Clinical evaluation of panel testing by next-generation sequencing (NGS) for gene mutations in myeloid neoplasms

Diagnostic Pathology

Edmond S. K. Ma¹  Tsun Leung Chan¹  Dona N. Ho¹  Anna Wa¹  Chun Hang Au¹ 

[1] Division of Molecular Pathology, Department of Pathology, 1/F Li Shu Fan Block, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital 2 Village Road, Happy Valley, Hong Kong, China

关键词: Bioinformatics;    Cytogenetics;    FLT3 internal tandem duplication;    Gene mutations;    Acute myeloid leukemia;    Next-generation sequencing;   

Others  :  1235682
DOI  :  10.1186/s13000-016-0456-8

 received in 2015-12-18, accepted in 2016-01-14,  发布年份 2016

【 摘 要 】

Background

Genomic techniques in recent years have allowed the identification of many mutated genes important in the pathogenesis of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Together with cytogenetic aberrations, these gene mutations are powerful prognostic markers in AML and can be used to guide patient management, for example selection of optimal post-remission therapy. The mutated genes also hold promise as therapeutic targets themselves. We evaluated the applicability of a gene panel for the detection of AML mutations in a diagnostic molecular pathology laboratory.

Methods

Fifty patient samples comprising 46 AML and 4 other myeloid neoplasms were accrued for the study. They consisted of 19 males and 31 females at a median age of 60 years (range: 18–88 years). A total of 54 genes (full coding exons of 15 genes and exonic hotspots of 39 genes) were targeted by 568 amplicons that ranged from 225 to 275 bp. The combined coverage was 141 kb in sequence length. Amplicon libraries were prepared by TruSight myeloid sequencing panel (Illumina, CA) and paired-end sequencing runs were performed on a MiSeq (Illumina) genome sequencer. Sequences obtained were analyzed by in-house bioinformatics pipeline, namely BWA-MEM, Samtools, GATK, Pindel, Ensembl Variant Effect Predictor and a novel algorithm ITDseek.

Results

The mean count of sequencing reads obtained per sample was 3.81 million and the mean sequencing depth was over 3000X. Seventy-seven mutations in 24 genes were detected in 37 of 50 samples (74 %). On average, 2 mutations (range 1–5) were detected per positive sample. TP53 gene mutations were found in 3 out of 4 patients with complex and unfavorable cytogenetics. Comparing NGS results with that of conventional molecular testing showed a concordance rate of 95.5 %. After further resolution and application of a novel bioinformatics algorithm ITDseek to aid the detection of FLT3 internal tandem duplication (ITD), the concordance rate was revised to 98.2 %.

Conclusions

Gene panel testing by NGS approach was applicable for sensitive and accurate detection of actionable AML gene mutations in the clinical laboratory to individualize patient management. A novel algorithm ITDseek was presented that improved the detection of FLT3-ITD of varying length, position and at low allelic burden.

【 授权许可】

   
2016 Au et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Grimwade D, Hills RK, Moorman AV, Walker H, Chatters S, Goldstone AH et al.. Refinement of cytogenetic classification in acute myeloid leukemia: determination of prognostic significance of rare recurring chromosomal abnormalities among 5876 younger adult patients treated in the United Kingdom Medical Research Council trials. Blood. 2010; 116(3):354-65.
• [2]Renneville A, Roumier C, Biggio V, Nibourel O, Boissel N, Fenaux P et al.. Cooperating gene mutations in acute myeloid leukemia: a review of the literature. Leukemia. 2008; 22(5):915-31.
• [3]Dohner H, Estey EH, Amadori S, Appelbaum FR, Buchner T, Burnett AK et al.. Diagnosis and management of acute myeloid leukemia in adults: recommendations from an international expert panel, on behalf of the European LeukemiaNet. Blood. 2010; 115(3):453-74.
• [4]Taskesen E, Bullinger L, Corbacioglu A, Sanders MA, Erpelinck CA, Wouters BJ et al.. Prognostic impact, concurrent genetic mutations, and gene expression features of AML with CEBPA mutations in a cohort of 1182 cytogenetically normal AML patients: further evidence for CEBPA double mutant AML as a distinctive disease entity. Blood. 2011; 117(8):2469-75.
• [5]Wouters BJ, Lowenberg B, Erpelinck-Verschueren CA, van Putten WL, Valk PJ, Delwel R. Double CEBPA mutations, but not single CEBPA mutations, define a subgroup of acute myeloid leukemia with a distinctive gene expression profile that is uniquely associated with a favorable outcome. Blood. 2009; 113(13):3088-91.
• [6]Dufour A, Schneider F, Metzeler KH, Hoster E, Schneider S, Zellmeier E et al.. Acute myeloid leukemia with biallelic CEBPA gene mutations and normal karyotype represents a distinct genetic entity associated with a favorable clinical outcome. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28(4):570-7.
• [7]Green CL, Koo KK, Hills RK, Burnett AK, Linch DC, Gale RE. Prognostic significance of CEBPA mutations in a large cohort of younger adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia: impact of double CEBPA mutations and the interaction with FLT3 and NPM1 mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28(16):2739-47.
• [8]O’Donnell MR, Abboud CN, Altman J, Appelbaum FR, Arber DA, Attar E et al.. Acute myeloid leukemia. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012; 10(8):984-1021.
• [9]Mardis ER, Ding L, Dooling DJ, Larson DE, McLellan MD, Chen K et al.. Recurring mutations found by sequencing an acute myeloid leukemia genome. N Engl J Med. 2009; 361(11):1058-66.
• [10]Genomic and epigenomic landscapes of adult de novo acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2013; 368(22):2059-74.
• [11]Walter MJ, Shen D, Ding L, Shao J, Koboldt DC, Chen K et al.. Clonal architecture of secondary acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2012; 366(12):1090-8.
• [12]Patel JP, Levine RL. How do novel molecular genetic markers influence treatment decisions in acute myeloid leukemia? Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2012; 2012:28-34.
• [13]Chung SS. Genetic mutations in acute myeloid leukemia that influence clinical decisions. Curr Opin Hematol. 2014; 21(2):87-94.
• [14]Schlenk RF, Dohner K, Krauter J, Frohling S, Corbacioglu A, Bullinger L et al.. Mutations and treatment outcome in cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2008; 358(18):1909-18.
• [15]Patel JP, Gonen M, Figueroa ME, Fernandez H, Sun Z, Racevskis J et al.. Prognostic relevance of integrated genetic profiling in acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2012; 366(12):1079-89.
• [16]Metzeler KH, Walker A, Geyer S, Garzon R, Klisovic RB, Bloomfield CD et al.. DNMT3A mutations and response to the hypomethylating agent decitabine in acute myeloid leukemia. Leukemia. 2012; 26(5):1106-7.
• [17]Voso MT, Santini V, Fabiani E, Fianchi L, Criscuolo M, Falconi G et al.. Why methylation is not a marker predictive of response to hypomethylating agents. Haematologica. 2014; 99(4):613-9.
• [18]Cortes JE, Kantarjian H, Foran JM, Ghirdaladze D, Zodelava M, Borthakur G et al.. Phase I study of quizartinib administered daily to patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia irrespective of FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3-internal tandem duplication status. J Clin Oncol. 2013; 31(29):3681-7.
• [19]Wang F, Travins J, DeLaBarre B, Penard-Lacronique V, Schalm S, Hansen E et al.. Targeted inhibition of mutant IDH2 in leukemia cells induces cellular differentiation. Science. 2013; 340(6132):622-6.
• [20]Li H. Toward better understanding of artifacts in variant calling from high-coverage samples. Bioinformatics. 2014; 30(20):2843-51.
• [21]Li H, Handsaker B, Wysoker A, Fennell T, Ruan J, Homer N et al.. The sequence alignment/map format and samtools. Bioinformatics. 2009; 25(16):2078-9.
• [22]DePristo MA, Banks E, Poplin R, Garimella KV, Maguire JR, Hartl C et al.. A framework for variation discovery and genotyping using next-generation DNA sequencing data. Nat Genet. 2011; 43(5):491-8.
• [23]Koboldt DC, Zhang Q, Larson DE, Shen D, McLellan MD, Lin L et al.. VarScan 2: somatic mutation and copy number alteration discovery in cancer by exome sequencing. Genome Res. 2012; 22(3):568-76.
• [24]Ye K, Schulz MH, Long Q, Apweiler R, Ning Z. Pindel: a pattern growth approach to detect break points of large deletions and medium sized insertions from paired-end short reads. Bioinformatics. 2009; 25(21):2865-71.
• [25]McLaren W, Pritchard B, Rios D, Chen Y, Flicek P, Cunningham F. Deriving the consequences of genomic variants with the Ensembl API and SNP Effect Predictor. Bioinformatics. 2010; 26(16):2069-70.
• [26]Robinson JT, Thorvaldsdottir H, Winckler W, Guttman M, Lander ES, Getz G et al.. Integrative genomics viewer. Nat Biotechnol. 2011; 29(1):24-6.
• [27]Quinlan AR, Hall IM. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics. 2010; 26(6):841-2.
• [28]Stajich JE, Block D, Boulez K, Brenner SE, Chervitz SA, Dagdigian C et al.. The Bioperl toolkit: Perl modules for the life sciences. Genome Res. 2002; 12(10):1611-8.
• [29]Spencer DH, Abel HJ, Lockwood CM, Payton JE, Szankasi P, Kelley TW et al.. Detection of FLT3 internal tandem duplication in targeted, short-read-length, next-generation sequencing data. J Mol Diagn. 2013; 15(1):81-93.
• [30]Ohgami RS, Arber DA. The diagnostic and clinical impact of genetics and epigenetics in acute myeloid leukemia. Int J Lab Hematol. 2015; 37 Suppl 1:122-32.
• [31]Roboz GJ. Epigenetic targeting and personalized approaches for AML. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2014; 2014(1):44-51.
• [32]Carbuccia N, Trouplin V, Gelsi-Boyer V, Murati A, Rocquain J, Adelaide J et al.. Mutual exclusion of ASXL1 and NPM1 mutations in a series of acute myeloid leukemias. Leukemia. 2010; 24(2):469-73.
• [33]Haferlach C, Dicker F, Herholz H, Schnittger S, Kern W, Haferlach T. Mutations of the TP53 gene in acute myeloid leukemia are strongly associated with a complex aberrant karyotype. Leukemia. 2008; 22(8):1539-41.
• [34]Rucker FG, Schlenk RF, Bullinger L, Kayser S, Teleanu V, Kett H et al.. TP53 alterations in acute myeloid leukemia with complex karyotype correlate with specific copy number alterations, monosomal karyotype, and dismal outcome. Blood. 2012; 119(9):2114-21.
• [35]Kihara R, Nagata Y, Kiyoi H, Kato T, Yamamoto E, Suzuki K et al.. Comprehensive analysis of genetic alterations and their prognostic impacts in adult acute myeloid leukemia patients. Leukemia. 2014; 28(8):1586-95.
• [36]Ohgami RS, Ma L, Merker JD, Gotlib JR, Schrijver I, Zehnder JL et al.. Next-generation sequencing of acute myeloid leukemia identifies the significance of TP53, U2AF1, ASXL1, and TET2 mutations. Mod Pathol. 2015; 28(5):706-14.
• [37]Wong TN, Ramsingh G, Young AL, Miller CA, Touma W, Welch JS et al.. Role of TP53 mutations in the origin and evolution of therapy-related acute myeloid leukaemia. Nature. 2015; 518(7540):552-5.
• [38]Leung AY, Man CH, Kwong YL. FLT3 inhibition: a moving and evolving target in acute myeloid leukaemia. Leukemia. 2013; 27(2):260-8.
• [39]Levis M. FLT3 mutations in acute myeloid leukemia: what is the best approach in 2013? Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2013; 2013:220-6.
• [40]Bolli N, Manes N, McKerrell T, Chi J, Park N, Gundem G et al.. Characterization of gene mutations and copy number changes in acute myeloid leukemia using a rapid target enrichment protocol. Haematologica. 2015; 100(2):214-22.
• [41]Abo RP, Ducar M, Garcia EP, Thorner AR, Rojas-Rudilla V, Lin L et al.. BreaKmer: detection of structural variation in targeted massively parallel sequencing data using kmers. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015; 43(3): Article ID e19
• [42]Chiba K, Shiraishi Y, Nagata Y, Yoshida K, Imoto S, Ogawa S et al.. Genomon ITDetector: a tool for somatic internal tandem duplication detection from cancer genome sequencing data. Bioinformatics. 2015; 31(1):116-8.
• [43]Kadri S, Zhen CJ, Wurst MN, Long BC, Jiang ZF, Wang YL et al.. Amplicon indel hunter is a novel bioinformatics tool to detect large somatic insertion/deletion mutations in amplicon-based next-generation sequencing data. J Mol Diagn. 2015; 17(6):635-43.
• [44]Bene MC, Grimwade D, Haferlach C, Haferlach T, Zini G. Leukemia diagnosis: today and tomorrow. Eur J Haematol. 2015; 95(4):365-73.
• [45]Wang ML, Bailey NG. Acute myeloid leukemia genetics: risk stratification and implications for therapy. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2015; 139(10):1215-23.