Search

Fadhil W, Ibrahem S, Seth R, AbuAli G, Ragunath K, Kaye P & Ilyas M (2012) Histopathology The utility of diagnostic biopsy specimens for predictive molecular testing in colorectal cancer Aims: If stratified medicine is to be applied in the neoadjuvant setting, predictive testing will have to be undertaken on preoperative diagnostic biopsy specimens. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a diagnostic biopsy was adequately representative of the main tumour in colorectal cancer. Methods and results: Thirty cases of paired biopsy and subsequent resection specimens were randomly selected. Samples were screened for mutation in KRAS (codons 12/13, 61, and 146), BRAF (codon 600 and exon 11), PIK3CA (exons 1, 9, and 20), TP53 (exons 5–8), and microsatellite instability, using the quick multiplex consensus or standard polymerase chain reaction (PCR) protocols followed by high-resolution melting analysis. A total of 570 paired PCR tests were performed for mutation detection, and identical results were obtained in both biopsy and resection specimens in 569 tests (>99% concordance). Four cases (13%) showed microsatellite instability, and, in all four cases, instability was seen at identical mononucleotide markers in both biopsy and matched resection specimens. Conclusions: This is the first study to show that diagnostic biopsy specimens, even though they are a tiny sample of the tumour, are sufficiently representative for use in predictive testing for early driver mutations in colorectal cancer.

Mutation detection is important in cancer management. Several methods are available of which high resolution melting (HRM) analysis and pyrosequencing are the most versatile. We undertook a comparative analysis of these techniques. The methods are: To compare the limit of detection (LOD), mutations in KRAS (codon 12/13 hotspot) and BRAF (V600E hotspot) were tested. DNA mixtures containing mutant alleles at a frequency of around 25%/12.5%/6%/3%/ 1.5%/0.8% were analysed. To compare frequency of mutation detection, 22 DNA samples (nine high quality samples from cell lines, 13 low quality samples from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue) were tested for three hotspots in KRAS (codons 12/13, 61 and 146) and two hotspots in BRAF (V600E and exon 11). HRM analysis of KRAS (codon12/13) and BRAF (V600E) showed that 3% and 1.5% mutant alleles respectively could be reliably detected whilst pyrosequencing reliably detected 6% mutant alleles in each case. Of 110 tests performed on 22 DNA samples, in 109 cases HRM and pyrosequencing gave identical results. Two of the samples tested had previously been called as wild type for KRAS by direct Sanger sequencing but were found to be mutant by both HRM and pyrosequencing. Both HRM and pyrosequencing can detect small numbers of mutant alleles although HRM has a lower limit of detection. Both are suitable for use in mutation detection and are both more sensitive than Sanger sequencing.

KRAS and BRAF mutations occur in colorectal cancers (CRCs) and are considered mutually exclusive methods of activating the RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway. This pathway is a therapeutic target and KRAS mutation may predict tumour responsiveness. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between KRAS and BRAF mutations in 24 CRC cell lines and 29 advanced CRCs.KRAS and BRAF mutations were detected using high resolution melting and sequencing. Expression of mutations was confirmed by reverse transcription- PCR (RT-PCR) and sequencing. CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) was tested by methylation-specific PCR.KRAS or BRAF mutation occurred in 79% of cell lines and 59% of CRCs. In the cell lines, KRAS mutations occurred in 54% of cases (with 62% in codons 12/13 and 38% in other codons). Four cell lines had a homozygous mutation. Only heterozygous BRAF mutations were detected in 29% cell lines. The V600E mutation occurred most commonly and was associated with CIMP+ status (p = 0.005). Mutations at codons 529 and 581 were also found and, in one case, BRAF and KRAS mutation co-occurred. Unexpectedly, BRAF splice variants (with a predicted kinase-dead protein) were found in 5/24 (21%) cell lines. In advanced CRCs, KRAS mutations occurred in 48% of cases (64% codons 12/13, 36% other codons) and BRAF mutations in 10% (66% V600E, 33% exon 11). A compound KRAS/BRAF mutation was not seen.Disrupted Ras/Raf signalling is common in CRC. Homozygous KRAS mutations and concomitant KRAS/BRAF mutations may be indicative of a gene dosage effect. The significance of BRAF splice variants is uncertain but may represent another layer of complexity. Finally, if KRAS mutation is to be used for predictive testing, then the whole gene may need to be screened as mutations occur outside codons 12/13.

CTEN/TNS4 is an oncogene in colorectal cancer (CRC) which enhances cell motility although the mechanism of Cten regulation is unknown. We found an association between high Cten expression and KRAS/BRAF mutation in a series of CRC cell lines (p = 0.03) and hypothesised that Kras may regulate Cten. To test this, Kras was knocked-down (using small interfering (si)RNA) in CRC cell lines SW620 and DLD1 (high Cten expressors and mutant for KRAS). In each cell line, Kras knockdown was mirrored by down-regulation of Cten Since Kras signals through Braf, we tested the effect of Kras knockdown in CRC cell line Colo205 (which shows high Cten expression and is mutant for BRAF but wild type for KRAS). Cten levels were unaffected by Kras knockdown whilst Braf knockdown resulted in reduced Cten expression suggesting that Kras signals via Braf to regulate Cten. Quantification of Cten mRNA and protein analysis following proteasome inhibition suggested that regulation was of Cten transcription. Kras knockdown inhibited cell motility. To test whether this could be mediated through Cten, SW620 cells were co-transfected with Kras specific siRNAs and a Cten expression vector. Restoring Cten expression was able to restore cell motility despite Kras knockdown (transwell migration and wounding assay, p

Background Mutation detection in tumours will become increasingly important in pathological diagnosis as ‘predictive’ mutations are identified. A cheap and reliable test that works on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue is required. Methods The quick-multiplex-consensus (QMC)-PCR protocol was developed to be used with high-resolution melting (HRM) analysis. The assay was compared with Sanger sequencing. Robustness of the assay was tested in DNA from FFPE tissue. Results QMC-PCR with HRM could detect a minimum of 2.5% of mutant alleles (compared with 20% detectable for Sanger sequencing). Ten mutation hotspots in KRAS , BRAF , PIK3CA and CDC4 were screened in 29 cell lines with 100% sensitivity and specificity. Forty-three FFPE colorectal tumours were sequenced for hotspots in KRAS and PIK3CA and then screened by QMC-PCR. There was 100% sensitivity, although, of 21 mutations detected by QMC-PCR, 16 were confirmed by sequencing (71% specificity, positive predictive value 76%). All 43 samples were then screened for mutations in all 10 hotspots. Of 430 tests, 43 (10%) showed aberrant melting and 36 were confirmed mutant (positive predictive value 84%). As our technique is more sensitive than direct sequencing, the remaining seven tests are probably sequencing false-negatives. Precision tests showed that there was little intra-assay and interassay variation. Conclusions QMC-PCR with HRM is a simple, robust and inexpensive technique which had greater sensitivity than Sanger sequencing. It allows multiple mutation hotspots to be rapidly screened and is thus highly suited to mutation detection in DNA derived from FFPE tissues.