Whole blood FPR1 mRNA expression predicts both non-small cell and small cell lung cancer.

While long-term survival rates for early-stage lung cancer are high, most cases are diagnosed in later stages that can negatively impact survival rates. We aim to design a simple, single biomarker blood test for early-stage lung cancer that is robust to preclinical variables and can be readily implemented in the clinic. Whole blood was collected in PAXgene tubes from a training set of 29 patients, and a validation set of 260 patients, of which samples from 58 patients were prospectively collected in a clinical trial specifically for our study. After RNA was extracted, the expressions of FPR1 and a reference gene were quantified by an automated one-step Taqman RT-PCR assay. Elevated levels of FPR1 mRNA in whole blood predicted lung cancer status with a sensitivity of 55% and a specificity of 87% on all validation specimens. The prospectively collected specimens had a significantly higher 68% sensitivity and 89% specificity. Results from patients with benign nodules were similar to healthy volunteers. No meaningful correlation was present between our test results and any clinical characteristic other than lung cancer diagnosis. FPR1 mRNA levels in whole blood can predict the presence of lung cancer. Using this as a reflex test for positive lung cancer screening computed tomography scans has the potential to increase the positive predictive value. This marker can be easily measured in an automated process utilizing off-the-shelf equipment and reagents. Further work is justified to explain the source of this biomarker.

Correction: Performance of next-generation sequencing on small tumor specimens and/or low tumor content samples using a commercially available platform.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196556.].

Performance of next-generation sequencing on small tumor specimens and/or low tumor content samples using a commercially available platform.

BACKGROUND: Next generation sequencing tests (NGS) are usually performed on relatively small core biopsy or fine needle aspiration (FNA) samples. Data is limited on what amount of tumor by volume or minimum number of FNA passes are needed to yield sufficient material for running NGS. We sought to identify the amount of tumor for running the PCDx NGS platform. METHODS: 2,723 consecutive tumor tissues of all cancer types were queried and reviewed for inclusion. Information on tumor volume, success of performing NGS, and results of NGS were compiled. Assessment of sequence analysis, mutation calling and sensitivity, quality control, drug associations, and data aggregation and analysis were performed. RESULTS: 6.4% of samples were rejected from all testing due to insufficient tumor quantity. The number of genes with insufficient sensitivity make definitive mutation calls increased as the percentage of tumor decreased, reaching statistical significance below 5% tumor content. The number of drug associations also decreased with a lower percentage of tumor, but this difference only became significant between 1-3%. The number of drug associations did decrease with smaller tissue size as expected. Neither specimen size or percentage of tumor affected the ability to pass mRNA quality control. A tumor area of 10 mm2 provides a good margin of error for specimens to yield adequate drug association results. CONCLUSIONS: Specimen suitability remains a major obstacle to clinical NGS testing. We determined that PCR-based library creation methods allow the use of smaller specimens, and those with a lower percentage of tumor cells to be run on the PCDx NGS platform.

Evaluation and comparison of two commercially available targeted next-generation sequencing platforms to assist oncology decision making.

BACKGROUND: It is widely acknowledged that there is value in examining cancers for genomic aberrations via next-generation sequencing (NGS). How commercially available NGS platforms compare with each other, and the clinical utility of the reported actionable results, are not well known. During the course of the current study, the Foundation One (F1) test generated data on a combination of somatic mutations, insertion and deletion polymorphisms, chromosomal abnormalities, and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) copy number changes at ~250× coverage, while the Paradigm Cancer Diagnostic (PCDx) test generated the same type of data at >5,000× coverage, plus provided messenger RNA (mRNA) expression levels. We sought to compare and evaluate paired formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue using these two platforms. METHODS: Samples from patients with advanced solid tumors were submitted to both the F1 and PCDx vendors for NGS analysis. Turnaround time (TAT) was calculated. Biomarkers were considered clinically actionable if they had a published association with treatment response in humans and were assigned to the following categories: commercially available drug (CA), clinical trial drug (CT), or neither option (hereafter referred to as "None"). RESULTS: The demographics of the 21 unique patient tumor samples included ten men and eleven women, with a median age of 56 years. Due to insufficient archival tissue from the same collection period, in one case, we used samples from different collections. PCDx reported first results faster than F1 in 20 cases. When received at both vendors on the same day, PCDx reported first results for 14 of 15 cases, with a median TAT of 9 days earlier than F1 (P<0.0001). Categorization of CA compared to CT and none significantly favored PCDx (P=0.012). CONCLUSION: In the current analysis, commercially available NGS platforms provided clinically relevant actionable targets (CA or CT) in 47%-67% of diverse cancer types. In the samples analyzed, PCDx significantly outperformed F1 in TAT, and had statistically significant higher clinically relevant actionable targets categorized as CA.