非小细胞肺癌表皮生长因子受体 20 外显子插入突变的检测:精准医疗中统一术语的意义

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q1 PATHOLOGY Pathology Pub Date : 2024-05-06 DOI:10.1016/j.pathol.2024.02.012
Jieun Park , Boram Lee , Ji-Young Song , Minjung Sung , Mi Jeong Kwon , Chae Rin Kim , Sangjin Lee , Young Kee Shin , Yoon-La Choi
{"title":"非小细胞肺癌表皮生长因子受体 20 外显子插入突变的检测:精准医疗中统一术语的意义","authors":"Jieun Park ,&nbsp;Boram Lee ,&nbsp;Ji-Young Song ,&nbsp;Minjung Sung ,&nbsp;Mi Jeong Kwon ,&nbsp;Chae Rin Kim ,&nbsp;Sangjin Lee ,&nbsp;Young Kee Shin ,&nbsp;Yoon-La Choi","doi":"10.1016/j.pathol.2024.02.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Epidermal growth factor receptor (<em>EGFR</em>) exon 20 insertion mutations (E20ins) are the third most frequent mutations observed in non-small cell lung cancer, accounting for approximately 1–10% of all <em>EGFR</em> mutations. In the era of precision medicine and targeted therapies, consistent naming of genetic alterations is crucial to avoid confusion and errors. However, the annotation of <em>EGFR</em> E20ins mutations has been inconsistent, leading to confusion in the scientific literature and product documentation. In this study, our primary objective was to investigate the usage of different annotation related to <em>EGFR</em> E20ins in independent studies. Additionally, we assessed the distribution of <em>EGFR</em> E20ins mutations and estimated the detection coverage expected from each available <em>EGFR</em> E20ins detection assay. A total of 1,418 EGFR E20ins mutations were collected from six studies (FoundationInsights, Geneseeq Technology Inc, mobocertinib phase I/II trial, poziotinib phase II trial, sunvozertinib phase I trial, and Samsung Medical Center) and reorganised according to Human Genome Variation Society (HGVS) nomenclature. Our analysis revealed that the majority of <em>EGFR</em> E20ins mutations requiring correction were ‘insertion’ or ‘deletion-insertion’, which should be appropriately designated as ‘duplication’. Additionally, duplicated variants were reported using different annotations in each study, and furthermore, even identical variant sequences were annotated differently within the same study. In all six studies, p.A767_V769dup and p.S768_D770dup were the most frequently observed <em>EGFR</em> E20ins. The Oncomine Dx Target Test showed the highest patient coverage at 77.2%, followed by the Droplex EGFR Mutation Test v2 with a patient coverage of 70.5% for <em>EGFR</em> E20ins patients. To ensure comprehensive coverage in real-world settings, it is essential to standardise the annotations for each variant, for example using the HGVS nomenclature. The accurate classification and analysis of drug responsiveness in <em>EGFR</em> E20ins necessitate consideration of the nomenclature, particularly with respect to the locations where the actual mutations occur.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19915,"journal":{"name":"Pathology","volume":"56 5","pages":"Pages 653-661"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detection of EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations in non-small cell lung cancer: implications for consistent nomenclature in precision medicine\",\"authors\":\"Jieun Park ,&nbsp;Boram Lee ,&nbsp;Ji-Young Song ,&nbsp;Minjung Sung ,&nbsp;Mi Jeong Kwon ,&nbsp;Chae Rin Kim ,&nbsp;Sangjin Lee ,&nbsp;Young Kee Shin ,&nbsp;Yoon-La Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pathol.2024.02.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Epidermal growth factor receptor (<em>EGFR</em>) exon 20 insertion mutations (E20ins) are the third most frequent mutations observed in non-small cell lung cancer, accounting for approximately 1–10% of all <em>EGFR</em> mutations. In the era of precision medicine and targeted therapies, consistent naming of genetic alterations is crucial to avoid confusion and errors. However, the annotation of <em>EGFR</em> E20ins mutations has been inconsistent, leading to confusion in the scientific literature and product documentation. In this study, our primary objective was to investigate the usage of different annotation related to <em>EGFR</em> E20ins in independent studies. Additionally, we assessed the distribution of <em>EGFR</em> E20ins mutations and estimated the detection coverage expected from each available <em>EGFR</em> E20ins detection assay. A total of 1,418 EGFR E20ins mutations were collected from six studies (FoundationInsights, Geneseeq Technology Inc, mobocertinib phase I/II trial, poziotinib phase II trial, sunvozertinib phase I trial, and Samsung Medical Center) and reorganised according to Human Genome Variation Society (HGVS) nomenclature. Our analysis revealed that the majority of <em>EGFR</em> E20ins mutations requiring correction were ‘insertion’ or ‘deletion-insertion’, which should be appropriately designated as ‘duplication’. Additionally, duplicated variants were reported using different annotations in each study, and furthermore, even identical variant sequences were annotated differently within the same study. In all six studies, p.A767_V769dup and p.S768_D770dup were the most frequently observed <em>EGFR</em> E20ins. The Oncomine Dx Target Test showed the highest patient coverage at 77.2%, followed by the Droplex EGFR Mutation Test v2 with a patient coverage of 70.5% for <em>EGFR</em> E20ins patients. To ensure comprehensive coverage in real-world settings, it is essential to standardise the annotations for each variant, for example using the HGVS nomenclature. The accurate classification and analysis of drug responsiveness in <em>EGFR</em> E20ins necessitate consideration of the nomenclature, particularly with respect to the locations where the actual mutations occur.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19915,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pathology\",\"volume\":\"56 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 653-661\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031302524001235\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031302524001235","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)第20外显子插入突变(E20ins)是非小细胞肺癌中第三大最常见的突变,约占所有EGFR突变的1-10%。在精准医疗和靶向治疗时代,基因改变的一致命名对于避免混淆和错误至关重要。然而,表皮生长因子受体 E20ins 突变的注释并不一致,导致科学文献和产品文档中的混淆。在本研究中,我们的主要目的是调查独立研究中与表皮生长因子受体 E20ins 相关的不同注释的使用情况。此外,我们还评估了表皮生长因子受体 E20ins 突变的分布情况,并估算了每种可用的表皮生长因子受体 E20ins 检测试剂的预期检测范围。我们从六项研究(FoundationInsights、Geneseeq Technology Inc、mobocertinib I/II 期试验、poziotinib II 期试验、sunvozertinib I 期试验和三星医疗中心)中共收集了 1,418 个表皮生长因子受体 E20ins 突变,并根据人类基因组变异协会(HGVS)的命名法进行了重组。我们的分析表明,大多数需要校正的表皮生长因子受体E20ins突变都是 "插入 "或 "缺失-插入 "突变,应将其恰当地命名为 "重复"。此外,重复变异在每项研究中都使用了不同的注释,而且,即使是相同的变异序列,在同一研究中也有不同的注释。在所有六项研究中,p.A767_V769dup 和 p.S768_D770dup 是最常观察到的表皮生长因子受体 E20ins。Oncomine Dx Target 测试的患者覆盖率最高,达到 77.2%,其次是 Droplex EGFR 基因突变测试 v2,对 EGFR E20ins 患者的覆盖率为 70.5%。为确保在实际环境中的全面覆盖,必须对每个变异体的注释进行标准化,例如使用 HGVS 术语。要对表皮生长因子受体 E20ins 的药物反应性进行准确分类和分析,就必须考虑到命名法,特别是实际突变发生的位置。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Detection of EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations in non-small cell lung cancer: implications for consistent nomenclature in precision medicine

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertion mutations (E20ins) are the third most frequent mutations observed in non-small cell lung cancer, accounting for approximately 1–10% of all EGFR mutations. In the era of precision medicine and targeted therapies, consistent naming of genetic alterations is crucial to avoid confusion and errors. However, the annotation of EGFR E20ins mutations has been inconsistent, leading to confusion in the scientific literature and product documentation. In this study, our primary objective was to investigate the usage of different annotation related to EGFR E20ins in independent studies. Additionally, we assessed the distribution of EGFR E20ins mutations and estimated the detection coverage expected from each available EGFR E20ins detection assay. A total of 1,418 EGFR E20ins mutations were collected from six studies (FoundationInsights, Geneseeq Technology Inc, mobocertinib phase I/II trial, poziotinib phase II trial, sunvozertinib phase I trial, and Samsung Medical Center) and reorganised according to Human Genome Variation Society (HGVS) nomenclature. Our analysis revealed that the majority of EGFR E20ins mutations requiring correction were ‘insertion’ or ‘deletion-insertion’, which should be appropriately designated as ‘duplication’. Additionally, duplicated variants were reported using different annotations in each study, and furthermore, even identical variant sequences were annotated differently within the same study. In all six studies, p.A767_V769dup and p.S768_D770dup were the most frequently observed EGFR E20ins. The Oncomine Dx Target Test showed the highest patient coverage at 77.2%, followed by the Droplex EGFR Mutation Test v2 with a patient coverage of 70.5% for EGFR E20ins patients. To ensure comprehensive coverage in real-world settings, it is essential to standardise the annotations for each variant, for example using the HGVS nomenclature. The accurate classification and analysis of drug responsiveness in EGFR E20ins necessitate consideration of the nomenclature, particularly with respect to the locations where the actual mutations occur.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pathology
Pathology 医学-病理学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.20%
发文量
459
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: Published by Elsevier from 2016 Pathology is the official journal of the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (RCPA). It is committed to publishing peer-reviewed, original articles related to the science of pathology in its broadest sense, including anatomical pathology, chemical pathology and biochemistry, cytopathology, experimental pathology, forensic pathology and morbid anatomy, genetics, haematology, immunology and immunopathology, microbiology and molecular pathology.
期刊最新文献
A rare case of coccidioidomycosis in Singapore and challenges faced with laboratory diagnosis in a non-endemic area. New challenges for HIV testing in the setting of long-acting cabotegravir pre-exposure prophylaxis. Unexpected concurrent B-lymphoblastic leukaemia and untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia presenting as worsening thrombocytopenia: a rare case report. Evaluation of a customised Sensititre YeastOne plate containing isavuconazole for antifungal susceptibility testing in Singapore. Pathologists' integration of prior biopsies of women with germline PTEN mutations may expedite the identification of this rare cancer predisposition syndrome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1