A Performance Comparison of Commonly Used Assays to Detect RET Fusions

检测 RET 融合的常用检测方法的性能比较

阅读:4
作者:Soo-Ryum Yang, Umut Aypar, Ezra Y Rosen, Douglas A Mata, Ryma Benayed, Kerry Mullaney, Gowtham Jayakumaran, Yanming Zhang, Denise Frosina, Alexander Drilon, Marc Ladanyi, Achim A Jungbluth, Natasha Rekhtman, Jaclyn F Hechtman

Conclusions

Although DNA sequencing has high sensitivity and specificity, RNA sequencing of RET SVUS is necessary. Both FISH and IHC demonstrated lower sensitivity for NCOA4-RET fusions.

Purpose

Selpercatinib and pralsetinib induce deep and durable responses in patients with advanced RET fusion-positive lung and thyroid cancer. RET fusion testing strategies with rapid and reliable

Results

A total of 171 of 41,869 patients with DNA NGS harbored RET structural variants, including 139 canonical fusions and 32 SVUS. Twelve of 32 (37.5%) SVUS were transcribed into RNA-level fusions, resulting in 151 oncogenic RET fusions. The most common RET fusion-positive tumor types were lung (65.6%) and thyroid (23.2%). The most common partners were KIF5B (45%), CCDC6 (29.1%), and NCOA4 (13.3%). DNA NGS showed 100% (46/46) sensitivity and 99.6% (4,459/4,479) specificity. FISH showed 91.7% (44/48) sensitivity, with lower sensitivity for NCOA4-RET (66.7%, 8/12). A total of 87.5% (7/8) of RET SVUS negative for RNA-level fusions demonstrated rearrangement by FISH. The sensitivity of IHC varied by fusion partner: KIF5B sensitivity was highest (100%, 31/31), followed by CCDC6 (88.9%, 16/18) and NCOA4 (50%, 6/12). Specificity of RET IHC was 82% (73/89). Conclusions: Although DNA sequencing has high sensitivity and specificity, RNA sequencing of RET SVUS is necessary. Both FISH and IHC demonstrated lower sensitivity for NCOA4-RET fusions.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。