The Italian external quality assessment for RAS testing in colorectal carcinoma identifies methods-related inter-laboratory differences

Nicola Normanno, Carmine Pinto, Francesca Castiglione, Francesca Fenizia, Massimo Barberis, Antonio Marchetti, Gabriella Fontanini, Gaetano De Rosa, Gian Luigi Taddei

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: In 2014 the European Medicines Agency included exon 2, 3 and 4 KRAS and NRAS testing for the selection of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients eligible for the therapy with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) and the Italian Society of Pathology and Cytology (SIAPEC) organized an external quality assessment (EQA) scheme for CRC to evaluate inter-laboratory consistency and to ensure standardization of the results in the transition from KRAS to all-RAS testing. Methods: Ten formalin fixed paraffin embedded specimens including KRAS/NRAS (exons 2, 3, 4) and BRAF (codon 600) mutations were validated by three referral laboratories and sent to 88 participant centers. Molecular pathology sample reports were also requested to each laboratory. A board of assessors from AIOM and SIAPEC evaluated the results according to a predefined scoring system. The scheme was composed of two rounds. Results: In the first round 36 % of the 88 participants failed, with 23 centers having at least one false positive or false negative while 9 centers did not meet the deadline. The genotyping error rate was higher when Sanger sequencing was employed for testing as compared with pyrosequencing (3 vs 1.3 %; p = 0.01; Pearson Chi Square test). In the second round, the laboratories improved their performance, with 23/32 laboratories passing the round. Overall, 79/88 participants passed the RAS EQA scheme. Standardized Human Genome Variation Society nomenclature was incorrectly used to describe the mutations identified and relevant variations were noticed in the genotype specification. Conclusion: The results of the Italian RAS EQA scheme indicate that the mutational analyses are performed with good quality in many Italian centers, although significant differences in the methods used were highlighted. The relatively high number of centers failing the first round underlines the fundamental role in continued education covered by EQA schemes.

Original languageEnglish
Article number287
JournalJournal of Translational Medicine
Volume13
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 3 2015

Fingerprint

Colorectal Neoplasms
Testing
Oncology
Medical Oncology
Pathology
Exons
Cytology
Mutation
Molecular Pathology
Human Genome
Chi-Square Distribution
Terminology
Codon
Paraffin
Standardization
Formaldehyde
Medicine
Cell Biology
Referral and Consultation
Genes

Keywords

  • Colorectal cancer
  • Quality assurance
  • RAS mutations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

The Italian external quality assessment for RAS testing in colorectal carcinoma identifies methods-related inter-laboratory differences. / Normanno, Nicola; Pinto, Carmine; Castiglione, Francesca; Fenizia, Francesca; Barberis, Massimo; Marchetti, Antonio; Fontanini, Gabriella; De Rosa, Gaetano; Taddei, Gian Luigi.

In: Journal of Translational Medicine, Vol. 13, No. 1, 287, 03.09.2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Normanno, Nicola ; Pinto, Carmine ; Castiglione, Francesca ; Fenizia, Francesca ; Barberis, Massimo ; Marchetti, Antonio ; Fontanini, Gabriella ; De Rosa, Gaetano ; Taddei, Gian Luigi. / The Italian external quality assessment for RAS testing in colorectal carcinoma identifies methods-related inter-laboratory differences. In: Journal of Translational Medicine. 2015 ; Vol. 13, No. 1.
@article{5d2ef00396484b04937695b1e8182280,
title = "The Italian external quality assessment for RAS testing in colorectal carcinoma identifies methods-related inter-laboratory differences",
abstract = "Background: In 2014 the European Medicines Agency included exon 2, 3 and 4 KRAS and NRAS testing for the selection of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients eligible for the therapy with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) and the Italian Society of Pathology and Cytology (SIAPEC) organized an external quality assessment (EQA) scheme for CRC to evaluate inter-laboratory consistency and to ensure standardization of the results in the transition from KRAS to all-RAS testing. Methods: Ten formalin fixed paraffin embedded specimens including KRAS/NRAS (exons 2, 3, 4) and BRAF (codon 600) mutations were validated by three referral laboratories and sent to 88 participant centers. Molecular pathology sample reports were also requested to each laboratory. A board of assessors from AIOM and SIAPEC evaluated the results according to a predefined scoring system. The scheme was composed of two rounds. Results: In the first round 36 {\%} of the 88 participants failed, with 23 centers having at least one false positive or false negative while 9 centers did not meet the deadline. The genotyping error rate was higher when Sanger sequencing was employed for testing as compared with pyrosequencing (3 vs 1.3 {\%}; p = 0.01; Pearson Chi Square test). In the second round, the laboratories improved their performance, with 23/32 laboratories passing the round. Overall, 79/88 participants passed the RAS EQA scheme. Standardized Human Genome Variation Society nomenclature was incorrectly used to describe the mutations identified and relevant variations were noticed in the genotype specification. Conclusion: The results of the Italian RAS EQA scheme indicate that the mutational analyses are performed with good quality in many Italian centers, although significant differences in the methods used were highlighted. The relatively high number of centers failing the first round underlines the fundamental role in continued education covered by EQA schemes.",
keywords = "Colorectal cancer, Quality assurance, RAS mutations",
author = "Nicola Normanno and Carmine Pinto and Francesca Castiglione and Francesca Fenizia and Massimo Barberis and Antonio Marchetti and Gabriella Fontanini and {De Rosa}, Gaetano and Taddei, {Gian Luigi}",
year = "2015",
month = "9",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1186/s12967-015-0655-1",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
journal = "Journal of Translational Medicine",
issn = "1479-5876",
publisher = "BioMed Central Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Italian external quality assessment for RAS testing in colorectal carcinoma identifies methods-related inter-laboratory differences

AU - Normanno, Nicola

AU - Pinto, Carmine

AU - Castiglione, Francesca

AU - Fenizia, Francesca

AU - Barberis, Massimo

AU - Marchetti, Antonio

AU - Fontanini, Gabriella

AU - De Rosa, Gaetano

AU - Taddei, Gian Luigi

PY - 2015/9/3

Y1 - 2015/9/3

N2 - Background: In 2014 the European Medicines Agency included exon 2, 3 and 4 KRAS and NRAS testing for the selection of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients eligible for the therapy with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) and the Italian Society of Pathology and Cytology (SIAPEC) organized an external quality assessment (EQA) scheme for CRC to evaluate inter-laboratory consistency and to ensure standardization of the results in the transition from KRAS to all-RAS testing. Methods: Ten formalin fixed paraffin embedded specimens including KRAS/NRAS (exons 2, 3, 4) and BRAF (codon 600) mutations were validated by three referral laboratories and sent to 88 participant centers. Molecular pathology sample reports were also requested to each laboratory. A board of assessors from AIOM and SIAPEC evaluated the results according to a predefined scoring system. The scheme was composed of two rounds. Results: In the first round 36 % of the 88 participants failed, with 23 centers having at least one false positive or false negative while 9 centers did not meet the deadline. The genotyping error rate was higher when Sanger sequencing was employed for testing as compared with pyrosequencing (3 vs 1.3 %; p = 0.01; Pearson Chi Square test). In the second round, the laboratories improved their performance, with 23/32 laboratories passing the round. Overall, 79/88 participants passed the RAS EQA scheme. Standardized Human Genome Variation Society nomenclature was incorrectly used to describe the mutations identified and relevant variations were noticed in the genotype specification. Conclusion: The results of the Italian RAS EQA scheme indicate that the mutational analyses are performed with good quality in many Italian centers, although significant differences in the methods used were highlighted. The relatively high number of centers failing the first round underlines the fundamental role in continued education covered by EQA schemes.

AB - Background: In 2014 the European Medicines Agency included exon 2, 3 and 4 KRAS and NRAS testing for the selection of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients eligible for the therapy with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) and the Italian Society of Pathology and Cytology (SIAPEC) organized an external quality assessment (EQA) scheme for CRC to evaluate inter-laboratory consistency and to ensure standardization of the results in the transition from KRAS to all-RAS testing. Methods: Ten formalin fixed paraffin embedded specimens including KRAS/NRAS (exons 2, 3, 4) and BRAF (codon 600) mutations were validated by three referral laboratories and sent to 88 participant centers. Molecular pathology sample reports were also requested to each laboratory. A board of assessors from AIOM and SIAPEC evaluated the results according to a predefined scoring system. The scheme was composed of two rounds. Results: In the first round 36 % of the 88 participants failed, with 23 centers having at least one false positive or false negative while 9 centers did not meet the deadline. The genotyping error rate was higher when Sanger sequencing was employed for testing as compared with pyrosequencing (3 vs 1.3 %; p = 0.01; Pearson Chi Square test). In the second round, the laboratories improved their performance, with 23/32 laboratories passing the round. Overall, 79/88 participants passed the RAS EQA scheme. Standardized Human Genome Variation Society nomenclature was incorrectly used to describe the mutations identified and relevant variations were noticed in the genotype specification. Conclusion: The results of the Italian RAS EQA scheme indicate that the mutational analyses are performed with good quality in many Italian centers, although significant differences in the methods used were highlighted. The relatively high number of centers failing the first round underlines the fundamental role in continued education covered by EQA schemes.

KW - Colorectal cancer

KW - Quality assurance

KW - RAS mutations

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84940515075&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84940515075&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12967-015-0655-1

DO - 10.1186/s12967-015-0655-1

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84940515075

VL - 13

JO - Journal of Translational Medicine

JF - Journal of Translational Medicine

SN - 1479-5876

IS - 1

M1 - 287

ER -