al.
(2014) A Quantitative Comparison of Single-Cell Whole Genome
Amplication Methods. PLoS One 9: e105585.
4
MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS IN MELANOCYTIC TUMORS: THE PATHOLOGISTS PERSPECTIVE
Gerardo Ferrara1 and Giuseppina Improta
1
Department of Oncology, Anatomic Pathology Unit, Geatano Rummo General
Hospital, Benevento, Italy
2
Laboratory of Clinical Research and Advanced Diagnostics, IRCCS-CROB Centro di
Riferimento Oncologico della Basilicata, Rionero in Vulture, Italy
2
ABSTRACT
During the last 15 years, molecular techniques have led to a fast gain in our knowledge on the development of melanocytic tumors. The potential implications of these advances for prognosis and therapy of melanoma patients are outstanding. There is, however, an even greater problem which has to be raised: since the histopathological diagnosis of melanoma is matter of considerable disagreement even among experts [1]. Pathologists have been increasingly asking for a molecular ‘key to the code’ in order to overcome the diagnostic limitations of conventional morphology. Table 1 summarizes the main molecular techniques and
74
Advances in Molecular Diagnostics
their expected results in melanoma [2], are these data meaningful also for the histopathological differential diagnosis between ‘nevus’ and ‘melanoma’?
Keywords: Melanoma; Spitzoid melanocytic tumors; Histopathology; Molecular diagnostics
During the last 15 years, molecular techniques have led to a fast gain in our knowledge on the development of melanocytic tumors. The potential implications of these advances for prognosis and therapy of melanoma patients are outstanding. There is, however, an even greater problem which has to be raised: since the histopathological diagnosis of melanoma is matter of considerable disagreement even among experts [ 1]. Pathologists have been increasingly asking for a molecular ‘key to the code’ in order to overcome the diagnostic limitations of conventional morphology. Table 1 summarizes the main molecular techniques and their expected results in melanoma [2], are these data meaningful also for the histopathological differential diagnosis between ‘nevus’ and ‘melanoma’.
Table 1: Molecular investigations for melanoma diagnosis.
Technique Expected results in melanoma
(Array) Compara­tive Genomic Hy­bridization
Fluorescence in situ hybridization
Gene expression
proling
Gains at 1q, 6p, 7p, 7q, 8q, 17q, 20q, 4q, 8q, and 11q. Losses at 6q, 9p, 10p, 10q, 11q, and 21q
RREB1 gain>29%; RREB1 gain relative to Cep6>55%; CCND1 gain >38%; MYB loss relative to CEP6>31%; MYC gain >29%; CDKN2A biallelic loss relative to Cep9 >29%; kinase fusions of ROS1, NTRK1, ALK, BRAF, and RET in Spitzoid melanoma (39%)
Compared with nevi, different expression of a set of genes including PRAME, S100A7, S100A8, S100A9, S100A12, PI3, CCL5, CD38, CXCL9, CXCL10, IRF1, LCP2, PTPRC, SELL
Molecular Diagnostics in Melanocytic Tumors: The Pathologists...
In familial melanoma: mutations of CDKN2A (40%), MITF (20%), CDK4, BAP1, TERT, POT1
DNA sequencing
DNA methylation
proling
Micro-ribonucleic acid (MiRNA)
proling
Mass spectrometry
In sporadic melanoma: mutations of BRAF (53-66%), NRAS (9-29%), NF1 (12-14%), KIT (36% of acral mela­nomas; 88% of oral melanomas), GNAQ/GNA11 (50% of uveal melanomas)
Methylation of promoters of CDKN2A, PTEN, RASSF­1A, RASSF10, RAR-beta2
Upregulation of miRNA192; down regulation of miRNA132
Actin, Vimentin, and three unknown peptidesdifferently expressed in Spitz nevi and Spitzoid melanoma
75
Whole exome sequencing performed on metastatic tumor tissue has demonstrated that melanoma has the highest mutation rate among all human cancer types (16.8 mutations/Mb) [3] However, these data do not necessarily apply to primary cutaneous tumors. Of the latter, over 80% of cases harbor mutations involving the RAS-RAF-MEK-
ERK pathway which is also affected in nevi [4]. In the eld of Spitzoid
melanocytic tumors, uorescence in-situ hybridization with break-apart probes demonstrate kinase fusions of ROS1, NTRK1, ALK, BRAF, and RET; but these chromosomal rearrangements are present along the entire spectrum of Spitzoid tumors (55% of Spitz nevi; 56% of atypical Spitz
tumors; 39% of Spitzoid melanomas) [5], a nding that clearly hampers
the diagnostic usefulness of such a molecular signature. The same is also true for homozygous BAP1 (3p21) mutations, which can be found in a subset of syndromic and sporadic atypical epithelioid (Spitzoid) cell nevi but also in morphologically clear-cut melanomas [6]. Despite early claims about 11p gains or mutations of the HRAS exon 3 as a hallmark of benignity in Spitzoid neoplasms [7], cases of melanoma with HRAS mutations can be found as well [8]. One could therefore conclude, along with Dummer et al. [9] that the expectations on molecular biology in the differential diagnosis of melanocytic lesions have been overestimated.
In our opinion, a completely sceptic approach about the diagnostic
impact of molecular techniques in this eld is probably NOT justied.
First of all, molecular techniques may help recognize as melanoma an undifferentiated malignancy with a ‘null’ immunophenotype [ 10]. Furthermore, and even more important, some subgroups of melanocytic
76
Advances in Molecular Diagnostics
tumors, irrespective of the degree of histopathological atypia, can be
identied on a molecular basis. As underlined above, Spitzoid neoplasms can be typied by kinase fusions [5], BAP1 biallelic inactivating mutations
[6], or HRAS gains/mutations [7]; along with 83% of uveal melanomas [11] activating mutations of GNAQ (9p21) and GNA11 (19p13) are a hallmark for dermal dendritic melanocytic tumors (blue nevus and related lesions) [12]. Both in Spitzoid and in dendritic cell melanocytic tumors, BRAF or NRAS mutation are very rare [12,13]; thus, if a BRAF or NRAS mutation is detected in a seemingly ‘Spitzoid’ or ‘dendritic cell’ morphologic context, a careful histopathological re-evaluation is warranted in order to exclude a conventional melanocytic malignancy. Figure 1 illustrates a case of melanocytic tumor of the arm in a 7-year­old boy. The lesion was initially diagnosed as an atypical Spitz tumor, mainly because of the age of the patient, the epidermal hyperplasia, and the epithelioid cell morphology. Unfortunately however, four years after wide excision of the primary tumor, the patient developed a cutaneous satellitosis, along with nodal and distant metastases. Both the primary and the metastatic tumor tissue were found to harbor the BRAF
V600E
mutation,
a nding which was obviously much more in keeping with a conventional
melanoma rather than with an atypical Spitz tumor.
Figure 1: A) A verrucous melanocytic tumor of the arm in a 7-year-old boy. B) A conuent junctional proliferation of melanocytes with a strikingly irregu­lar epidermal hyperplasia. C) Relativerly monomorhic epithelioid cells at the dermoepidermal junction. D) The deep dermal component of the tumor with a mitosis (arrow). The lesion was diagnosed as atypical Spitz tumor, but, unlike atypical Spitz tumors, it harbored the BRAF ‘conventional’ melanoma.
V600E
mutation and behaved as a