RESUMO
BACKGROUND/AIM: To compare the GeneXpert® O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) methylation prototype (GX MGMT) assay with pyrosequencing in glioblastomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The MGMT methylation status was retrospectively assessed in formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) tumor blocks from 262 glioblastoma patients obtained from three independent cohorts using either a standard of care pyrosequencing laboratory developed test or the GX MGMT assay. RESULTS: The concordance rate was 92.1% (58/63) for Oregon Health and Science University (OSHU) samples, 91.7% (88/96) for Medical University of Vienna (MUV) samples, and 82.5% (85/103) for Kepler University Hospital (KUH) samples. Patients with MGMT promoter hypermethylation assessed by pyrosequencing or the GX MGMT test had a significantly longer overall survival compared to patients without hypermethylation (HR=0.43, 95%CI=0.26-0.72, p=0.001 and HR=0.51, 95%CI=0.31-0.84, p=0.008, respectively). CONCLUSION: Standardized, simplified, and on-demand testing of MGMT promoter methylation by the GX MGMT assay is feasible.
Assuntos
Bioensaio/métodos , Neoplasias Encefálicas/genética , Metilação de DNA/genética , Metilases de Modificação do DNA/genética , Enzimas Reparadoras do DNA/genética , Glioblastoma/genética , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase/métodos , Regiões Promotoras Genéticas , Proteínas Supressoras de Tumor/genética , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Adulto JovemRESUMO
PURPOSE: An unmet need in low-resource countries is an automated breast cancer detection assay to prioritize women who should undergo core breast biopsy and pathologic review. Therefore, we sought to identify and validate a panel of methylated DNA markers to discriminate between cancer and benign breast lesions using cells obtained by fine-needle aspiration (FNA).Experimental Design: Two case-control studies were conducted comparing cancer and benign breast tissue identified from clinical repositories in the United States, China, and South Africa for marker selection/training (N = 226) and testing (N = 246). Twenty-five methylated markers were assayed by Quantitative Multiplex-Methylation-Specific PCR (QM-MSP) to select and test a cancer-specific panel. Next, a pilot study was conducted on archival FNAs (49 benign, 24 invasive) from women with mammographically suspicious lesions using a newly developed, 5-hour, quantitative, automated cartridge system. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) compared with histopathology for the marker panel. RESULTS: In the discovery cohort, 10 of 25 markers were selected that were highly methylated in breast cancer compared with benign tissues by QM-MSP. In the independent test cohort, this panel yielded an AUC of 0.937 (95% CI = 0.900-0.970). In the FNA pilot, we achieved an AUC of 0.960 (95% CI = 0.883-1.0) using the automated cartridge system. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and piloted a fast and accurate methylation marker-based automated cartridge system to detect breast cancer in FNA samples. This quick ancillary test has the potential to prioritize cancer over benign tissues for expedited pathologic evaluation in poorly resourced countries.
