Application of COLD-PCR for improved detection of KRAS mutations in clinical samples

106Citations
Citations of this article
51Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

KRAS mutations have been detected in approximately 30% of all human tumors, and have been shown to predict response to some targeted therapies. The most common KRAS mutation-detection strategy consists of conventional PCR and direct sequencing. This approach has a 10-20% detection sensitivity depending on whether pyrosequencing or Sanger sequencing is used. To improve detection sensitivity, we compared our conventional method with the recently described co-amplification-at-lower denaturation erature PCR (COLD-PCR) method, which selectively amplifies minority alleles. In COLD-PCR, the critical denaturation temperature is lowered to 80°C (vs 94°C in conventional PCR). The sensitivity of COLD-PCR was determined by assessing serial dilutions. Fifty clinical samples were used, including 20 fresh bone-marrow aspirate specimens and the formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue of 30 solid tumors. Implementation of COLD-PCR was straightforward and required no additional cost for reagents or instruments. The method was specific and reproducible. COLD-PCR successfully detected mutations in all samples that were positive by conventional PCR, and enhanced the mutant-to-wild-type ratio by 4.74-fold, increasing the mutation detection sensitivity to 1.5%. The enhancement of mutation detection by COLD-PCR inversely correlated with the tumor-cell percentage in a sample. In conclusion, we validated the utility and superior sensitivity of COLD-PCR for detecting KRAS mutations in a variety of hematopoietic and solid tumors using either fresh or fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue. © 2009 USCAP, Inc.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zuo, Z., Chen, S. S., Chandra, P. K., Galbincea, J. M., Soape, M., Doan, S., … Luthra, R. (2009). Application of COLD-PCR for improved detection of KRAS mutations in clinical samples. Modern Pathology, 22(8), 1023–1031. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2009.59

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free