Hide metadata

dc.date.accessioned2015-07-02T10:48:17Z
dc.date.available2015-07-02T10:48:17Z
dc.date.created2015-01-13T12:46:54Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.citationLøes, Inger Marie Immervoll, Heike Angelsen, Jon-Helge Horn, Arild Geisler, Jürgen Busch, Christian Lønning, Per Eystein Knappskog, Stian . Performance comparison of three BRAF V600E detection methods in malignant melanoma and colorectal cancer specimen. Tumour Biology. 2014
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/44145
dc.description.abstractPersonalized cancer care requires reliable biomarkers. While the BRAF V600E mutation is implemented in the clinic, no method for its detection has so far been established as reference. We aimed to perform a comprehensive comparison of three methods currently being used for V600E detection in clinical samples. We analysed genomic DNA from 127 malignant melanomas (77 patients) and 389 tumours from 141 colorectal cancer patients (383 liver metastases and 6 primary tumours) by Sanger sequencing and a single probe-based high-resolution melting assay (LightMix). Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue from a subset of these lesions (n = 77 and 304, respectively) was analysed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) using the V600E-specific antibody VE1. In a dilution series of V600E-mutated DNA in wild-type DNA, the detection limit for the LightMix assay was 1:1000 mutated alleles while it was 1:10 for Sanger sequencing. In line with this, we detected 15 additional mutated melanoma samples and two additional mutated metastatic colorectal cancer samples by the LightMix assay compared to Sanger sequencing. For the melanoma samples, we observed high concordance between DNA-based methods and analysis by IHC. However, in colorectal samples, IHC performed poorly with 12 samples being scored as V600E positive exclusively by IHC and nine samples being scored as V600E negative exclusively by IHC. In conclusion, the VE1 antibody is not recommendable for clinical tests of colorectal cancer samples. For melanoma samples, IHC may be useful as a screening tool guiding further analytical approaches. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.en_US
dc.languageEN
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherKarger
dc.titlePerformance comparison of three BRAF V600E detection methods in malignant melanoma and colorectal cancer specimenen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.creator.authorLøes, Inger Marie
dc.creator.authorImmervoll, Heike
dc.creator.authorAngelsen, Jon-Helge
dc.creator.authorHorn, Arild
dc.creator.authorGeisler, Jürgen
dc.creator.authorBusch, Christian
dc.creator.authorLønning, Per Eystein
dc.creator.authorKnappskog, Stian
cristin.unitcode185,53,30,0
cristin.unitnameKlinikk for indremedisin og laboratoriefag
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.cristin1196481
dc.identifier.bibliographiccitationinfo:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.jtitle=Tumour Biology&rft.volume=36&rft.spage=1003&rft.date=2015
dc.identifier.jtitleTumour Biology
dc.identifier.volumeVolume 36
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.startpage1003
dc.identifier.endpage1013
dc.identifier.pagecount11
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13277-014-2711-5
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:no-48467
dc.subject.nviVDP::Onkologi: 762
dc.type.documentTidsskriftartikkelen_US
dc.type.peerreviewedPeer reviewed
dc.source.issn1010-4283
dc.identifier.fulltextFulltext https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/44145/2/art%25253A10.1007%25252Fs13277-014-2711-5.pdf
dc.type.versionPublishedVersion


Files in this item

Appears in the following Collection

Hide metadata