EGFR and KRAS mutations detection on lung cancer liquid-based cytology: a pilot study

Preparation of DNA from cytological material: effects of fixation, staining, and mounting medium on DNA yield and quality

BACKGROUND

Personalized oncology requires molecular analysis of tumor cells. Several studies have demonstrated that cytological material is suitable for DNA analysis, but to the authors' knowledge there are no systematic studies comparing how the yield and quality of extracted DNA is affected by the various techniques used for the preparation of cytological material.

METHODS

DNA yield and quality were compared using cultured human lung cancer cells subjected to different preparation techniques used in routine cytology, including fixation, mounting medium, and staining. The results were compared with the outcome of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) genotyping of 66 clinical cytological samples using the same DNA preparation protocol.

RESULTS

All tested protocol combinations resulted in fragment lengths of at least 388 base pairs. The mounting agent EcoMount resulted in higher yields than traditional xylene-based medium. Spray and ethanol fixation resulted in both a higher yield and better DNA quality than air drying. In liquid-based cytology (LBC) methods, CytoLyt solution resulted in a 5-fold higher yield than CytoRich Red. Papanicolaou staining provided twice the yield of hematoxylin and eosin staining in both liquid-based preparations. Genotyping outcome and quality control values from the clinical EGFR genotyping demonstrated a sufficient amount and amplifiability of DNA in both spray-fixed and air-dried cytological samples.

CONCLUSIONS

Reliable clinical genotyping can be performed using all tested methods. However, in the cell line experiments, spray- or ethanol-fixed, Papanicolaou-stained slides provided the best results in terms of yield and fragment length. In LBC, the DNA recovery efficiency of the preserving medium may differ considerably, which should be taken into consideration when introducing LBC. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2013;121:344-353. © 2013 American Cancer Society.

High concordance of EGFR mutation status between histologic and corresponding cytologic specimens of lung adenocarcinomas

BACKGROUND

Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) are associated significantly with responsiveness to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The objective of this study was to investigate the suitability of cytologic specimens for assessing EGFR mutations in lung adenocarcinomas.

METHODS

Sixty paired histologic and cytologic specimens of lung adenocarcinoma were collected. Exons 18 through 21 of the EGFR gene were amplified using polymerase chain reaction, and the mutation status of each sample was analyzed by pyrosequencing. A comparison of EGFR mutation status between histologic specimens and cytologic specimens was performed.

RESULTS

The overall EGFR mutation concordance rate between histologic specimens and corresponding cytologic specimens was 91.7%. No significant difference was observed in the concordance rate between cytologic specimens from primary lesions and specimens from metastatic lesions (P = .63). The following parameters were correlated with the most reliable EGFR mutation results using the pyrosequencing method (100% concordance with the corresponding histologic specimens) in cytologic samples: a DNA concentration >25 ng/μL, content of >30 tumor cells, or a tumor percentage >30%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, routinely prepared cytologic specimens were reliable sources for assessing EGFR mutation status. The authors concluded that cytologic specimens from metastatic lesions and primary tumors are suitable for the successful assessment of EGFR mutation status.

EGFR mutation testing in lung cancer: a review of available methods and their use for analysis of tumour tissue and cytology samples

Aims

Activating mutations in the gene encoding epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) can confer sensitivity to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as gefitinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Testing for mutations in EGFR is therefore an important step in the treatment-decision pathway. We reviewed reported methods for EGFR mutation testing in patients with lung cancer, initially focusing on studies involving standard tumour tissue samples. We also evaluated data on the use of cytology samples in order to determine their suitability for EGFR mutation analysis.

Methods

We searched the MEDLINE database for studies reporting on EGFR mutation testing methods in patients with lung cancer.

Results

Various methods have been investigated as potential alternatives to the historical standard for EGFR mutation testing, direct DNA sequencing. Many of these are targeted methods that specifically detect the most common EGFR mutations. The development of targeted mutation testing methods and commercially available test kits has enabled sensitive, rapid and robust analysis of clinical samples. The use of screening methods, subsequent to sample micro dissection, has also ensured that identification of more rare, uncommon mutations is now feasible. Cytology samples including fine needle aspirate and pleural effusion can be used successfully to determine EGFR mutation status provided that sensitive testing methods are employed.

Conclusions

Several different testing methods offer a more sensitive alternative to direct sequencing for the detection of common EGFR mutations. Evidence published to date suggests cytology samples are viable alternatives for mutation testing when tumour tissue samples are not available.

Molecular pathology of non-small cell lung cancer: a practical guide

The traditional distinction between small cell lung cancer and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is no longer sufficient for treatment planning. It is advised to handle small diagnostic specimens prudently because they are often the only specimen available for molecular analysis. Pathologists are experiencing pressure to subclassify lung carcinoma based on extremely small tumor samples, because NSCLC tumor subtyping is now essential to determine molecular testing strategies. Evaluation for EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangements are now considered to be the standard of care in advanced-stage pulmonary adenocarcinomas. Immunohistochemical stains can aid in subclassifying NSCLC, but performing these ancillary studies can significantly reduce the quantity of tissue available for molecular tests, requiring careful balancing of these 2 needs. The pathologist plays a pivotal role in facilitating clear and timely communication between the clinical oncology care team and the molecular laboratory to ensure that the appropriate tests are ordered and optimal material is submitted for testing.

Sanger sequencing in routine KRAS testing: a review of 1720 cases from a pathologist's perspective

Background

Sanger sequencing (SS) of PCR products is still the most frequent method to test colorectal cancer for KRAS mutations in routine practice.

Methods

An audit of SS on 1720 routine cases was carried out, taking into account age, gender, specimen type (resection vs biopsies), tumour site (primary vs metastasis), tumour stage, neoplastic cells abundance (>30% vs <30%) and fixation type (buffered formalin vs simple formalin). In a subset of 50 wild-type (WT) patients correlations between SS findings and response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were also evaluated.

Results

The tests were informative in 1691 cases (98.3%). Mutations were detected in 671 cases (39.6%). No significant differences in mutation rates were observed with respect to age (p=0.2), gender (p=0.2), specimen type (p=0.3) and formalin fixation (p=0.08). Conversely, KRAS mutant rate was higher in metastatic tissue (50% vs 39%, p=0.02), in samples with over 30% of neoplastic cells (43.4% vs 26.6%, p=0.02) and in tumours tested in stage IV (p=0.05). The RR of SS KRAS WT patients was 26% (one complete and 12 partial responses). The disease control rate (objective responses plus stable disease) was 56%. Median PFS was 4.4 months and median OS was 10.4 months.

Conclusions

Pathological criteria that make SS a more robust method for KRAS testing and treatment response prediction are neoplastic cell abundance, metastatic tissue sample and stage IV primary tumour.

Epidermal growth factor receptor and Kras gene expression: reliability of mutational analysis on cytological samples

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and Kras gene mutations are crucial for discriminating patients responsive to anti-EGFR drugs in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and colorectal cancer (CRC), respectively. The majority of NSCLCs come to clinical attention at an advanced stage when surgery is no longer recommended and a considerable number of them are diagnosed by cytology only. A large number of metastatic CRCs are also diagnosed by imaging and minimally invasive techniques such as fine-needle aspiration biopsy. Here, we report our experience in the mutation analysis of EGFR and Kras on cytological material obtained from superficial and deep lesions of NSCLC and CRC. Our series included 63 cytological specimens from primary or metastatic lesions of 42 NSCLCs and 21 CRCs. The cytological material was adequate for the mutation analysis in 39/42 (93%) NSCLCs and in 20/21(95%) CRCs. EGFR and Kras mutations were found in 9 (23%) and 9 (23%) NSCLC cases, respectively. Kras mutations were found in 9/20 (45%) CRC specimens. Histological samples from the primary tumors were available in 9/42 NSCLCs and in 17/21 CRCs. The agreement of EGFR and Kras mutational status in cytological vs. histological samples was 100% for NSCLC and 88% for CRC. Our results suggest that standard cytology provides adequate material for the assessment of EGFR and Kras mutational status in NSCLC and CRC patients and could be specifically indicated in patients not eligible for surgery but candidate to anti-EGFR therapy.