A Validation Study of Vascular Cognitive Impairment Genetics Meta-Analysis Findings in an Independent Collaborative Cohort

Vascular cognitive impairment (VCI), including its severe form, vascular dementia (VaD), is the second most common form of dementia. The genetic etiology of sporadic VCI remains largely unknown. We previously conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published genetic association studies of sporadic VCI prior to 6 July 2012, which demonstrated that APOE (ɛ4, ɛ2) and MTHFR (rs1801133) variants were associated with susceptibility for VCI. De novo genotyping was conducted in a new independent relatively large collaborative European cohort of VaD (nmax = 549) and elderly non-demented samples (nmax = 552). Where available, genotype data derived from Illumina's 610-quad array for 1210 GERAD1 control samples were also included in analyses of genes examined. Associations were tested using the Cochran-Armitage trend test: MTHFR rs1801133 (OR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.16-1.58, p = <0.0001), APOE rs7412 (OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.90, p = 0.01), and APOE rs429358 (OR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.17-2.16, p = 0.003). Association was also observed with APOE epsilon alleles; ɛ4 (OR = 1.85, 95% CI 1.35-2.52, p = <0.0001) and ɛ2 (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.98, p = 0.03). Logistic Regression and Bonferroni correction in a subgroup of the cohort adjusted for gender, age, and population maintained the association of APOE rs429358 and ɛ4 allele.

External quality assessment of BRAF molecular analysis in melanoma

The availability of BRAF inhibitors has given metastatic melanoma patients an effective new treatment choice and molecular testing to determine the presence or absence of a BRAF codon 600 mutation is pivotal in the clinical management of these patients. This molecular test must be performed accurately and appropriately to ensure that the patient receives the most suitable treatment in a timely manner. Laboratories have introduced such testing; however, some experience low sample throughput making it critical that an external quality assurance programme is available to help promote a high standard of testing, reporting and provide an educational aspect for BRAF molecular testing. Laboratories took part in three rounds of external quality assessment (EQA) during a 12-month period giving participants a measure of the accuracy of genotyping, clinical interpretation of the result and experience in testing a range of different samples. Formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue sections from malignant melanoma patients were distributed to participants for BRAF molecular testing. The standard of testing was generally high but distribution of a mutation other than the most common, p.(Val600Glu), highlighted concerns with detection or reporting of the presence of rarer mutations. The main issues raised in the interpretation of the results were the importance of clear unambiguous interpretation of the result tailored to the patient and the understanding that the treatment is different from that given to other stratified medicine programmes. The variability in reporting and wide range of methodologies used indicate a continuing need for EQA in this field.

Refining the diagnosis and EGFR status of non-small cell lung carcinoma in biopsy and cytologic material, using a panel of mucin staining, TTF-1, cytokeratin 5/6, and P63, and EGFR mutation analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The dichotomization of non-small cell carcinoma (NSCLC) subtype into squamous (SQCC) and adenocarcinoma (ADC) has become important in recent years and is increasingly required with regard to management. The aim of this study was to determine the utility of a panel of commercially available antibodies in refining the diagnosis on small biopsies and also to determine whether cytologic material is suitable for somatic EGFR genotyping in a prospectively analyzed series of patients undergoing investigation for suspected lung cancer. METHODS: Thirty-two consecutive cases of NSCLC were first tested using a panel comprising cytokeratin 5/6, P63, thyroid transcription factor-1, 34betaE12, and a D-PAS stain for mucin, to determine their value in refining diagnosis of NSCLC. After this test phase, two further pathologists independently reviewed the cases using a refined panel that excluded 34betaE12 because of its low specificity for SQCC, and refinement of diagnosis and concordance were assessed. Ten cases of ADC, including eight derived from cytologic samples, were sent for EGFR mutation analysis. RESULTS: There was refinement of diagnosis in 65% of cases of NSCLC to either SQCC or ADC in the test phase. This included 10 of 13 cases where cell pellets had been prepared from transbronchial needle aspirates. Validation by two further pathologists with varying expertise in lung pathology confirmed increased refinement and concordance of diagnosis. All samples were adequate for analysis, and they all showed a wild-type EGFR genotype. CONCLUSION: A panel comprising cytokeratin 5/6, P63, thyroid transcription factor-1, and a D-PAS stain for mucin increases diagnostic accuracy and agreement between pathologists when faced with refining a diagnosis of NSCLC to SQCC or ADC. These small samples, even cell pellets derived from transbronchial needle aspirates, seem to be adequate for EGFR mutation analysis.