Comparison of Fresh Frozen Tissue With Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Tissue for Mutation Analysis Using a Multi-Gene Panel in Patients With Colorectal Cancer

Xian Hua Gao,Juan Li,Hai Feng Gong,Guan Yu Yu,Peng Liu,Li Qiang Hao,Lian Jie Liu,Chen Guang Bai,Wei Zhang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00310
IF: 4.7
2020-03-13
Frontiers in Oncology
Abstract:Background: Next generation sequencing (NGS)-based multi-gene panel tests have been performed to predict the treatment response and prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Whether the multi-gene mutation results of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues are identical to those of fresh frozen tissues remains unknown.Methods: A 22-gene panel with 103 hotspots was used to detect mutations in paired fresh frozen tissue and FFPE tissue from 118 patients with CRC.Results: In our study, 117 patients (99.2%) had one or more variants, with 226 variants in FFPE tissue and 221 in fresh frozen tissue. Of the 129 variants identified in this study, 96 variants were present in both FFPE and fresh frozen tissues; 27 variants were found in FFPE tissues only; 6 variants were found only in fresh frozen tissues. The mutation results demonstrated >94.0% concordance in all variants, with Kappa coefficient >0.500 in 64.3% (83/129) of variants. At the gene level, concordance ranged from 73.8 to 100.0%, with Kappa coefficient >0.500 in 81.3% (13/16) of genes.Conclusions: The results of mutation analysis performed with a multi-gene panel and FFPE and fresh frozen tissue were highly concordant in patients with CRC, at both the variant and gene levels. There were, however, some important differences in mutation results between the two tissue types. Therefore, fresh frozen tissue should not routinely be replaced with FFPE tissue for mutation analysis with a multi-gene panel. Rather, FFPE tissue is a reasonable alternative for fresh frozen tissue when the latter is unavailable.
oncology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to evaluate the result consistency between formalin - fixed paraffin - embedded (FFPE) tissues and fresh - frozen tissues when using multi - gene panels for mutation analysis. Specifically, the researchers wanted to know whether the results at the variant and gene levels in multi - gene mutation detection were consistent between FFPE tissues and fresh - frozen tissues in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. In addition, they also hoped to explore the differences between these different types of tissue samples in mutation detection and the impact of these differences on clinical practice. ### Research Background - **Next - Generation Sequencing (NGS)**: Multi - gene panel tests based on NGS have been used to predict the treatment response and prognosis of colorectal cancer patients. - **Tissue Types**: It is currently unclear whether the multi - gene mutation results of FFPE tissues are the same as those of fresh - frozen tissues. ### Research Methods - **Sample Selection**: The study used paired fresh - frozen tissues and FFPE tissues from 118 colorectal cancer patients. - **Multi - Gene Panel**: A multi - gene panel containing 22 genes and 103 hot - spot regions was used for mutation detection. ### Research Results - **Variant Detection**: 117 patients (99.2%) had at least one variant, among which there were 226 variants in FFPE tissues and 221 variants in fresh - frozen tissues. - **Consistency Analysis**: - **Variant Level**: Among 129 variants, 96 variants were detected in both tissues; 27 variants were detected only in FFPE tissues; and 6 variants were detected only in fresh - frozen tissues. The overall variant consistency was over 94.0%, and the Kappa coefficient was greater than 0.500 in 64.3% (83/129) of the variants. - **Gene Level**: The consistency of gene mutations ranged from 73.8% to 100.0%, and the Kappa coefficient was greater than 0.500 in 81.3% (13/16) of the genes. ### Conclusions - **High Consistency**: At the variant and gene levels, the mutation results of FFPE tissues and fresh - frozen tissues are highly consistent. - **Differences Exist**: Although the consistency is high, there are still some important differences between the two tissues. - **Recommendation**: Fresh - frozen tissues should not be routinely replaced by FFPE tissues for multi - gene panel mutation analysis, but when fresh - frozen tissues are unavailable, FFPE tissues are a reasonable alternative. ### Discussion - **Coverage Difference**: The total coverage of fresh - frozen tissues was significantly higher than that of FFPE tissues, which may be due to the fact that the DNA fragments in FFPE tissues are smaller and some fragments are below the detection limit. - **False - Positive Rate**: Some variants in FFPE tissues may be due to DNA damage during the formaldehyde fixation process, such as fragmentation, degradation, and cross - linking. - **Importance of Standardization**: In order to improve the accuracy of FFPE tissue mutation detection, it is necessary to standardize the processes of sample preparation, storage conditions, library preparation, quality assessment of extracted DNA, and exclusion of low - quality samples. ### Limitations - **Retrospective Study**: The study used stored FFPE tissues, and the fixation and embedding processes were not strictly controlled, which may affect DNA quality. - **Fixation Time**: The fixation time and storage time may affect the accuracy of the results. - **Sample Size**: Although the sample size is relatively large, a larger - scale prospective study is still required to verify the results. Through this study, the authors provided an important reference for using FFPE tissues for multi - gene mutation detection in clinical practice.