Freidin Maxim B, Freydina Dasha V, Leung Maria, Montero Fernandez Angeles, Nicholson Andrew G, Lim Eric
Royal Brompton and Harefield National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, UK; National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Royal Brompton and Harefield National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, UK;
Clin Chem. 2015 Oct;61(10):1299-304. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2015.242453. Epub 2015 Aug 13.
Circulating biomarkers, such as circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), are both considered for blood-based mutation detection, but limited studies have compared them in a head-to-head manner. Using KRAS (Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog), we performed such a comparison in patients who underwent surgery for suspected lung cancer.
We recruited 93 patients, including 82 with lung cancer and 11 with benign diseases of the lung. Mutations were detected in codons 12 and 13 of KRAS in DNA extracted from CTCs, plasma, and matched tumors or lung tissues with custom-designed coamplification at lower denaturation temperature (COLD)-PCR assays, high-resolution melt analysis (HRM), and commercial assays (Roche Cobas(®) KRAS mutation test and Qiagen Therascreen(®) pyrosequencing KRAS kit).
With the Cobas mutation test, we identified KRAS mutations in 21.3% of tumors. Mutation analysis in matched CTC DNA and ctDNA samples by COLD-PCR/HRM assay revealed mutations in 30.5% (ctDNA) and 23.2% (CTC DNA) of patients with lung cancer. Combined results of different tests revealed KRAS-positive cases for 28% of tumors. The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of KRAS mutation detection in tumors achieved with ctDNA was 0.96 (95% CI 0.81-1.00) and 0.95 (0.85-0.99), respectively. The diagnostic test performance was lower for CTC DNA, at 0.52 (0.34-0.73) and 0.88 (0.79-0.95).
Our results support ctDNA as a preferential specimen type for mutation screening in thoracic malignancies vs CTC DNA, achieving greater mutation detection than either CTCs or limited amounts of tumor tissue alone.
循环生物标志物,如循环肿瘤细胞(CTC)和循环肿瘤DNA(ctDNA),都被用于基于血液的突变检测,但很少有研究对它们进行直接比较。我们利用KRAS( Kirsten大鼠肉瘤病毒癌基因同源物)在疑似肺癌手术患者中进行了这样的比较。
我们招募了93名患者,其中82名患有肺癌,11名患有肺部良性疾病。采用定制设计的低变性温度共扩增(COLD)-PCR检测、高分辨率熔解分析(HRM)和商业检测方法(罗氏Cobas(®)KRAS突变检测和Qiagen Therascreen(®)焦磷酸测序KRAS试剂盒),对从CTC、血浆以及匹配的肿瘤或肺组织中提取的DNA进行KRAS第12和13密码子突变检测。
通过Cobas突变检测,我们在21.3%的肿瘤中检测到KRAS突变。通过COLD-PCR/HRM检测对匹配的CTC DNA和ctDNA样本进行突变分析,发现肺癌患者中分别有30.5%(ctDNA)和23.2%(CTC DNA)存在突变。不同检测方法的综合结果显示,28%的肿瘤为KRAS阳性病例。ctDNA检测肿瘤中KRAS突变的诊断敏感性和特异性分别为0.96(95%CI 0.81 - 1.00)和0.95(0.85 - 0.99)。CTC DNA的诊断检测性能较低,分别为0.52(0.34 - 0.73)和0.88(0.79 - 0.95)。
我们的结果支持将ctDNA作为胸部恶性肿瘤突变筛查的优先标本类型,与CTC DNA相比,其突变检测能力优于单独的CTC或有限量的肿瘤组织。