Cited by 31Colorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesGenetic factors in colorectal cancerColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments

Concordance in KRAS and BRAF mutations in endoscopic biopsy samples and resection specimens of colorectal adenocarcinoma

Krol, L.C., ’t Hart, N.A., Methorst, N., Knol, A.J., Prinsen, C., Boers, J.E.·2012·European Journal of Cancer

Abstract

Background KRAS testing is mandatory if anti-EGFR therapy is considered in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). In addition, BRAF mutations seem to be an important negative prognostic factor. The aim of this study is to establish the concordance of KRAS and BRAF mutational status in paired biopsy and resection specimens of primary CRC using several analytic methods.Methods DNA was extracted from paraffin blocks of 126 CRC patients. KRAS codon 12/13 and BRAF V600E mutational status was assessed using high resolution melting (HRM), direct sequencing (DS) of the HRM polymerase chain reaction (PCR) product. In addition, the Therascreen Amplification Refractory Mutation System (ARMS)-Scorpion KRAS assay and BRAF pyrosequencing were employed; both assays claim to require less tumour cells in comparison with DS.Results KRAS and BRAF were found to be mutually exclusive. Mutation frequencies were 33.9% for KRAS, and for BRAF 19.0%, respectively. Concordance of KRAS mutational status between biopsy and resection specimens was 97.4% (ARMS), 98.4% (DS) and 99.2% (HRM), respectively. For BRAF concordance was 98.4% (Pyro, DS) and 99.2% (HRM).Conclusions KRAS and BRAF mutational status of endoscopic biopsies and resection specimens of CRC showed a >95% concordance. Endoscopic biopsies can be confidently used for molecular analysis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.02.054

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Krol, L. C., ’t Hart, N. A., Methorst, N., Knol, A. J., Prinsen, C., & Boers, J. E.
Affiliations
Isala (NL)
Corresponding author
Boers, J.E.
Venue
European Journal of Cancer
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-05
Volume
48
Issue
7
Pages
1108-1115
ISSN
0959-8049 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2160668006
Cited by
31
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Keywords
KRAS mutation, BRAF V600E mutation, colorectal adenocarcinoma, endoscopic biopsy, surgical resection specimens, concordance, anti-EGFR therapy, high-resolution melting analysis, pyrosequencing, allele-specific PCR
MeSH terms
Adenocarcinoma, Aged, Biopsy, Endoscopy, Female, Humans, Male, Mutation, Genes, ras, Colorectal Neoplasms, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review