Molecular Biological Diagnostics of KRAS and BRAF Mutations in Patients with Colorectal Cancer – Laboratory Experience
Authors:
B. Robešová 1; M. Bajerová 1; A. Vašíková 1; L. Ostřížková 2; J. Hausnerová 3; J. Kyclová 3; Š. Pospíšilová 1,4; J. Mayer 1,4; D. Dvořáková 1,4
Authors‘ workplace:
Centrum molekulární biologie a genové terapie, Interní hematologická a onkologická klinika LF MU a FN Brno
1; Interní hematologická a onkologická klinika LF MU a FN Brno
2; Ústav patologie, FN Brno
3; CEITEC – Středoevropský technologický institut, MU Brno
4
Published in:
Klin Onkol 2013; 26(1): 25-30
Category:
Original Articles
Overview
Background:
Targeted biological therapy based on blocking growth factor receptors and inhibition of cancer-inducing signaling pathways is a new treatment facility for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Therapeutic agents are monoclonal antibodies targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Gene aberrations in the EGFR-induced pathways are negative predictors of therapeutic response. Determination of non-mutated KRAS is a requirement for the indication of targeted anti-EGFR therapy in the present time, BRAF mutation analysis is recommended. Comparison of our results with published data and verification of routine laboratory methods in relation to diagnostic kits were the purposes of this study.
Patients and Methods:
In addition to routine methods based on PCR, direct sequencing as well as two diagnostic kits for KRAS (codon 12 and 13) and BRAF (codon 600) mutation analysis were used for 132 patients.
Results:
KRAS mutations were detected in 45 patients (34%), V600E mutation of the BRAF gene in 9 patients (7%). Both mutations simultaneously were not detected. Tissues from primary tumor and metastases were available from 33 patients. KRAS mutation was detected in 13 cases of this group. KRAS mutations in tumor and metastasis were of the same type in 9 patients; types of mutation in both tissues were different in one case. KRAS mutation only in one tissue was detected in 3 cases. BRAF mutation in both tissues was detected in the 4 patients. A low percentage of tumor cells in 17 patients’ specimen did not allow performance of routine analysis and diagnostic kit was used.
Conclusion:
The frequency of KRAS and BRAF mutations in our cohort of patients corresponds to published data. The suitability of metastatic tissue analysis due to tumor heterogeneity was confirmed. KRAS analysis requires a comprehensive methodological approach with regard to reduced DNA quality and different percentage of tumor cells in tissue. For this reason, commercial diagnostic kits constitute a suitable supplement to standard methods.
Key words:
colorectal neoplasms – KRAS – BRAF – molecular targeted therapy – monoclonal antibodies – molecular diagnostics
Sources
1. www.svod.cz. Dušek L, Mužík J, Kubásek M et al. Epidemiologie zhoubných nádorů v České republice [online], cit. 2012-9-10. Dostupný z WWW: http://www.svod.cz.
2. Haggar FA, Boushey RP. Colorectal Cancer Epidemiology: Incidence, Mortality, Survival, and Risk Factors. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2009; 22(4): 191–197.
3. Monzon FA, Ogino S, Hammond ME et al. The role of KRAS mutation testing in the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2009; 133(10): 1600–1606.
4. Lièvre A, Bachet JB, Le Corre D et al. KRAS mutation status is predictive of response to cetuximab therapy in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res 2006; 66(8): 3992–3995.
5. Modrá kniha České onkologické společnosti. Platnost od 1. 8. 2012. Brno, Česká onkologická společnost ČLS JEP 2012.
6. Lièvre A, Bachet JB, Boige V et al. KRAS mutations as an independent prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26(3): 374–379.
7. Siena S, Sartore-Bianchi A, Di Nicolantonio F et al. Biomarkers predicting clinical outcome of epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted therapy inmetastatic colorectal cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101(19): 1308–1324.
8. van Krieken JH, Jung A, Kirchner T et al. KRAS mutation testing for predicting response to anti-EGFR therapy for colorectal carcinoma: proposal for an European quality assurance program. Virchows Arch 2008; 453(5): 417–431.
9. Amado RG, Wolf M, Peeters M et al. Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26(10): 1626–1634.
10. Patil DT, Fraser CR, Plesec TP. KRAS testing and its importance in colorectal cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 2010; 12(3): 160–167.
11. Stintzing S, Heinemann V, Moosmann N et al. The treatment of colorectal carcinoma with monoclonal antibodies: the importance of KRAS mutation analysis and EGFR status. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2009; 106(12): 202–206.
12. Sun L, Zhang Q, Luan H et al. Comparison of KRAS and EGFR gene status between primary non-small cell lung cancer and local lymph node metastases: implications for clinical practice. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2011; 17; 30: 30.
13. Pellegata NS, Sessa F, Renault B et al. K-ras and p53 gene mutations in pancreatic cancer: ductal and nonductal tumors progress through different genetic lesions. Cancer Res 1994; 54(6): 1556–1560.
14. Bando I, Cillero L, Sanz-Ortega J et al. Study of KRAS new predictive marker in a clinical laboratory. Clin Transl Oncol 2012; 14(12): 937–942.
15. Laurent-Puig P, Cayre A, Manceau G et al. Analysis of PTEN, BRAF, and EGFR status in determining benefit from cetuximab therapy in wild-type KRAS metastatic colon cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27(35): 5924–5930.
16. Van Cutsem E, Dicato M, Arber N et al. Molecular markers and biological targeted therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer: expert opinion and recommendations derived from the 11th ESMO/World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer, Barcelona, 2009. Ann Oncol 2010; 21 (Suppl 6): vi1–vi10.
17. Simi L, Pratesi N, Vignoli M et al. High-resolution melting analysis for rapid detection of KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA gene mutations in colorectal cancer. Am J Clin Pathol 2008; 130(2): 247–253.
18. Richman SD, Seymour MT, Chambers P et al. KRAS and BRAF mutations in advanced colorectal cancer are associated with poor prognosis but do not preclude benefit from oxaliplatin or irinotecan: results from the MRC FOCUS trial. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27(35): 5931–5937.
19. Edkins S, O‘Meara S, Parker A et al. Recurrent KRAS codon 146 mutations in human colorectal cancer. Cancer Biol Ther 2006; 5(8): 928–932.
20. Neumann J, Zeindl-Eberhart E, Kirchner T et al. Frequency and type of KRAS mutations in routine diagnostic analysis of metastatic colorectal cancer. Pathol Res Pract 2009; 205(12): 858–862.
21. Artale S, Sartore-Bianchi A, Veronese SM et al. Mutations of KRAS and BRAF in primary and matched metastatic sites of colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26(25): 4217.
22. Velho S, Oliveira C, Seruca R. KRAS mutations and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy in colorectal cancer with lymph node metastases. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27(1): 158–159.
23. Krypuy M, Newnham GM, Thomas DM et al. High resolution melting analysis for the rapid and sensitive detection of mutations in clinical samples: KRAS codon 12 and 13 mutations in non-small cell lung cancer. BMC Cancer 2006; 6: 295.
24. Benlloch S, Payá A, Alenda C et al. Detection of BRAF V600E mutation in colorectal cancer: Comparison of automatic sequencing and Real-Time chemistry metodology. J Mol Diagn 2006; 8(5): 540–543.
25. Willmore-Payne C, Holden JA, Tripp S et al. Human malignant melanoma: detection of BRAF- and c-kit-activating mutations by high-resolution amplicon melting analysis. Hum Pathol 2005; 36(5): 486–493.
26. Gallegos Ruiz MI, Floor K, Rijmen F et al. EGFR and K-ras mutation analysis in non-small cell lung cancer: comparison of paraffin embedded versus frozen specimens. Cell Oncol 2007; 29(3): 257–264.
27. Loupakis F, Pollina L, Stasi I et al. PTEN expression and KRAS mutations on primary tumors and metastases in the prediction of benefit from cetuximab plus irinotecan for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27(16): 2622–2629.
28. Knijn N, Mekenkamp LJ, Klomp M et al. KRAS mutation analysis: a comparison between primary tumours and matched liver metastases in 305 colorectal cancer patients. Br J Cancer 2011; 104(6): 1020–1026.
Labels
Paediatric clinical oncology Surgery Clinical oncologyArticle was published in
Clinical Oncology
2013 Issue 1
Most read in this issue
- Pineal Germ Cell Tumors: Review
- Proteasome Inhibitors in Treatment of Multiple Myeloma
- Malignant Melanoma Treated with Radical Chemotherapy, Resemblance Histology of Melanoma to Soft Tissue Sarcomas, Case Report
- Extensive AL Amyloidosis Presenting with Recurrent Liver Hemorrhage and Hemoperitoneum: Case Report and Literature Review