Consistency and reproducibility of next‐generation sequencing and other multigene mutational assays: A worldwide ring trial study on quantitative cytological molecular reference specimens
Open Access
- 5 May 2017
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Cancer Cytopathology
- Vol. 125 (8) , 615-626
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Molecular testing of cytological lung cancer specimens includes, beyond epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), emerging predictive/prognostic genomic biomarkers such as Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS), neuroblastoma RAS viral [v‐ras] oncogene homolog (NRAS), B‐Raf proto‐oncogene, serine/threonine kinase (BRAF), and phosphatidylinositol‐4,5‐bisphosphate 3‐kinase catalytic subunit α (PIK3CA). Next‐generation sequencing (NGS) and other multigene mutational assays are suitable for cytological specimens, including smears. However, the current literature reflects single‐institution studies rather than multicenter experiences.METHODS: Quantitative cytological molecular reference slides were produced with cell lines designed to harbor concurrent mutations in the EGFR, KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA genes at various allelic ratios, including low allele frequencies (AFs; 1%). This interlaboratory ring trial study included 14 institutions across the world that performed multigene mutational assays, from tissue extraction to data analysis, on these reference slides, with each laboratory using its own mutation analysis platform and methodology.RESULTS: All laboratories using NGS (n = 11) successfully detected the study's set of mutations with minimal variations in the means and standard errors of variant fractions at dilution points of 10% (P = .171) and 5% (P = .063) despite the use of different sequencing platforms (Illumina, Ion Torrent/Proton, and Roche). However, when mutations at a low AF of 1% were analyzed, the concordance of the NGS results was low, and this reflected the use of different thresholds for variant calling among the institutions. In contrast, laboratories using matrix‐assisted laser desorption/ionization–time of flight (n = 2) showed lower concordance in terms of mutation detection and mutant AF quantification.CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative molecular reference slides are a useful tool for monitoring the performance of different multigene mutational assays, and this could lead to better standardization of molecular cytopathology procedures. Cancer Cytopathol 2017;125:615‐26. © 2017 American Cancer Society.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Present and Future Molecular Testing of Lung CarcinomaAdvances in Anatomic Pathology, 2014
- Applications and limitations of oncogene mutation testing in clinical cytopathologySeminars in Diagnostic Pathology, 2013
- Assuring the quality of next-generation sequencing in clinical laboratory practiceNature Biotechnology, 2012
- Implementation of Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Cell Line Pellets as High-Quality Process Controls in Quality Assessment Programs for KRAS Mutation AnalysisThe Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 2012
- Molecular cytopathology and flow cytometry: pre‐analytical procedures matterCytopathology, 2011
- Rapid KRAS, EGFR, BRAF and PIK3CA Mutation Analysis of Fine Needle Aspirates from Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Using Allele-Specific qPCRPLOS ONE, 2011
- Archival Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytopathology (FNAC) SamplesThe Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 2010
- Seize the opportunityCancer Cytopathology, 2009
- A Sensitive Method for Detecting EGFR Mutations in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Samples with Few Tumor CellsJournal of Thoracic Oncology, 2008
- Comprehensive epidermal growth factor receptor gene analysis from cytological specimens of non-small-cell lung cancersBritish Journal of Cancer, 2007