Comparison of EGFR Mutations Detected by LNA-ARMS PCR in Plasma Ctdna Samples and Matched Tissue Sample in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.

Jiahui Jin,Jingjing He,Xinyu Yan,Yaru Zhao,Haojie Zhang,Kai Zhuang,Yating Wen,Junzhen Gao
2022-01-01
Abstract:BACKGROUND:Screening for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations is the key to select suitable patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for EGFR-TKI therapy in clinical practice. Nevertheless, tumor tissue that needed for mutation analysis is frequently unavailable, especially for patients with recurrence after operation. Therefore, detection of EGFR from circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patients with NSCLC is a sensitive and convenient method to direct patient sequential treatment strategy.METHODS:One hundred and seventy-nine NSCLC patients with both tumor tissue samples and paired plasma samples were recruited. EGFR mutations were detected in 68 tumor tissue samples and 179 plasma samples using Anlongen Locked Nucleic Acid-Amplification Refractory Mutation System (LNA-ARMS) EGFR Mutation Detection Kit. The remaining 111 tumor tissue samples were detected with the use of multiplex PCR-Based NGS sequence. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive prediction value (PPV) and negative prediction value (NPV) of LAN-ARMS PCR. The objective response rate (ORR) of patients received TKIs therapy was calculated.RESULTS:Of the 179 patients, EGFR mutations were detected in 77 of the 179 tumor tissue samples, with a positive rate of 43.01% (77/179). In addition, EGFR mutations were detected in 42 of the 179 plasma samples. The sensitivity and specificity of LAN-ARMS in detecting EGFR mutations were 57.18% and 98.04% respectively compared to tissue results. The PPV was 95.24%, and NPV was 72.99%. Of the 179 pair of samples, EGFR mutations were inconsistent in 39 pairs of tissue and plasma. The overall agreement of EGFR mutation detection was 78.21% (140/179). The ORR was higher in patients with both tissue and plasma EGFR mutations compared with that in patients with only tissue EGFR mutations (73.33% vs. 68.29%), but the difference was not significant. It was suggested that tissue detection combined with plasma detection could improve the mutation rate.CONCLUSION:In plasma samples, Anlongen LAN-ARMS EGFR Mutation Detection Kit had a high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of EGFR mutations. Anlongen LAN-ARMS EGFR Mutation Detection Kit had the advantages of easy-to-operate and high sensitivity in clinical application.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?