Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing Validates the Use of Diagnostic Biopsies as a Suitable Alternative to Resection Material for Mutation Screening in Colorectal Cancer

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Mutation testing in the context of neoadjuvant therapy must be performed on biopsy samples. Given the issue of tumour heterogeneity, this raises the question of whether the biopsies are representative of the whole tumour. Here we have compared the mutation profiles of colorectal biopsies with their matched resection specimens.

Methods

We performed next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis on 25 paired formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded colorectal cancer biopsy and primary resection samples. DNA was extracted and analysed using the TruSight tumour kit, allowing the interrogation of 26 cancer driver genes. Samples were run on an Illumina MiSeq. Mutations were validated using quick-multiplex-consensus (QMC)-polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in conjunction with high resolution melting (HRM). The paired biopsy and resection tumour samples were assessed for presence or absence of mutations, mutant allele frequency ratios, and allelic imbalance status.

Results

A total of 81 mutations were detected, in ten of the 26 genes in the TruSight kit. Two of the 25 paired cases were wild-type across all genes. The mutational profiles, allelic imbalance status, and mutant allele frequency ratios of the paired biopsy and resection samples were highly concordant (88.75–98.85%), with all but three (3.7%) of the mutations identified in the resection specimens also being present in the biopsy specimens. All 81 mutations were confirmed by QMC-PCR and HRM analysis, although four low-level mutations required a co-amplification at lower denaturation temperature (COLD)-PCR protocol to enrich for the mutant alleles.

Conclusions

Diagnostic biopsies are adequate and reliable materials for molecular testing by NGS. The use of biopsies for molecular screening will enhance targeted neoadjuvant therapy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:E359–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.29210.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cancer Research UK. http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/bowel-cancer/. Accessed 20 June 2018.

  3. LeBlanc VG, Marra MA. Next-generation sequencing approaches in cancer: where have they brought us and where will they take us? Farah CS, Cho WC, eds. Cancers. 2015;7(3):1925–58. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers7030869.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Li J, Wang T, Zhang X, Yang X. The contribution of next generation sequencing technologies to epigenome research of stem cell and tumorigenesis. Hum Genet Embryol. 2011;S2:001. https://doi.org/10.4172/2161-0436.S2-001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schmiegel W, Scott RJ, Dooley S, Lewis W, Meldrum CJ, Pockney P, et al. Blood-based detection of RAS mutations to guide anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer patients: concordance of results from circulating tumor DNA and tissue-based RAS testing. Mol Oncol. 2017;11(2):208–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Sepulveda AR, Hamilton SR, Allegra CJ, Grody W, Cushman-Vokoun AM, Funkhouser WK, et al. Molecular biomarkers for the evaluation of colorectal cancer: guideline from the American Society for Clinical Pathology, College of American Pathologists, Association for Molecular Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Mol Diagn. 2017;19(2):187–225.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Santos MD, Silva C, Rocha A, Nogueira C, Castro-Poças F, Araujo A, et al. Predictive clinical model of tumor response after chemoradiation in rectal cancer. Oncotarget. 2017;8(35):58133–51.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Lim SH, Chua W, Henderson C, Ng W, Shin JS, Chantrill L, et al. Predictive and prognostic biomarkers for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2015;96(1):67–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. FoxTROT Collaboration Group. Feasibility of preoperative chemotherapy for locally advanced, operable colon cancer: the pilot phase of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(11):1152–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Jakobsen A, Andersen F, Fischer A, Jensen LH, Jørgensen JCR, Larsen O, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced colon cancer. A phase II trial. Acta Oncol. 2015;54(10):1747–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fadhil W, Ibrahem S, Seth R, AbuAli G, Ragunath K, Kaye P, et al. The utility of diagnostic biopsy specimens for predictive molecular testing in colorectal cancer. Histopathology. 2012;61(6):1117–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Greaves M, Maley CC. Clonal evolution in cancer. Nature. 2012;481(7381):306–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Fadhil W, Ibrahem S, Seth R, Ilyas M. Quick-multiplex-consensus (QMC)-PCR followed by high-resolution melting: a simple and robust method for mutation detection in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. J Clin Pathol. 2010;63(2):134–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Seth R, Crook S, Ibrahem S, Fadhil W, Jackson D, Ilyas M. Concomitant mutations and splice variants in KRAS and BRAF demonstrate complex perturbation of the Ras/Raf signalling pathway in advanced colorectal cancer. Gut. 2009;58(9):1234–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. GraphPad QuickCalcs. http://www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/kappa2/. Accessed 20 June 2018.

  16. Lowry R. VassarStats: website for statistical computation. http://vassarstats.net/Kappa. Accessed 20 June 2018.

  17. Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding inter-observer agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med. 2005;37(5):360–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gajria D, Chandarlapaty S. HER2-amplified breast cancer: mechanisms of trastuzumab resistance and novel targeted therapies. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2011;11(2):263–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Abrahao-Machado LF, Scapulatempo-Neto C. HER2 testing in gastric cancer: an update. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22(19):4619–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Bokemeyer C, Cutsem EV, Rougier P, Ciardiello F, Heeger S, Schlichting M, et al. Addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: pooled analysis of the CRYSTAL and OPUS randomised clinical trials. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(10):1466–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Krol LC, ’t Hart NA, Methorst N, Knol AJ, Prinsen C, Boers JE. Concordance in KRAS and BRAF mutations in endoscopic biopsy samples and resection specimens of colorectal adenocarcinoma. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(7):1108–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ku BM, Heo MH, Kim J-H, Cho BC, Cho EK, Min YJ, et al. Molecular screening of small biopsy samples using next-generation sequencing in Korean patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Korean Lung Cancer Consortium (KLCC-13-01). J Pathol Transl Med. 2018;52(3):148–56.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Zheng G, Tsai H, Tseng L-H, Gocke CD, Eshleman JR, Netto G, Lin M-T. Test feasibility of next-generation sequencing assays in clinical mutation detection of small biopsy and fine needle aspiration specimens. Am J Clin Pathol. 2016;145:696–702.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Illei PB, Belchis D, Tseng L-H, Nguyen D, De Marchi F, Haley L, et al. Clinical mutational profiling of 1006 lung cancers by next generation sequencing. Oncotarget. 2017;8(57):96684–96.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. DiBardino D, Rawson D, Saqi A, Heymann J, Pagan C, Bulman W. Next-generation sequencing of non-small cell lung cancer using a customized, targeted sequencing panel: emphasis on small biopsy and cytology. CytoJournal 2017;14(1):7. http://www.cytojournal.com/text.asp?2017/14/1/7/202602. Accessed 20 June 2018.

  26. Catalogue of somatic mutation in cancer at https://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/. Accessed 20 June 2018.

  27. The Cancer Genome Atlas at https://cancergenome.nih.gov/. Accessed 20 June 2018.

  28. Nurwidya F, Takahashi F, Takahashi K. Gefitinib in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer with activating epidermal growth factor receptor mutation. J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2016;7(2):119–23. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-9668.184695.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Tejpar S, Bertagnolli M, Bosman F, Lenz H-J, Garraway L, Waldman F, Warren R, et al. Prognostic and predictive biomarkers in resected colon cancer: current status and future perspectives for integrating genomics into biomarker discovery. Oncologist. 2010;15(4):390–404.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Dienstmann R, Elez E, Argiles G, et al. Analysis of mutant allele fractions in driver genes in colorectal cancer—biological and clinical insights. Mol Oncol. 2017;11(9):1263–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.12099.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Shen S, Wei Y, Zhang R, et al. Mutant-allele fraction heterogeneity is associated with non-small cell lung cancer patient survival. Oncol Lett. 2018;15(1):795–802. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2017.7428.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ono A, Kenmotsu H, Watanabe M, Serizawa M, Mori K, Imai H, et al. Mutant allele frequency predicts the efficacy of EGFR-TKIs in lung adenocarcinoma harboring the L858R mutation. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(10):1948–53. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu251.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Doma V, Papp O, Rásó E, Barbai T, Reiniger L, Vízkeleti L, Timar J. Alteration of mutant allele frequency in visceral metastases of melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(15_suppl):e21528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Baldus SE, Schaefer K-L, Engers R, Hartleb D, Stoecklein NH, Gabbert HE. Prevalence and heterogeneity of KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA mutations in primary colorectal adenocarcinomas and their corresponding metastases. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(3):790–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Yun J, Rago C, Cheong I, Pagliarini R, Angenendt P, Rajagopalan H, et al. Glucose deprivation contributes to the development of kras pathway mutations in tumor cells. Science. 2009;325(5947):1555–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Gareth Cross for enabling the process of NGS data generation and analyses.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Pathology, School of Medicine, Queen’s Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK

    Hersh A. Ham-Karim, Henry Okuchukwu Ebili, Wakkas Fadhil & Mohammad Ilyas

  2. Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, College of Health Sciences, Komar University of Science and Technology, Chaq-Chaq-Qualaraisi, Sulaimani, Iraq

    Hersh A. Ham-Karim

  3. Department of Morbid Anatomy and Histopathology, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, Nigeria

    Henry Okuchukwu Ebili

  4. Centre for Medical Genetics, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, City Hospital Campus, Nottingham, UK

    Kirsty Manger

  5. Clinical Oncology, University of Nottingham, City Hospital Campus, Nottingham, UK

    Narmeen S. Ahmad

  6. Kurdistan Institution for Strategic Studies and Scientific Research, Qirga, Sulaimani, KRG, Iraq

    Narmeen S. Ahmad

  7. Department of Pathology and Tumour Biology, Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, Wellcome Trust Brenner Building, St James University Hospital, Leeds, UK

    Susan D. Richman

Authors
  1. Hersh A. Ham-Karim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Henry Okuchukwu Ebili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kirsty Manger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wakkas Fadhil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Narmeen S. Ahmad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Susan D. Richman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mohammad Ilyas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henry Okuchukwu Ebili.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This work was funded by Universities of Nottingham (for MI) and Leeds (for SDR).

Conflict of interest

All the authors (HH-K, HOE, KM, WF, NSA, SDR and MI) declare that they have no conflicts of interest in publishing this manuscript.

Ethical approval and informed consent

Access to tissues and ethics approval were granted by Nottingham Health Sciences Biobank, which has approval as an IRB from North West–Greater Manchester Central Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 15/NW/0685).

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

40291_2019_388_MOESM1_ESM.tif

Supplementary material 1 (TIFF 6040 kb) Online Resource Figure 1: Validation of NGS-detected mutations by HRM analysis. Difference plots obtained for (A) TP53 and (B) KRAS, by HRM analysis. The samples shown were identified by NGS as harbouring mutations and were confirmed by HRM analysis

40291_2019_388_MOESM2_ESM.tif

Supplementary material 2 (TIFF 3908 kb) Online Resource Figure 2: HRM Analysis Difference plots showing enrichment of mutant allele by COLD-PCR. (A) A PIK3CA (c.331_333delAAG) mutation was detected by NGS in this sample. Plot 1 represents PCR products obtained by QMC-PCR, whilst plot 2 denotes PCR products obtained by COLD-PCR. (B) A SMAD4 (c.1082G>A) mutation detected by NGS. Plot 1 is PCR products obtained by QMC-PCR, whereas plot 2 is PCR products obtained by COLD-PCR. * denotes baseline normal DNA

40291_2019_388_MOESM3_ESM.tif

Supplementary material 3 (TIFF 885 kb) Online Resource Figure 3: A grid chart showing the agreement status between Bx and Rx using the ‘mutation-present-or-absent’ test. The coloured boxes denote presence of mutations, whilst the white boxes denote absence of mutations. The coloured boxes without numbers denote that there is only one mutation type between Rx/Bx pair; the numbers in some of the boxes denote the number of mutations for each gene found in the sample pair, whilst the * denotes that the matched Bx lacked the mutation that was found in the Rx. C = concordance, D = discordance

Supplementary material 4 (DOC 196 kb)

Supplementary material 5 (XLSX 111 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ham-Karim, H.A., Ebili, H.O., Manger, K. et al. Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing Validates the Use of Diagnostic Biopsies as a Suitable Alternative to Resection Material for Mutation Screening in Colorectal Cancer. Mol Diagn Ther 23, 383–393 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40291-019-00388-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40291-019-00388-z

Search

Navigation