domingo, 9 de julio de 2017

Early experience with formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) based commercial clinical genomic profiling of gliomas-robust and informative with ca... - PubMed - NCBI

2017 Jun 26. pii: S0014-4800(17)30195-8. doi: 10.1016/j.yexmp.2017.06.006. [Epub ahead of print]

Early experience with formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) based commercial clinical genomic profiling of gliomas-robust and informative with caveats.

Movassaghi M1, Shabihkhani M1, Hojat SA1, Williams RR1, Chung LK2, Im K1, Lucey GM1, Wei B1, Mareninov S1, Wang MW1, Ng DW1, Tashjian RS1, Magaki S1, Perez-Rosendahl M1, Yang I3, Khanlou N1, Vinters HV4, Liau LM5, Nghiemphu PL6, Lai A7, Cloughesy TF6, Yong WH8.

Author information

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Commercial targeted genomic profiling with next generation sequencing using formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissue has recently entered into clinical use for diagnosis and for the guiding of therapy. However, there is limited independent data regarding the accuracy or robustness of commercial genomic profiling in gliomas.

METHODS:

As part of patient care, FFPE samples of gliomas from 71 patients were submitted for targeted genomic profiling to one commonly used commercial vendor, Foundation Medicine. Genomic alterations were determined for the following grades or groups of gliomas; Grade I/II, Grade III, primary glioblastomas (GBMs), recurrent primary GBMs, and secondary GBMs. In addition, FFPE samples from the same patients were independently assessed with conventional methods such as immunohistochemistry (IHC), Quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR), or Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for three genetic alterations: IDH1 mutations, EGFR amplification, and EGFRvIII expression.

RESULTS:

A total of 100 altered genes were detected by the aforementioned targeted genomic profiling assay. The number of different genomic alterations was significantly different between the five groups of gliomas and consistent with the literature. CDKN2A/B, TP53, and TERT were the most common genomic alterations seen in primary GBMs, whereas IDH1, TP53, and PIK3CA were the most common in secondary GBMs. Targeted genomic profiling demonstrated 92.3%-100% concordance with conventional methods. The targeted genomic profiling report provided an average of 5.5 drugs, and listed an average of 8.4 clinical trials for the 71 glioma patients studied but only a third of the trials were appropriate for glioma patients.

CONCLUSIONS:

In this limited comparison study, this commercial next generation sequencing based-targeted genomic profiling showed a high concordance rate with conventional methods for the 3 genetic alterations and identified mutations expected for the type of glioma. While it may not be feasible to exhaustively independently validate a commercial genomic profiling assay, examination of a few markers provides some reassurance of its robustness. While potential targeted drugs are recommended based on genetic alterations, to date most targeted therapies have failed in glioblasomas so the usefulness of such recommendations will increase with development of novel and efficacious drugs.