Comparison of Methods for Testing Mismatch Repair Status in Endometrial Cancer
Approximately 20–30% of endometrial carcinomas (EC) are characterized by mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (dMMR) or microsatellite instability (MSI), and their testing has become part of the routine diagnosis. The aim of this study was to establish and compare the MMR status using various approaches...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of molecular sciences 2023-10, Vol.24 (19), p.14468 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 19 |
| container_start_page | 14468 |
| container_title | International journal of molecular sciences |
| container_volume | 24 |
| creator | Mendiola, Marta Heredia-Soto, Victoria Ruz-Caracuel, Ignacio Baillo, Amparo Ramon-Patino, Jorge Luis Escudero, Francisco Javier Miguel, Maria Pelaez-Garcia, Alberto Hernandez, Alicia Feliu, Jaime Hardisson, David Redondo, Andres |
| description | Approximately 20–30% of endometrial carcinomas (EC) are characterized by mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (dMMR) or microsatellite instability (MSI), and their testing has become part of the routine diagnosis. The aim of this study was to establish and compare the MMR status using various approaches. Immunohistochemistry (IHC), PCR-based MSI, and the detection of defects in the four key MMR genes (MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6) via methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) and targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) were performed. MSH3 expression was also evaluated. A set of 126 early-stage EC samples were analyzed, 53.2% of which were dMMR and 46.8% of which were proficient MMR (pMMR) as determined using IHC, whereas 69.3% were classified as microsatellite stable, while 8.8% and 21.9% were classified MSI-low (MSI-L) and MSI-high (MSI-H), respectively. In total, 44.3% of the samples showed genetic or epigenetic alterations in one or more genes; MLH1 promoter methylation was the most common event. Although acceptable concordance was observed, there were overall discrepancies between the three testing approaches, mainly associated with the dMMR group. IHC had a better correlation with MMR genomic status than the MSI status determined using PCR. Further studies are needed to establish solid conclusions regarding the best MMR assessment technique for EC. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.3390/ijms241914468 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10572657</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2877390417</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-a9c897a78eb9f1b920cc59878e2d487763e07b26e0847d7a3963ad0644b5e9623</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkctLxDAQxoMoPlaP3gNevFTzatKcRJb1AauCj3NI09TN0iZr0gr-92ZZEdfTzDC_-fhmBoBTjC4olejSLftEGJaYMV7tgEPMCCkQ4mL3T34AjlJaIkQoKeU-OKCiysOYH4LHaehXOroUPAwtfLDDIjQJtiHCV5sG59_hg0u9HswCPtuVdhG-DHoYE3QeznwTejtEpzs41d7YeAz2Wt0le_ITJ-DtZvY6vSvmT7f30-t5YSiTQ6GlqaTQorK1bHEtCTKmlFWuScMqITi1SNSEW1Qx0QhNJae6QZyxurSSEzoBVxvd1Vj3tjHWD1F3ahVdr-OXCtqp7Y53C_UePhVGpSC8FFnh_Echho8xr6p6l4ztOu1tGJMi2Ua-L8Nr9Owfugxj9Hm_NcUF49lwpooNZWJIKdr21w1Gav0qtfUq-g3Wj4VE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2876746763</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Methods for Testing Mismatch Repair Status in Endometrial Cancer</title><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Mendiola, Marta ; Heredia-Soto, Victoria ; Ruz-Caracuel, Ignacio ; Baillo, Amparo ; Ramon-Patino, Jorge Luis ; Escudero, Francisco Javier ; Miguel, Maria ; Pelaez-Garcia, Alberto ; Hernandez, Alicia ; Feliu, Jaime ; Hardisson, David ; Redondo, Andres</creator><creatorcontrib>Mendiola, Marta ; Heredia-Soto, Victoria ; Ruz-Caracuel, Ignacio ; Baillo, Amparo ; Ramon-Patino, Jorge Luis ; Escudero, Francisco Javier ; Miguel, Maria ; Pelaez-Garcia, Alberto ; Hernandez, Alicia ; Feliu, Jaime ; Hardisson, David ; Redondo, Andres</creatorcontrib><description>Approximately 20–30% of endometrial carcinomas (EC) are characterized by mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (dMMR) or microsatellite instability (MSI), and their testing has become part of the routine diagnosis. The aim of this study was to establish and compare the MMR status using various approaches. Immunohistochemistry (IHC), PCR-based MSI, and the detection of defects in the four key MMR genes (MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6) via methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) and targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) were performed. MSH3 expression was also evaluated. A set of 126 early-stage EC samples were analyzed, 53.2% of which were dMMR and 46.8% of which were proficient MMR (pMMR) as determined using IHC, whereas 69.3% were classified as microsatellite stable, while 8.8% and 21.9% were classified MSI-low (MSI-L) and MSI-high (MSI-H), respectively. In total, 44.3% of the samples showed genetic or epigenetic alterations in one or more genes; MLH1 promoter methylation was the most common event. Although acceptable concordance was observed, there were overall discrepancies between the three testing approaches, mainly associated with the dMMR group. IHC had a better correlation with MMR genomic status than the MSI status determined using PCR. Further studies are needed to establish solid conclusions regarding the best MMR assessment technique for EC.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1422-0067</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1661-6596</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1422-0067</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/ijms241914468</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37833916</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>DNA methylation ; Endometrial cancer ; Genes ; Mutation ; Oncology ; Protein expression ; Proteins</subject><ispartof>International journal of molecular sciences, 2023-10, Vol.24 (19), p.14468</ispartof><rights>2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2023 by the authors. 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-a9c897a78eb9f1b920cc59878e2d487763e07b26e0847d7a3963ad0644b5e9623</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-7308-823X ; 0000-0002-7257-5642 ; 0000-0003-1644-3992 ; 0000-0002-2463-1304 ; 0000-0002-5401-3216 ; 0000-0002-2183-3699 ; 0000-0002-2298-4683</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10572657/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10572657/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mendiola, Marta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heredia-Soto, Victoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruz-Caracuel, Ignacio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baillo, Amparo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramon-Patino, Jorge Luis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Escudero, Francisco Javier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miguel, Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pelaez-Garcia, Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hernandez, Alicia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feliu, Jaime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hardisson, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Redondo, Andres</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Methods for Testing Mismatch Repair Status in Endometrial Cancer</title><title>International journal of molecular sciences</title><description>Approximately 20–30% of endometrial carcinomas (EC) are characterized by mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (dMMR) or microsatellite instability (MSI), and their testing has become part of the routine diagnosis. The aim of this study was to establish and compare the MMR status using various approaches. Immunohistochemistry (IHC), PCR-based MSI, and the detection of defects in the four key MMR genes (MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6) via methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) and targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) were performed. MSH3 expression was also evaluated. A set of 126 early-stage EC samples were analyzed, 53.2% of which were dMMR and 46.8% of which were proficient MMR (pMMR) as determined using IHC, whereas 69.3% were classified as microsatellite stable, while 8.8% and 21.9% were classified MSI-low (MSI-L) and MSI-high (MSI-H), respectively. In total, 44.3% of the samples showed genetic or epigenetic alterations in one or more genes; MLH1 promoter methylation was the most common event. Although acceptable concordance was observed, there were overall discrepancies between the three testing approaches, mainly associated with the dMMR group. IHC had a better correlation with MMR genomic status than the MSI status determined using PCR. Further studies are needed to establish solid conclusions regarding the best MMR assessment technique for EC.</description><subject>DNA methylation</subject><subject>Endometrial cancer</subject><subject>Genes</subject><subject>Mutation</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Protein expression</subject><subject>Proteins</subject><issn>1422-0067</issn><issn>1661-6596</issn><issn>1422-0067</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkctLxDAQxoMoPlaP3gNevFTzatKcRJb1AauCj3NI09TN0iZr0gr-92ZZEdfTzDC_-fhmBoBTjC4olejSLftEGJaYMV7tgEPMCCkQ4mL3T34AjlJaIkQoKeU-OKCiysOYH4LHaehXOroUPAwtfLDDIjQJtiHCV5sG59_hg0u9HswCPtuVdhG-DHoYE3QeznwTejtEpzs41d7YeAz2Wt0le_ITJ-DtZvY6vSvmT7f30-t5YSiTQ6GlqaTQorK1bHEtCTKmlFWuScMqITi1SNSEW1Qx0QhNJae6QZyxurSSEzoBVxvd1Vj3tjHWD1F3ahVdr-OXCtqp7Y53C_UePhVGpSC8FFnh_Echho8xr6p6l4ztOu1tGJMi2Ua-L8Nr9Owfugxj9Hm_NcUF49lwpooNZWJIKdr21w1Gav0qtfUq-g3Wj4VE</recordid><startdate>20231001</startdate><enddate>20231001</enddate><creator>Mendiola, Marta</creator><creator>Heredia-Soto, Victoria</creator><creator>Ruz-Caracuel, Ignacio</creator><creator>Baillo, Amparo</creator><creator>Ramon-Patino, Jorge Luis</creator><creator>Escudero, Francisco Javier</creator><creator>Miguel, Maria</creator><creator>Pelaez-Garcia, Alberto</creator><creator>Hernandez, Alicia</creator><creator>Feliu, Jaime</creator><creator>Hardisson, David</creator><creator>Redondo, Andres</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7308-823X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7257-5642</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1644-3992</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2463-1304</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5401-3216</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2183-3699</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2298-4683</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231001</creationdate><title>Comparison of Methods for Testing Mismatch Repair Status in Endometrial Cancer</title><author>Mendiola, Marta ; Heredia-Soto, Victoria ; Ruz-Caracuel, Ignacio ; Baillo, Amparo ; Ramon-Patino, Jorge Luis ; Escudero, Francisco Javier ; Miguel, Maria ; Pelaez-Garcia, Alberto ; Hernandez, Alicia ; Feliu, Jaime ; Hardisson, David ; Redondo, Andres</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-a9c897a78eb9f1b920cc59878e2d487763e07b26e0847d7a3963ad0644b5e9623</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>DNA methylation</topic><topic>Endometrial cancer</topic><topic>Genes</topic><topic>Mutation</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Protein expression</topic><topic>Proteins</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mendiola, Marta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heredia-Soto, Victoria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruz-Caracuel, Ignacio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baillo, Amparo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramon-Patino, Jorge Luis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Escudero, Francisco Javier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miguel, Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pelaez-Garcia, Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hernandez, Alicia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feliu, Jaime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hardisson, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Redondo, Andres</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International journal of molecular sciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mendiola, Marta</au><au>Heredia-Soto, Victoria</au><au>Ruz-Caracuel, Ignacio</au><au>Baillo, Amparo</au><au>Ramon-Patino, Jorge Luis</au><au>Escudero, Francisco Javier</au><au>Miguel, Maria</au><au>Pelaez-Garcia, Alberto</au><au>Hernandez, Alicia</au><au>Feliu, Jaime</au><au>Hardisson, David</au><au>Redondo, Andres</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Methods for Testing Mismatch Repair Status in Endometrial Cancer</atitle><jtitle>International journal of molecular sciences</jtitle><date>2023-10-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>19</issue><spage>14468</spage><pages>14468-</pages><issn>1422-0067</issn><issn>1661-6596</issn><eissn>1422-0067</eissn><abstract>Approximately 20–30% of endometrial carcinomas (EC) are characterized by mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (dMMR) or microsatellite instability (MSI), and their testing has become part of the routine diagnosis. The aim of this study was to establish and compare the MMR status using various approaches. Immunohistochemistry (IHC), PCR-based MSI, and the detection of defects in the four key MMR genes (MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6) via methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) and targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) were performed. MSH3 expression was also evaluated. A set of 126 early-stage EC samples were analyzed, 53.2% of which were dMMR and 46.8% of which were proficient MMR (pMMR) as determined using IHC, whereas 69.3% were classified as microsatellite stable, while 8.8% and 21.9% were classified MSI-low (MSI-L) and MSI-high (MSI-H), respectively. In total, 44.3% of the samples showed genetic or epigenetic alterations in one or more genes; MLH1 promoter methylation was the most common event. Although acceptable concordance was observed, there were overall discrepancies between the three testing approaches, mainly associated with the dMMR group. IHC had a better correlation with MMR genomic status than the MSI status determined using PCR. Further studies are needed to establish solid conclusions regarding the best MMR assessment technique for EC.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>37833916</pmid><doi>10.3390/ijms241914468</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7308-823X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7257-5642</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1644-3992</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2463-1304</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5401-3216</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2183-3699</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2298-4683</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1422-0067 |
| ispartof | International journal of molecular sciences, 2023-10, Vol.24 (19), p.14468 |
| issn | 1422-0067 1661-6596 1422-0067 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10572657 |
| source | MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central |
| subjects | DNA methylation Endometrial cancer Genes Mutation Oncology Protein expression Proteins |
| title | Comparison of Methods for Testing Mismatch Repair Status in Endometrial Cancer |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T21%3A05%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Methods%20for%20Testing%20Mismatch%20Repair%20Status%20in%20Endometrial%20Cancer&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20molecular%20sciences&rft.au=Mendiola,%20Marta&rft.date=2023-10-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=19&rft.spage=14468&rft.pages=14468-&rft.issn=1422-0067&rft.eissn=1422-0067&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/ijms241914468&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2877390417%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2876746763&rft_id=info:pmid/37833916&rfr_iscdi=true |