Implementation of circulating tumour DNA multi-target mutation testing in plasma: a perspective from an external quality assessment providers' survey.

Demand for large-scale tumour profiling across cancer types has increased in recent years, driven by the emergence of targeted drug therapies. Analysing alternations in plasma circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) for cancer detection can improve survival; ctDNA testing is recommended when tumour tissue is unavailable. An online survey of molecular pathology testing was circulated by six external quality assessment members of IQN Path to registered laboratories and all IQN Path collaborative corporate members. Data from 275 laboratories across 45 countries were collected; 245 (89%) perform molecular pathology testing, including 177 (64%) which perform plasma ctDNA diagnostic service testing. The most common tests were next-generation sequencing-based (n = 113). Genes with known stratified treatment options, including KRAS (n = 97), NRAS (n = 84), and EGFR (n = 130), were common targets. The uptake of ctDNA plasma testing and plans to implement further testing demonstrates the importance of support from a well-designed EQA scheme.

External quality assessment (EQA) for tumor mutational burden: results of an international IQN path feasibility pilot scheme.

Tumor mutational burden (TMB) has recently been approved as an agnostic biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, methods for TMB testing have not yet been standardized. The International Quality Network for Pathology (IQNPath) organized a pilot external quality assessment (EQA) scheme for TMB testing. The aim of this program was the validation of the materials and the procedures for the EQA of this complex biomarker. Five formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) cell lines were selected to mimic the various TMB values observed in clinical practice. The FFPE samples were tested with the FoundationOne CDx (F1CDx) assay as the reference test and three commercially available targeted sequencing panels. Following this internal validation, the five cell lines were sent to 29 laboratories selected on the basis of a previous survey. Nineteen of the 23 laboratories that submitted results (82.6%) used targeted sequencing for TMB estimation. Only two laboratories performed whole exome sequencing (WES) and two assessed TMB by clinical exome. A high variability in the reported TMB values was observed. The variability was higher for samples with the highest TMB value according to the F1CDx test. However, good reproducibility of the TMB score was shown by laboratories using the same panel. The majority of laboratories did not indicate a TMB cut-off value for clinical interpretation. In conclusion, this pilot EQA scheme suggests that it is feasible to run such an EQA program for TMB assessment. However, the results of our pilot highlight the numerous challenges for the standardization of this test.

Results of a worldwide external quality assessment of cfDNA testing in lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Circulating cell free DNA (cfDNA) testing of plasma for EGFR somatic variants in lung cancer patients is being widely implemented and with any new service, external quality assessment (EQA) is required to ensure patient safety. An international consortium, International Quality Network for Pathology (IQNPath), has delivered a second round of assessment to measure the accuracy of cfDNA testing for lung cancer and the interpretation of the results. METHODS: A collaboration of five EQA provider organisations, all members of IQNPath, have delivered the assessment during 2018-19 to a total of 264 laboratories from 45 countries. Bespoke plasma reference material containing a range of EGFR mutations at varying allelic frequencies were supplied to laboratories for testing and reporting according to routine procedures. The genotyping accuracy and clinical reporting was reviewed against standardised criteria and feedback was provided to participants. RESULTS: The overall genotyping error rate in the EQA was found to be 11.1%. Low allelic frequency samples were the most challenging and were not detected by some testing methods, resulting in critical genotyping errors. This was reflected in higher false negative rates for samples with variant allele frequencies (VAF) rates less than 1.5% compared to higher frequencies. A sample with two different EGFR mutations gave inconsistent detection of both mutations. However, for one sample, where two variants were present at a VAF of less than 1% then both mutations were correctly detected in 145/263 laboratories. Reports often did not address the risk that tumour DNA may have not been tested and limitations of the methodologies provided by participants were insufficient. This was reflected in the average interpretation score for the EQA being 1.49 out of a maximum of 2. CONCLUSIONS: The variability in the standard of genotyping and reporting highlighted the need for EQA and educational guidance in this field to ensure the delivery of high-quality clinical services where testing of cfDNA is the only option for clinical management.

Expert opinion on NSCLC small specimen biomarker testing - Part 1: Tissue collection and management.

Biomarker testing is crucial for treatment selection in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the quantity of available tissue often presents a key constraint for patients with advanced disease, where minimally invasive tissue biopsy typically returns small samples. In Part 1 of this two-part series, we summarise evidence-based recommendations relating to small sample processing for patients with NSCLC. Generally, tissue biopsy techniques that deliver the greatest quantity and quality of tissue with the least risk to the patient should be selected. Rapid on-site evaluation can help to ensure sufficient sample quality and quantity. Sample processing should be managed according to biomarker testing requirements, because tissue fixation methodology influences downstream nucleic acid, protein and morphological analyses. Accordingly, 10% neutral buffered formalin is recommended as an appropriate fixative, and the duration of fixation is recommended not to exceed 24-48 h. Tissue sparing techniques, including the 'one biopsy per block' approach and small sample cutting protocols, can help preserve tissue. Cytological material (formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded [FFPE] cytology blocks and non-FFPE samples such as smears and touch preparations) can be an excellent source of nucleic acid, providing either primary or supplementary patient material to complete morphological and molecular diagnoses. Considerations on biomarker testing, reporting and quality assessment are discussed in Part 2.

Expert opinion on NSCLC small specimen biomarker testing - Part 2: Analysis, reporting, and quality assessment.

The diagnostic work-up for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) requires biomarker testing to guide therapy choices. This article is the second of a two-part series. In Part 1, we summarised evidence-based recommendations for obtaining and processing small specimen samples (i.e. pre-analytical steps) from patients with advanced NSCLC. Here, in Part 2, we summarise evidence-based recommendations relating to analytical steps of biomarker testing (and associated reporting and quality assessment) of small specimen samples in NSCLC. As the number of biomarkers for actionable (genetic) targets and approved targeted therapies continues to increase, simultaneous testing of multiple actionable oncogenic drivers using next-generation sequencing (NGS) becomes imperative, as set forth in European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines. This is particularly relevant in advanced NSCLC, where tissue specimens are typically limited and NGS may help avoid tissue exhaustion compared with sequential biomarker testing. Despite guideline recommendations, significant discrepancies in access to NGS persist across Europe, primarily due to reimbursement constraints. The use of increasingly complex testing methods also has implications for the reporting of results. Molecular testing reports should include clinical interpretation with additional commentary on sample adequacy as appropriate. Molecular tumour boards are recommended to facilitate the interpretation of complex genetic information arising from NGS, and to collaboratively determine the optimal treatment for patients with NSCLC. Finally, whichever testing modality is employed, it is essential that adequate internal and external validation and quality control measures are implemented.

The value proposition of integrative diagnostics for (early) detection of cancer. On behalf of the EFLM interdisciplinary Task and Finish Group "CNAPS/CTC for early detection of cancer".

Disruptive imaging and laboratory technologies can improve clinical decision processes and outcomes in oncology. However, certain obstacles must be overcome before these technologies can be fully implemented as part of the standard for care. An integrative diagnostic approach represents a unique opportunity to unleash the full diagnostic potential and paves the way towards personalized cancer diagnostics. To meet this demand, an interdisciplinary Task Force of the EFLM was initiated as a consequence of an EFLM/ESR during the CELME 2019 meeting in order to evaluate the clinical value of CNAPS/CTC (circulating nucleic acids in plasma and serum/circulating tumor cells) in early detection of cancer. Here, an overview of current disruptive techniques, their clinical implications and potential value of an integrative diagnostic approach is provided. Furthermore, requirements such as the establishment of diagnostic tumor boards, development of adequate software solutions and a change of mindset towards a new generation of diagnosticians providing actionable health information are presented. This development has the potential to elevate the position and clinical recognition of diagnosticians.

Tumor mutation burden testing: a survey of the International Quality Network for Pathology (IQN Path).

While tumour mutation burden (TMB) is emerging as a possible biomarker for immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), methods for testing have not been standardised as yet. In April 2019, the International Quality Network for Pathology (IQN Path) launched a survey to assess the current practice of TMB testing. Of the 127 laboratories that replied, 69 (54.3%) had already introduced TMB analysis for research purposes and/or clinical applications. Fifty laboratories (72.5%) used targeted sequencing, although a number of different panels were employed. Most laboratories tested formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded material (94.2%), while 18/69 (26%) tested also cell-free DNA. Fifty-five laboratories used both single nucleotide variants and indels for TMB calculation; 20 centers included only non-synonymous variants. In conclusion, the data from this survey indicate that multiple global laboratories were capable of rapidly introducing routine clinical TMB testing. However, the variability of testing methods raises concerns about the reproducibility of results among centers.

External Quality Assessment Schemes for Biomarker Testing in Oncology: Comparison of Performance between Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded-Tissue and Cell-Free Tumor DNA in Plasma.

Liquid biopsies have emerged as a useful addition to tissue biopsies in molecular pathology. Literature has shown lower laboratory performances when a new method of variant analysis is introduced. This study evaluated the differences in variant analysis between tissue and plasma samples after the introduction of liquid biopsy in molecular analysis. Data from a pilot external quality assessment scheme for the detection of molecular variants in plasma samples and from external quality assessment schemes for the detection of molecular variants in tissue samples were collected. Laboratory performance and error rates by sample were compared between matrices for variants present in both scheme types. Results showed lower overall performance [65.6% (n = 276) versus 89.2% (n = 1607)] and higher error rates [21.0% to 43.5% (n = 138) versus 8.7% to 16.7% (n = 234 to 689)] for the detection of variants in plasma compared to tissue, respectively. In the plasma samples, performance was decreased for variants with an allele frequency of 1% compared to 5% [56.5% (n = 138) versus 74.6% (n = 138)]. The implementation of liquid biopsy in the detection of circulating tumor DNA in plasma was associated with poor laboratory performance. It is important both to apply optimal detection methods and to extensively validate new methods for testing circulating tumor DNA before treatment decisions are made.

Evaluation of current genetic testing reports in German-speaking countries with regard to secondary use and future electronic implementation.

Modern diagnostic methods (next-generation sequencing) are one of the current hopes with regard to a personalised medicine. By applying detailed genetic analysis, it is possible to not only improve the prediction of potential risks (as, e.g., concerning hereditary breast cancer) but also the precision of therapy by targeting it to a specific genetic variant. However, there is no international standard for creating, structuring and/or transferring the results of a genetic test report. This type of test report often contains large amounts of complex information, and a standardised and consistent structure would offer potential benefits to all. These include reduced expenditure of time (due to the elimination of information-conversion steps), improved safety (due to a reduction in the occurrence of transmission errors, misunderstanding or misinterpretation of content) and improved clinical information gathering (by the respective linkage to scientific data and literature). Especially in regard to secondary use, a standardised (electronic) format would improve the suitability of these data in retrospective studies and basic research. In this study, we analysed the format and content of 96 genetic testing reports (germline and somatic) from Germany, Switzerland and Austria. Based on these results, we summarised and discussed potentially critical data that were demonstrated to be reported inconsistently, and propose a baseline structure for reporting that would also ease future electronic conversion.

One byte at a time: evidencing the quality of clinical service next-generation sequencing for germline and somatic variants.

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is replacing other molecular techniques to become the de facto gene diagnostics approach, transforming the speed of diagnosis for patients and expanding opportunities for precision medicine. Consequently, for accredited laboratories as well as those seeking accreditation, both objective measures of quality and external review of laboratory processes are required. External quality assessment (EQA), or Proficiency Testing (PT), can assess a laboratory's service through an independent external agency, the EQA provider. The analysis of a growing number of genes and whole exome and genomes is now routine; therefore, an EQA must be delivered to enable all testing laboratories to participate. In this paper, we describe the development of a unique platform and gene target independent EQA scheme for NGS, designed to scale from current to future requirements of clinical diagnostic laboratories testing for germline and somatic variants. The EQA results from three annual rounds indicate that clinical diagnostic laboratories are providing an increasingly high-quality NGS service and variant calling abilities are improving. From an EQA provider perspective, challenges remain regarding delivery and performance criteria, as well as in analysing similar NGS approaches between cohorts with meaningful metrics, sample sourcing and data formats.

Current practices for the genetic diagnosis of autoinflammatory diseases: results of a European Molecular Genetics Quality Network Survey.

Monogenic autoinflammatory disorders (AIDs) are rare diseases caused by variants in genes regulating the innate immune system. The identification of the first four genes responsible for the prototype group of hereditary recurrent fevers prompted the development of genetic diagnosis, followed by external quality assessment and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants in these diseases. Recent changes in the diagnosis of genetic diseases, namely the implementation of next-generation sequencing (NGS), lead to discovery of the new genes associated with at least 40 novel AIDs, which revolutionized patient care and prognosis. However, these rapid advances resulted in nonstandardized molecular strategies that can influence genetic diagnosis and reporting of results. In order to assess factors, which may have an impact on performance and quality of results in the NGS era, we carried out an online survey among member laboratories of the European Molecular Genetics Quality Network, which highlighted different strategies being used and identified pitfalls that deserve discussion and improvement.

IQN path ASBL report from the first European cfDNA consensus meeting: expert opinion on the minimal requirements for clinical ctDNA testing.

Liquid biopsy testing is a new laboratory-based method that detects tumour mutations in circulating free DNA (cfDNA) derived from minimally invasive blood sampling techniques. Recognising the significance for clinical testing, in 2017, IQN Path provided external quality assessment for liquid biopsy testing. Representatives of those participating laboratories were invited to attend a workshop to discuss the findings and how to achieve quality implementation of cfDNA testing in the clinical setting, the discussion and outcomes of this consensus meeting are described below. Predictive molecular profiling using tumour tissue in order to select cancer patients eligible for targeted therapy is now routine in diagnostic pathology. If insufficient tumour tissue material is available, in some circumstances, recent European Medicines Agency (EMA) guidance recommends mutation testing with plasma cfDNA. Clinical applications of cfDNA include treatment selection based on clinically relevant mutations derived from pre-treatment samples and the detection of resistant mutations upon progression of the disease. In order to identify tumour-related mutations in amongst other nucleic acid material found in plasma samples, highly sensitive laboratory methods are needed. In the workshop, we discussed the variable approaches taken with regard to cfDNA extraction methods, the tests, and considered the impact of false-negative test results. We explored the lack of standardisation of complex testing procedures ranging from plasma collection, transport, processing and storage, cfDNA extraction, and mutation analysis, to interpretation and reporting of results. We will also address the current status of clinical validation and clinical utility, and its use in current diagnosis. This workshop revealed a need for guidelines on with standardised procedures for clinical cfDNA testing and reporting, and a requirement for cfDNA-based external quality assessment programs.

Ensuring high standards for the delivery of NIPT world-wide: Development of an international external quality assessment scheme.

OBJECTIVE: To ensure accurate and appropriate reporting of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) results, the standard of testing should be measured and monitored by participation in external quality assessment (EQA) schemes. The findings from international pilot EQAs for NIPT for the common trisomies are presented. METHODS: In the first pilot, three EQA providers used artificially manufactured reference materials to deliver an EQA for NIPT. The second pilot used clinically collected maternal plasma samples. The testing and reporting for aneuploidy status was performed by participating laboratories using routine procedures. Reports were assessed against peer ratified criteria and EQA scores were returned to participants. RESULTS: Forty laboratories participated in the first. Genotyping accuracy was high; four laboratories reported a critical genotyping error (10%) and two reported partial results. Eighty seven laboratories participated in the second pilot using maternal plasma, two reporting a critical genotyping error (2.3%). For both rounds, report content was variable with key information frequently omitted or difficult to identify within the report. CONCLUSIONS: We have successfully delivered an international pilot EQA for NIPT. When compared with currently available manufactured materials, EQA for NIPT was best performed using clinically collected maternal plasma. Work is required to define and improve the standard of reporting.

International pilot external quality assessment scheme for analysis and reporting of circulating tumour DNA.

BACKGROUND: Molecular analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is becoming increasingly important in clinical treatment decisions. A pilot External Quality Assessment (EQA) scheme for ctDNA analysis was organized by four European EQA providers under the umbrella organization IQN Path, in order to investigate the feasibility of delivering an EQA to assess the detection of clinically relevant variants in plasma circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and to analyze reporting formats. METHODS: Thirty-two experienced laboratories received 5 samples for EGFR mutation analysis and/or 5 samples for KRAS and NRAS mutation analysis. Samples were artificially manufactured to contain 3 mL of human plasma with 20 ng/mL of fragmented ctDNA and variants at allelic frequencies of 1 and 5%. RESULTS: The scheme error rate was 20.1%. Higher error rates were observed for RAS testing when compared to EGFR analysis, for allelic frequencies of 1% compared to 5%, and for cases including 2 different variants. The reports over-interpreted wild-type results and frequently failed to comment on the amount of cfDNA extracted. CONCLUSIONS: The pilot scheme demonstrated the feasibility of delivering a ctDNA EQA scheme and the need for such a scheme due to high error rates in detecting low frequency clinically relevant variants. Recommendations to improve reporting of cfDNA are provided.

Recommended practice for laboratory reporting of non-invasive prenatal testing of trisomies 13, 18 and 21: a consensus opinion.

OBJECTIVE: Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for trisomies 13, 18 and 21 is used worldwide. Laboratory reports should provide clear, concise results with test limitations indicated, yet no national or local guidelines are currently available. Here, we aim to present minimum best practice guidelines. METHODS: All laboratories registered in the three European quality assurance schemes for molecular and cytogenetics were invited to complete an online survey focused on services provided for NIPT and non-invasive prenatal diagnosis. Laboratories delivering NIPT for aneuploidy were asked to submit two example reports; one high and one low risk result. Reports were reviewed for content and discussed at a meeting of laboratory providers and clinicians held at the ISPD 2016 conference in Berlin. RESULTS: Of the 122 laboratories that responded, 50 issued reports for NIPT and 43 of these submitted sample reports. Responses and reports were discussed by 72 attendees at the meeting. Consensus opinion was determined in several areas and used to develop best practice guidelines for reporting of NIPT results. CONCLUSIONS: Across Europe, there is considerable variation in reporting NIPT results. Here, we describe minimum best practice guidelines, which will be distributed to European laboratories, and reports audited in subsequent external quality assurance cycles. © 2017 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Conversion, correction, and International Scale standardization: results From a Multicenter External Quality Assessment Study for BCR-ABL1 testing.

CONTEXT: Monitoring BCR-ABL1 expression levels relative to clinically validated response criteria on the International Scale (IS) is vital in the optimal management of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia, yet significant variability remains across laboratories worldwide. OBJECTIVE: To assess method performance, interlaboratory precision, and different IS standardization modalities in representative laboratories performing routine BCR-ABL1 testing. DESIGN: Fifteen blinded test specimens with 5-level nominal BCR-ABL1 to ABL1 IS percentage ratios ranging from 5% to 0.0005% and 4-level secondary IS reference panels, the ARQ IS Calibrator Panels, were tested by relative quantitative polymerase chain reaction in 15 laboratories in 5 countries. Both raw and IS percentage ratios calculated by using local conversion factors (CFs) or analytic correction parameters (CPs) were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 670 valid positive results were generated. BCR-ABL1 detection was associated with variable ABL1 quality metric passing rates (P < .001) and reached at least 0.01% in 13 laboratories. Intralaboratory precision was within 2.5-fold for all sample levels combined with a relative mean difference greater than 5-fold across laboratories. International Scale accuracy was increased by using both the CF and CP standardization methods. Classification agreement for major molecular response status was 90% after CF conversion and 93% after CP correction, with precision improved by 3-fold for the CP method. CONCLUSIONS: Despite preanalytic and analytic differences between laboratories, conversion and correction are effective IS standardization methods. Validated secondary reference materials can facilitate global diffusion of the IS without the need to perform sample exchange and improve the accuracy and precision of BCR-ABL1 quantitative measurements, including at low levels of residual disease.

Monitoring standards for molecular genetic testing in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Ireland.

Molecular genetic techniques have entered many areas of clinical practice. Public expectations from this technology are understandably high. To maintain confidence in this technology, laboratories must implement the highest standards of quality assurance (QA). External quality assessment (EQA) is recognized as an essential component of QA. The United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Service (UKNEQAS) for Molecular Genetics, first set up in 1991, is currently the longest provider of EQA to molecular genetic testing laboratories in the UK, The Netherlands, and Ireland. Errors in the scheme are sporadic events. However, evidence from this and other EQA schemes suggests that a residual error rate persists, which should be taken into account in clinical practice. This EQA scheme has evolved from the respective scientific bodies of the constituent countries and retains a strong emphasis on collective peer review. It is essential that the steps taken to ensure quality in this rapidly expanding field are clear and transparent to participants and public alike. We describe the procedures developed and the governance imposed to monitor and improve analytical and reporting standards in participant laboratories and we compare our experiences with those of equivalent EQA services in the United States.

Benchmark for evaluating the quality of DNA sequencing: proposal from an international external quality assessment scheme.

BACKGROUND: In the past 15 years, clinical laboratory science has been transformed by the use of technologies that cross the traditional boundaries between laboratory disciplines. However, during this period, issues of quality have not always been given adequate attention. The European Molecular Genetics Quality Network (EMQN) has developed a novel external quality assessment scheme for evaluation of DNA sequencing. We report the results of an international survey of the quality of DNA sequencing among 64 laboratories from 21 countries. METHODS: Current practice for DNA sequence analysis was established by use of an online questionnaire. Participating laboratories were provided with 4 DNA samples of validated genotype. Evaluation of the results included assessing the quality of sequence data, variant genotypes, and mutation nomenclature. To accommodate variations in mutation nomenclature, variants indicated by participants were scored for compliance with 3 acceptable marking schemes. RESULTS: A total of 346 genotypes were analyzed. Of these, 19 (5%) genotyping errors were made. Of these, 10 (53%) were false-negative and 9 (47%) were false-positive results. A further 27 (8%) errors were made in naming mutations. Results were analyzed for 3 indicators of data quality: PHRED quality scores, Quality Read Length, and Quality Read Overlap. Most laboratories produced results of acceptable diagnostic quality as judged by these indicators. The results were used to calculate a consensus benchmark for DNA sequencing against which individual laboratories could rank their performance. CONCLUSIONS: We propose that the consensus benchmark can be used as a baseline against which the aggregate and individual laboratory standard of DNA sequencing may be tracked from year to year.