Transfer of next-generation sequencing technology to a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified laboratory requires vigorous validation. Herein, we validated a next-generation sequencing screen interrogating 740 mutational hotspots in 46 cancer-related genes using the Ion Torrent AmpliSeq cancer panel and Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine (IT-PGM). Ten nanograms of FFPE DNA was used as template to amplify mutation hotspot regions of 46 genes in 70 solid tumor samples, including 22 archival specimens with known mutations and 48 specimens sequenced in parallel with alternate sequencing platforms. In the archival specimens, the IT-PGM detected expected nucleotide substitutions (n = 29) and four of six insertions/deletions; in parallel, 66 variants were detected. These variants, except a single nucleotide substitution, were confirmed by alternate platforms. Repeated sequencing of progressively diluted DNA from two cancer cell lines with known mutations demonstrated reliable sensitivity at 10% variant frequency for single nucleotide variants with high intrarun and inter-run reproducibility. Manual library preparation yielded relatively superior sequencing performance compared with the automated Ion Torrent OneTouch system. Overall, the IT-PGM platform with the ability to multiplex and simultaneously sequence multiple patient samples using low amounts of FFPE DNA was specific and sensitive for single nucleotide variant mutation analysis and can be incorporated easily into the clinical laboratory for routine testing.

No abstract

Increasing use of fine needle aspiration for oncological diagnosis, while minimally invasive, poses a challenge for molecular testing by traditional sequencing platforms due to high sample requirements. The advent of affordable benchtop next-generation sequencing platforms such as the semiconductor-based Ion Personal Genome Machine (PGM) Sequencer has facilitated multi-gene mutational profiling using only nanograms of DNA. We describe successful next-generation sequencing-based testing of fine needle aspiration cytological specimens in a clinical laboratory setting. We selected 61 tumor specimens, obtained by fine needle aspiration, with known mutational status for clinically relevant genes; of these, 31 specimens yielded sufficient DNA for next-generation sequencing testing. Ten nanograms of DNA from each sample was tested for mutations in the hotspot regions of 46 cancer-related genes using a 318-chip on Ion PGM Sequencer. All tested samples underwent successful targeted sequencing of 46 genes. We showed 100% concordance of results between next-generation sequencing and conventional test platforms for all previously known point mutations that included BRAF, EGFR, KRAS, MET, NRAS, PIK3CA, RET and TP53, deletions of EGFR and wild-type calls. Furthermore, next-generation sequencing detected variants in 19 of the 31 (61%) patient samples that were not detected by traditional platforms, thus increasing the utility of mutation analysis; these variants involved the APC, ATM, CDKN2A, CTNNB1, FGFR2, FLT3, KDR, KIT, KRAS, MLH1, NRAS, PIK3CA, SMAD4, STK11 and TP53 genes. The results of this study show that next-generation sequencing-based mutational profiling can be performed on fine needle aspiration cytological smears and cell blocks. Next-generation sequencing can be performed with only nanograms of DNA and has better sensitivity than traditional sequencing platforms. Use of next-generation sequencing also enhances the power of fine needle aspiration by providing gene mutation results that can direct personalized cancer therapy.

BACKGROUND:The use of cytology specimens for next-generation sequencing (NGS) is particularly challenging because of the unconventional substrate of smears and the often limited sample volume. An analysis of factors affecting NGS testing in cytologic samples may help to increase the frequency of successful testing. METHODS: This study reviewed variables associated with all in-house cytology cases (n 5 207) that were analyzed by NGS with the Ion Torrent platform during a 10-month interval. A statistical analysis was performed to measure the effects of the DNA input threshold, specimen preparation, slide type, tumor fraction, DNA yield, and cytopathologist bias. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-four of 207 cases (79%) were successfully sequenced by NGS; 43 (21%) failed because of either a low DNA yield or a template/library preparation failure. The median estimated tumor fraction and DNA concentration for the successfully sequenced cases were 70% and 2.5 ng/lL, respectively, whereas they were 60% and 0.2 ng/lL, respectively, for NGS failures. Cell block sections were tested in 91 cases, and smears were used in 116 cases. NGS success positively correlated with the DNA yield but not the tumor fraction. Cell block preparations showed a higher success rate than smears. Frosted-tip slides yielded significantly more DNA than fully frosted slides. Lowering the input DNA concentration below the manufacturer's recommended threshold of 10 ng (>0.85 ng/lL) resulted in a marked increase in the NGS success rate from 58.6% to 89.8%. CONCLUSIONS:The failure of NGS with cytology samples is usually a result of suboptimal DNA due to multiple pre-analytical factors.Knowledge of these factors will allow better selection of cytology material for mutational analysis. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2015;123:659-68.

No abstract