Suppr超能文献

通过 CADMA 与 SNaPshot assay 及两种免疫组化方法对脑胶质瘤患者进行 IDH 基因突变分析。

IDH Mutation Analysis in Glioma Patients by CADMA Compared with SNaPshot Assay and two Immunohistochemical Methods.

机构信息

CGB Laboratory Inc., Ostrava, Czech Republic.

Department of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic.

出版信息

Pathol Oncol Res. 2019 Jul;25(3):971-978. doi: 10.1007/s12253-018-0413-9. Epub 2018 Mar 19.

Abstract

Mutations in IDH1/2 genes are a marker of good prognosis for glioma patients, associated with low grade gliomas and secondary glioblastomas. Immunohistochemistry and Sanger sequencing are current standards for IDH1/2 genotyping while many other methods exist. The aim of this study was to validate Competitive amplification of differentially melting amplicons (CADMA) PCR for IDH genotyping by comparison with SNaPshot assay and two immunohistochemical methods. In our study, 87 glioma patients (46 from Olomouc and 41 from Ostrava) were analyzed. IDH1/2 mutations in native bioptical samples were analyzed at DNA level by CADMA and SNaPshot while IDH1 mutations in FFPE samples were analyzed at protein level by two IHC methods. CADMA PCR sensitivity for IDH1 was 96.4% and specificity 100% for 86 concluded samples. SNaPshot assay sensitivity was 92.9% and specificity of 100% for 85 concluded samples. IHC in the laboratory no. 2 reached sensitivity 85.7% and specificity 100% for 86 concluded samples. IHC in the laboratory no. 4 reached sensitivity of 96.4% and specificity of 79.7% in 74 concluded samples. Only one IDH2 mutation was found by SNaPshot while CADMA yielded false negative result. In conclusion, CADMA is a valid method for IDH1 p.(R132H) testing with higher sensitivity than SNaPshot assay. Also, molecular genetic methods of IDH1 testing from native samples were more robust than IHC from FFPE.

摘要

IDH1/2 基因突变是胶质母细胞瘤患者预后良好的标志物,与低级别胶质瘤和继发性胶质母细胞瘤相关。免疫组织化学和 Sanger 测序是 IDH1/2 基因分型的现行标准,而其他方法也存在。本研究的目的是通过与 SNaPshot 测定法和两种免疫组织化学方法比较,验证差异熔解扩增子(CADMA)PCR 对 IDH 基因分型的竞争性扩增。在我们的研究中,分析了 87 名胶质瘤患者(46 名来自奥洛穆茨,41 名来自俄斯特拉发)。通过 CADMA 和 SNaPshot 在原生生物光学样本中分析 IDH1/2 突变,而通过两种 IHC 方法在 FFPE 样本中分析 IDH1 突变。CADMA PCR 对 IDH1 的敏感性为 96.4%,特异性为 86 个结论样本的 100%。SNaPshot 测定法的敏感性为 92.9%,特异性为 85 个结论样本的 100%。实验室编号 2 的 IHC 达到了 86 个结论样本的敏感性 85.7%和特异性 100%。实验室编号 4 的 IHC 达到了 74 个结论样本的敏感性 96.4%和特异性 79.7%。SNaPshot 仅发现一个 IDH2 突变,而 CADMA 则产生假阴性结果。总之,CADMA 是一种有效的 IDH1 p.(R132H)检测方法,其敏感性高于 SNaPshot 测定法。此外,来自原生样本的 IDH1 分子遗传学检测方法比 FFPE 的 IHC 更稳健。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c6b5/6614140/9a5d3e56fdac/12253_2018_413_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验