Results of the first external quality assessment scheme (EQA) for isolation and analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA)
Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is considered to have a high potential for future management of malignancies. This pilot external quality assessment (EQA) scheme aimed to address issues of analytical quality in this new area of laboratory diagnostics. The EQA scheme consisted of three 2-mL EDTA-plasm...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine 2018-01, Vol.56 (2), p.220-228 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 228 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 220 |
container_title | Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine |
container_volume | 56 |
creator | Haselmann, Verena Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz Geilenkeuser, Wolf J. Duda, Angelika Gabor, Merle Eichner, Romy Patton, Simon Neumaier, Michael |
description | Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is considered to have a high potential for future management of malignancies. This pilot external quality assessment (EQA) scheme aimed to address issues of analytical quality in this new area of laboratory diagnostics.
The EQA scheme consisted of three 2-mL EDTA-plasma samples spiked with fragmented genomic DNA with a mutant allele frequency ranging from 0% to 10% dedicated to the analysis of nine known sequence variations in KRAS codon 12/13 and of BRAF V600E. Laboratories reported: (1) time elapsed for processing, (2) storage temperatures, (3) methods for extraction and quantification, (4) genotyping methodologies and (5) results.
Specimens were sent to 42 laboratories from 10 European countries; 72.3% reported to isolate cell-free DNA (cfDNA) manually, 62.5% used the entire plasma volume for cfDNA isolation and 38.5% used >10% of cfDNA extracted for downstream genotyping. Of the methods used for quantification, PicoGreen demonstrated the lowest coefficient of variation (33.7%). For genotyping, 11 different methods were reported with the highest error rate observed for Sanger sequencing and the lowest for highly sensitive approaches like digital PCR. In total, 197 genotypes were determined with an overall error rate of 6.09%.
This pilot EQA scheme illustrates the current variability in multiple phases of cfDNA processing and analysis of ctDNA resulting in an overall error rate of 6.09%. The areas with the greatest variance and clinical impact included specimen volume, cfDNA quantification method, and preference of genotyping platform. Regarding quality assurance, there is an urgent need for harmonisation of procedures and workflows. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1515/cclm-2017-0283 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1932850702</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2355151067</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-3e6cf071e4ff7f1122173c64ce73a88893262d7d7a03a11f170a173fb38482f63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1rFTEUhgdRbK1uXUrAze1iak4-54KbS21VKIqi65BmknZKZqbNSajXX99MbxURcRHOgTx5T5KnaV4CPQIJ8o1zcWwZBd1S1vFHzT4IrlvBOTy-70WrFIO95hniFaUgpdBPmz3WdQKkWu83P796LDEjmQPJl56EIWEm_kf2abKR3BQbh7wlFtEjjn7KBN2lHz1ZnXzZHJIwJzLgHG0e5onYqa_Lxi0O94FuSK4se9MFyWWcSyLvPm3IyuVaDp83T4KN6F881IPm--nJt-MP7dnn9x-PN2etE1LnlnvlAtXgRQg6ADAGmjslnNfcdl235kyxXvfaUm4BAmhqKxHOeSc6FhQ_aFa73Os03xSP2YwDOh-jnfxc0EBN6CTVlFX09V_oVb10fREaxmX9b6BK_4-C9VoK0FouY492lEszYvLBXKdhtGlrgJrFnVncmcWdWdzVA68eYsv56Pvf-C9ZFXi7A25trH56f5HKtjZ_jP9nslSMMcrvAAzOpsA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1995417756</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Results of the first external quality assessment scheme (EQA) for isolation and analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA)</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>De Gruyter journals</source><creator>Haselmann, Verena ; Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz ; Geilenkeuser, Wolf J. ; Duda, Angelika ; Gabor, Merle ; Eichner, Romy ; Patton, Simon ; Neumaier, Michael</creator><creatorcontrib>Haselmann, Verena ; Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz ; Geilenkeuser, Wolf J. ; Duda, Angelika ; Gabor, Merle ; Eichner, Romy ; Patton, Simon ; Neumaier, Michael</creatorcontrib><description>Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is considered to have a high potential for future management of malignancies. This pilot external quality assessment (EQA) scheme aimed to address issues of analytical quality in this new area of laboratory diagnostics.
The EQA scheme consisted of three 2-mL EDTA-plasma samples spiked with fragmented genomic DNA with a mutant allele frequency ranging from 0% to 10% dedicated to the analysis of nine known sequence variations in KRAS codon 12/13 and of BRAF V600E. Laboratories reported: (1) time elapsed for processing, (2) storage temperatures, (3) methods for extraction and quantification, (4) genotyping methodologies and (5) results.
Specimens were sent to 42 laboratories from 10 European countries; 72.3% reported to isolate cell-free DNA (cfDNA) manually, 62.5% used the entire plasma volume for cfDNA isolation and 38.5% used >10% of cfDNA extracted for downstream genotyping. Of the methods used for quantification, PicoGreen demonstrated the lowest coefficient of variation (33.7%). For genotyping, 11 different methods were reported with the highest error rate observed for Sanger sequencing and the lowest for highly sensitive approaches like digital PCR. In total, 197 genotypes were determined with an overall error rate of 6.09%.
This pilot EQA scheme illustrates the current variability in multiple phases of cfDNA processing and analysis of ctDNA resulting in an overall error rate of 6.09%. The areas with the greatest variance and clinical impact included specimen volume, cfDNA quantification method, and preference of genotyping platform. Regarding quality assurance, there is an urgent need for harmonisation of procedures and workflows.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1434-6621</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1437-4331</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2017-0283</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28841569</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Germany: De Gruyter</publisher><subject>Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - methods ; Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - standards ; circulating DNA ; Circulating Tumor DNA - analysis ; Circulating Tumor DNA - isolation & purification ; Coefficient of variation ; Deoxyribonucleic acid ; DNA ; Error detection ; Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acids ; external quality assessment scheme ; Gene frequency ; Genotypes ; Genotyping ; Genotyping Techniques - methods ; Genotyping Techniques - standards ; Humans ; Laboratories ; Liquid Biopsy ; liquid profiling ; Mathematical analysis ; Mutants ; plasma ; Plasma Volume ; Quality assessment ; Quality assurance ; Quality control ; Specimen Handling ; Tumors ; Workflow</subject><ispartof>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, 2018-01, Vol.56 (2), p.220-228</ispartof><rights>Copyright Walter De Gruyter & Company 2018</rights><rights>2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-3e6cf071e4ff7f1122173c64ce73a88893262d7d7a03a11f170a173fb38482f63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-3e6cf071e4ff7f1122173c64ce73a88893262d7d7a03a11f170a173fb38482f63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2017-0283/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2017-0283/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,66754,68538</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28841569$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Haselmann, Verena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geilenkeuser, Wolf J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Duda, Angelika</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gabor, Merle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eichner, Romy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patton, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Neumaier, Michael</creatorcontrib><title>Results of the first external quality assessment scheme (EQA) for isolation and analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA)</title><title>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine</title><addtitle>Clin Chem Lab Med</addtitle><description>Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is considered to have a high potential for future management of malignancies. This pilot external quality assessment (EQA) scheme aimed to address issues of analytical quality in this new area of laboratory diagnostics.
The EQA scheme consisted of three 2-mL EDTA-plasma samples spiked with fragmented genomic DNA with a mutant allele frequency ranging from 0% to 10% dedicated to the analysis of nine known sequence variations in KRAS codon 12/13 and of BRAF V600E. Laboratories reported: (1) time elapsed for processing, (2) storage temperatures, (3) methods for extraction and quantification, (4) genotyping methodologies and (5) results.
Specimens were sent to 42 laboratories from 10 European countries; 72.3% reported to isolate cell-free DNA (cfDNA) manually, 62.5% used the entire plasma volume for cfDNA isolation and 38.5% used >10% of cfDNA extracted for downstream genotyping. Of the methods used for quantification, PicoGreen demonstrated the lowest coefficient of variation (33.7%). For genotyping, 11 different methods were reported with the highest error rate observed for Sanger sequencing and the lowest for highly sensitive approaches like digital PCR. In total, 197 genotypes were determined with an overall error rate of 6.09%.
This pilot EQA scheme illustrates the current variability in multiple phases of cfDNA processing and analysis of ctDNA resulting in an overall error rate of 6.09%. The areas with the greatest variance and clinical impact included specimen volume, cfDNA quantification method, and preference of genotyping platform. Regarding quality assurance, there is an urgent need for harmonisation of procedures and workflows.</description><subject>Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - methods</subject><subject>Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - standards</subject><subject>circulating DNA</subject><subject>Circulating Tumor DNA - analysis</subject><subject>Circulating Tumor DNA - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Coefficient of variation</subject><subject>Deoxyribonucleic acid</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>Error detection</subject><subject>Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acids</subject><subject>external quality assessment scheme</subject><subject>Gene frequency</subject><subject>Genotypes</subject><subject>Genotyping</subject><subject>Genotyping Techniques - methods</subject><subject>Genotyping Techniques - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Liquid Biopsy</subject><subject>liquid profiling</subject><subject>Mathematical analysis</subject><subject>Mutants</subject><subject>plasma</subject><subject>Plasma Volume</subject><subject>Quality assessment</subject><subject>Quality assurance</subject><subject>Quality control</subject><subject>Specimen Handling</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><subject>Workflow</subject><issn>1434-6621</issn><issn>1437-4331</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1rFTEUhgdRbK1uXUrAze1iak4-54KbS21VKIqi65BmknZKZqbNSajXX99MbxURcRHOgTx5T5KnaV4CPQIJ8o1zcWwZBd1S1vFHzT4IrlvBOTy-70WrFIO95hniFaUgpdBPmz3WdQKkWu83P796LDEjmQPJl56EIWEm_kf2abKR3BQbh7wlFtEjjn7KBN2lHz1ZnXzZHJIwJzLgHG0e5onYqa_Lxi0O94FuSK4se9MFyWWcSyLvPm3IyuVaDp83T4KN6F881IPm--nJt-MP7dnn9x-PN2etE1LnlnvlAtXgRQg6ADAGmjslnNfcdl235kyxXvfaUm4BAmhqKxHOeSc6FhQ_aFa73Os03xSP2YwDOh-jnfxc0EBN6CTVlFX09V_oVb10fREaxmX9b6BK_4-C9VoK0FouY492lEszYvLBXKdhtGlrgJrFnVncmcWdWdzVA68eYsv56Pvf-C9ZFXi7A25trH56f5HKtjZ_jP9nslSMMcrvAAzOpsA</recordid><startdate>20180126</startdate><enddate>20180126</enddate><creator>Haselmann, Verena</creator><creator>Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz</creator><creator>Geilenkeuser, Wolf J.</creator><creator>Duda, Angelika</creator><creator>Gabor, Merle</creator><creator>Eichner, Romy</creator><creator>Patton, Simon</creator><creator>Neumaier, Michael</creator><general>De Gruyter</general><general>Walter De Gruyter & Company</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180126</creationdate><title>Results of the first external quality assessment scheme (EQA) for isolation and analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA)</title><author>Haselmann, Verena ; Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz ; Geilenkeuser, Wolf J. ; Duda, Angelika ; Gabor, Merle ; Eichner, Romy ; Patton, Simon ; Neumaier, Michael</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c457t-3e6cf071e4ff7f1122173c64ce73a88893262d7d7a03a11f170a173fb38482f63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - methods</topic><topic>Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - standards</topic><topic>circulating DNA</topic><topic>Circulating Tumor DNA - analysis</topic><topic>Circulating Tumor DNA - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Coefficient of variation</topic><topic>Deoxyribonucleic acid</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>Error detection</topic><topic>Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acids</topic><topic>external quality assessment scheme</topic><topic>Gene frequency</topic><topic>Genotypes</topic><topic>Genotyping</topic><topic>Genotyping Techniques - methods</topic><topic>Genotyping Techniques - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Liquid Biopsy</topic><topic>liquid profiling</topic><topic>Mathematical analysis</topic><topic>Mutants</topic><topic>plasma</topic><topic>Plasma Volume</topic><topic>Quality assessment</topic><topic>Quality assurance</topic><topic>Quality control</topic><topic>Specimen Handling</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><topic>Workflow</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Haselmann, Verena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Geilenkeuser, Wolf J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Duda, Angelika</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gabor, Merle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eichner, Romy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patton, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Neumaier, Michael</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Haselmann, Verena</au><au>Ahmad-Nejad, Parviz</au><au>Geilenkeuser, Wolf J.</au><au>Duda, Angelika</au><au>Gabor, Merle</au><au>Eichner, Romy</au><au>Patton, Simon</au><au>Neumaier, Michael</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Results of the first external quality assessment scheme (EQA) for isolation and analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA)</atitle><jtitle>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Chem Lab Med</addtitle><date>2018-01-26</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>220</spage><epage>228</epage><pages>220-228</pages><issn>1434-6621</issn><eissn>1437-4331</eissn><abstract>Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is considered to have a high potential for future management of malignancies. This pilot external quality assessment (EQA) scheme aimed to address issues of analytical quality in this new area of laboratory diagnostics.
The EQA scheme consisted of three 2-mL EDTA-plasma samples spiked with fragmented genomic DNA with a mutant allele frequency ranging from 0% to 10% dedicated to the analysis of nine known sequence variations in KRAS codon 12/13 and of BRAF V600E. Laboratories reported: (1) time elapsed for processing, (2) storage temperatures, (3) methods for extraction and quantification, (4) genotyping methodologies and (5) results.
Specimens were sent to 42 laboratories from 10 European countries; 72.3% reported to isolate cell-free DNA (cfDNA) manually, 62.5% used the entire plasma volume for cfDNA isolation and 38.5% used >10% of cfDNA extracted for downstream genotyping. Of the methods used for quantification, PicoGreen demonstrated the lowest coefficient of variation (33.7%). For genotyping, 11 different methods were reported with the highest error rate observed for Sanger sequencing and the lowest for highly sensitive approaches like digital PCR. In total, 197 genotypes were determined with an overall error rate of 6.09%.
This pilot EQA scheme illustrates the current variability in multiple phases of cfDNA processing and analysis of ctDNA resulting in an overall error rate of 6.09%. The areas with the greatest variance and clinical impact included specimen volume, cfDNA quantification method, and preference of genotyping platform. Regarding quality assurance, there is an urgent need for harmonisation of procedures and workflows.</abstract><cop>Germany</cop><pub>De Gruyter</pub><pmid>28841569</pmid><doi>10.1515/cclm-2017-0283</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1434-6621 |
ispartof | Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, 2018-01, Vol.56 (2), p.220-228 |
issn | 1434-6621 1437-4331 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1932850702 |
source | MEDLINE; De Gruyter journals |
subjects | Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - methods Chemistry Techniques, Analytical - standards circulating DNA Circulating Tumor DNA - analysis Circulating Tumor DNA - isolation & purification Coefficient of variation Deoxyribonucleic acid DNA Error detection Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acids external quality assessment scheme Gene frequency Genotypes Genotyping Genotyping Techniques - methods Genotyping Techniques - standards Humans Laboratories Liquid Biopsy liquid profiling Mathematical analysis Mutants plasma Plasma Volume Quality assessment Quality assurance Quality control Specimen Handling Tumors Workflow |
title | Results of the first external quality assessment scheme (EQA) for isolation and analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T09%3A06%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Results%20of%20the%20first%20external%20quality%20assessment%20scheme%20(EQA)%20for%20isolation%20and%20analysis%20of%20circulating%20tumour%20DNA%20(ctDNA)&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20chemistry%20and%20laboratory%20medicine&rft.au=Haselmann,%20Verena&rft.date=2018-01-26&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=220&rft.epage=228&rft.pages=220-228&rft.issn=1434-6621&rft.eissn=1437-4331&rft_id=info:doi/10.1515/cclm-2017-0283&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2355151067%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1995417756&rft_id=info:pmid/28841569&rfr_iscdi=true |