Search

Companion diagnostic (CDx) tests play important roles in identifying oncogenic driver genes and tailoring effective molecularly targeted therapies for lung cancer patients. In Japan, the Oncomine Dx target test (ODxTT) and the AmoyDx pan lung cancer PCR panel (AmoyDx) are prominent CDx tests and only one of these tests is covered by the domestic insurance system. However, these CDx tests cover different target regions and apply different technologies (ODxTT is amplicon-based next-generation sequencing and AmoyDx is multiplex PCR-based assay), which may lead to missing of actionable mutations affecting patient prognosis. Here, we performed a direct comparison analysis of 1059 genetic alterations of eight driver genes from 131 samples and evaluated the concordance between two CDx tests for detecting actionable variants and fusions. When excluding the eight uncovered variants (ODxTT: two variants, AmoyDx: six variants), the overall percent agreement was 97.6% (1026/1051) with 89.0% of overall positive percent agreement (89/100) and 98.5% of overall negative percent agreement (937/951). Of the 25 discordant genetic alterations, two were undetected despite being covered in the AmoyDx (one EGFR variant and one ROS1 fusion). Furthermore, there were potential false positives in the ODxTT (nine MET exon 14 skippings) and in the AmoyDx (five variants, six ROS1 and three RET fusions). These potential false positives in the AmoyDx likely due to non-specific amplification, which was validated by the unique molecular barcoding sequencing. The ODxTT missed two uncovered EGFR rare variants, which was visually confirmed in the raw sequencing data. Our study provides insights into real-world performance of CDx tests for lung cancer and ensures reliability to advance precision medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lung cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) driver mutations are crucial for treatment decisions for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aimed to assess the differences in EGFR mutation detection between two companion diagnostic (CDx) tests—the Oncomine Dx Target Test (ODxTT) and the AmoyDx Pan Lung Cancer PCR Panel—and their impact on treatment applicability. To this end, we used an in-house targeted sequencing dataset of 282 samples from 127 EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients to simulate the concordance between the EGFR variants targeted by the ODxTT and AmoyDx panel, the oncogenicity of the variants, and their therapeutic potential. Of the 216 EGFR mutations identified by the in-house panel, 51% were detectable by both CDx tests, 3% were specific to ODxTT, and 46% were not targeted by either test. Most non-targeted mutations did not have oncogenicity and were located outside exons 18–21. Notably, 95% of the mutations detectable by both tests had potential oncogenicity. Furthermore, among the 96 patients harboring actionable EGFR mutations, 97% had mutations detectable by both CDx tests and 1% by ODxTT, while 2% had mutations not covered by either test. These findings suggest that while both CDx tests are effective in detecting almost all actionable EGFR mutations, ODxTT provides slightly broader coverage. These results emphasize the importance of selecting appropriate CDx tests to inform treatment decisions for EGFR-positive NSCLC patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objective: The Oncomine Dx Target Test (ODxTT) has been used as a companion diagnostic test for lung cancer. Here, we evaluated whether the amount of nucleic acid and the degree of RNA degradation are related to the success of the ODxTT. Methods: This study included 223 samples from 218 patients with lung cancer. For all samples, DNA and RNA concentrations were quantified using Qubit, and the degree of RNA degradation was evaluated using the Bioanalyzer. Results: Of the 223 samples, 219 samples were successfully analyzed in the ODxTT and four were not. DNA analysis failed in two samples, which were attributed to low DNA concentrations and both were cytology specimens. Meanwhile, RNA analysis failed in the other two samples. These samples had sufficient amounts of RNA, but it was highly degraded with DV200 (the percentage of RNA fragments > 200 base pairs) less than 30. Compared with RNA samples with DV200 ≥ 30, analysis of RNA with DV200 < 30 yielded significantly fewer reads for the internal control genes. This test showed actionable mutations were identified in 38% (83/218) of all patients and in 46.6% (76/163) of patients with lung adenocarcinoma. Conclusions: DNA concentration and degree of RNA degradation are key factors determining the success of diagnostic testing by the ODxTT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing reagents are expected to become scarce worldwide. However, little is known regarding whether pooling of samples accurately detects SARS-CoV-2. To validate the feasibility of pooling samples, serial dilution analysis and spike-in experiments were conducted using synthetic DNA and nucleic acids extracted from SARS-CoV-2-positive and -negative patients. Furthermore, we studied 1000 individuals, 667 of whom were "healthy" individuals (195 healthcare workers and 472 hospitalized patients with disorders other than COVID-19 infection), and 333 infection-suspected patients with cough and fever. Serial dilution analysis showed a limit of detection of around 10–100 viral genome copies according to the protocol of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Japan. Spike-in experiments demonstrated that RT-qPCR detected positive signals in pooled samples with SARS-CoV-2-negative and -positive patients at 5-, 10-, 20-fold dilutions. By screening with this pooling strategy, by the end of April 2020 there were 12 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients in 333 infection-suspected patients (3.6%) and zero in 667 "healthy" controls. We obtained these results with a total of 538 runs using the pooling strategy, compared with 1000 standard runs. In a prospective study, we successfully detected SARS-CoV-2 using 10- to 20-fold diluted samples of nasopharyngeal swabs from eighteen COVID-19 patients with wide ranges of viral load. Pooling sample is feasible for conserving test reagents and detecting SARS-CoV-2 in clinical settings. This strategy will help us to research the prevalence infected individuals and provide infected-status information to prevent the spread of the virus and nosocomial transmission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]