4.6 Article

Gene mutations in stool from gastric and colorectal neoplasia patients by next-generation sequencing

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 23, 期 47, 页码 8291-8299

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i47.8291

关键词

Stool DNA; next-generation sequencing; Mutations; Gastric neoplasia; Colorectal neoplasia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AIM To study cancer hotspot mutations by next-generation sequencing (NGS) in stool DNA from patients with different gastrointestinal tract (GIT) neoplasms. METHODS Stool samples were collected from 87 Finnish patients diagnosed with various gastric and colorectal neoplasms, including benign tumors, and from 14 healthy controls. DNA was isolated from stools by using the PSP (R) Spin Stool DNA Plus Kit. For each sample, 20 ng of DNA was used to construct sequencing libraries using the Ion AmpliSeq Cancer Hotspot Panel v2 or Ion AmpliSeq Colon and Lung Cancer panel v2. Sequencing was performed on Ion PGM. Torrent Suite Software v.5.2.2 was used for variant calling and data analysis. RESULTS NGS was successful in assaying 72 GIT samples and 13 healthy controls, with success rates of the assay being 78% for stomach neoplasia and 87% for colorectal tumors. In stool specimens from patients with gastric neoplasia, five hotspot mutations were found in APC, CDKN2A and EGFR genes, in addition to seven novel mutations. From colorectal patients, 20 mutations were detected in AKT1, APC, ERBB2, FBXW7, KIT, KRAS, NRAS, SMARCB1, SMO, STK11 and TP53. Healthy controls did not exhibit any hotspot mutations, except for two novel ones. APC and TP53 were the most frequently mutated genes in colorectal neoplasms, with five mutations, followed by KRAS with two mutations. APC was the most commonly mutated gene in stools of patients with premalignant/benign GIT lesions. CONCLUSION Our results show that in addition to colorectal neoplasms, mutations can also be assayed from stool specimens of patients with gastric neoplasms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据