Anbinselvam A, Akinshipo AWO, Adisa AO, Effiom OA, Zhu X, Adebiyi KE, Arotiba GT, Akintoye SO. Comparison of diagnostic methods for detection of BRAFV600E mutation in ameloblastoma.
J Oral Pathol Med 2024;
53:79-87. [PMID:
38185471 PMCID:
PMC10872315 DOI:
10.1111/jop.13506]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2023] [Revised: 12/06/2023] [Accepted: 12/14/2023] [Indexed: 01/09/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Ameloblastoma is an aggressively growing, highly recurrent odontogenic jaw tumor. Its association with BRAFV600E mutation is an indication for BRAFV00E-inhibitor therapy The study objective was to identify a sensitive low-cost test for BRAFV600E-positive ameloblastoma. We hypothesized that immunohistochemical staining of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues for BRAFV600E mutation is a low-cost surrogate for BRAFV600E gene sequencing when laboratory resources are inadequate for molecular testing.
METHODS
Tissues from 40 ameloblastoma samples were retrieved from either formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded blocks, RNAlater™ stabilization solution or samples inadvertently pre-fixed in formalin before transfer to RNAlater™. BRAFV600E mutation was assessed by Direct Sanger sequencing, Amplification Refractory Mutation System-PCR and immunohistochemistry (IHC).
RESULTS
BRAFV600E mutation was detected by IHC, Amplification Refractory Mutation System-PCR and Direct Sanger sequencing in 93.33%, 52.5% and 30% of samples respectively. Considering Direct Sanger sequencing as standard BRAFV600E detection method, there was significant difference between the three detection methods (𝜒2 (2) = 31.34, p < 0.0001). Sensitivity and specificity of IHC were 0.8 (95% CI: 0.64-0.90) and 0.9 (95% CI: 0.75-0.99) respectively, while positive predictive value and negative predictive value (NPV) were 0.9 and 0.8 (Fischer's test, p < 0.0001) respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of Amplification Refractory Mutation System-PCR detection method were 0.7 (95% CI: 0.53-0.80) and 0.9 (95% CI = 0.67-0.98) respectively, while PPV and NPV were 0.9 and 0.6 respectively (Fischer's test, p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION
Low-cost and less vulnerability of IHC to tissue quality make it a viable surrogate test for BRAFV600E detection in ameloblastoma. Sequential dual IHC and molecular testing for BRAFV600E will reduce equivocal results that could exclude some patients from BRAFV600E-inhibitor therapies.
Collapse