Comparison of two detection methods for microsatellite status of colorectal cancer

Meili Chen,Qian Chen,Shi Zhou,Jieyu Chen,Lixia Yu,Baorui Liu,Xiaoping Qian,Mi Yang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-4992.2018.03.018
2018-01-01
Journal of Modern Oncology
Abstract:Objective:To search the differences between the PCR and IHC in the diagnosis of microsatellite sta-tus. Methods:This study collected 485 colorectal cancer cases with clear pathological diagnosis. Microsatellite status of all cases has been determined by detecting the BAT25,BAT26,D5S346,D2S123 and D17S250 mutation status of cancer tissues and normal tissues. The expression of DNA mismatch repair (MMR)genes of MLH1,MSH2,MSH6 and PMS2 have been detected by IHC simultaneously. Results:In the 485 patients with colorectal cancer,MSI status was detected in 39 cases,including 30 cases of MSI-H and 9 cases of MSI-L. The incidence of MSI was 8. 04%, and the incidence of MSI-H was 6. 19% . IHC analyses were performed on 485 cases of colorectal cancer,among which 61 cases were dMMR and 424 cases were pMMR. The incidence of dMMR was 12. 58% . The sensitivity and specificity of IHC were 86. 67% and 92. 31%,the coincidence rate of the two methods for detecting microsatellite sta-tus was 91. 96% . Conclusion:The results of IHC are accorded with PCR. Compared with PCR,IHC is more economi-cal,convenient and easier for clinical promotion. When one case exhibites all mismatch repair protein positive expres-sion by IHC,we can diagnose MSS/ MSI-L,without further PCR detection,but when any repair protein is found to be missing,PCR detection is required to determine whether there is microsatellite instability. This result will save a lot of time and cost for clinical work.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?