Detection of ROS1 gene rearrangement in lung adenocarcinoma: comparison of IHC, FISH and real-time RT-PCR.

AIMS:To compare fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), immunohistochemistry (IHC) and quantitative real-time reverse transcription-PCR (qRT-PCR) assays for detection of ROS1 fusion in a large number of ROS1-positive lung adenocatcinoma (ADC) patients. METHODS:Using IHC analysis, sixty lung ADCs...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ling Shan, Fang Lian, Lei Guo, Tian Qiu, Yun Ling, Jianming Ying, Dongmei Lin
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2015-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4351102?pdf=render
id doaj-2937995999594b24a82715b1768cfe46
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2937995999594b24a82715b1768cfe462020-11-25T01:33:18ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032015-01-01103e012042210.1371/journal.pone.0120422Detection of ROS1 gene rearrangement in lung adenocarcinoma: comparison of IHC, FISH and real-time RT-PCR.Ling ShanFang LianLei GuoTian QiuYun LingJianming YingDongmei LinAIMS:To compare fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), immunohistochemistry (IHC) and quantitative real-time reverse transcription-PCR (qRT-PCR) assays for detection of ROS1 fusion in a large number of ROS1-positive lung adenocatcinoma (ADC) patients. METHODS:Using IHC analysis, sixty lung ADCs including 16 cases with ROS1 protein expression and 44 cases without ROS1 expression were selected for this study. The ROS1 fusion status was examined by FISH and qRT-PCR assay. RESULTS:Among 60 cases, 16 (26.7%), 13 (21.7%) and 20 (33.3%) cases were ROS1 positive revealed by IHC, FISH and qRT-PCR, respectively. Using FISH as a standard method for ROS1 fusion detection, the sensitivity and specificity of IHC were 100% and 93.6%, respectively. Three IHC-positive cases, which showed FISH negative, were demonstrated with ROS1 fusion by qRT-PCR analysis. The sensitivity and specificity of qRT-PCR for detection for ROS1 fusion were 100% and 85.1%, respectively. The total concordance rate between IHC and qRT-PCR were 93.3%. CONCLUSION:IHC is a reliable and rapid screening tool in routine pathologic laboratories for the identification of suitable candidates for ROS1-targeted therapy. Some ROS1 IHC-positive but FISH-negative cases did harbor the translocation events and may benefit from crizotinib.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4351102?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Ling Shan
Fang Lian
Lei Guo
Tian Qiu
Yun Ling
Jianming Ying
Dongmei Lin
spellingShingle Ling Shan
Fang Lian
Lei Guo
Tian Qiu
Yun Ling
Jianming Ying
Dongmei Lin
Detection of ROS1 gene rearrangement in lung adenocarcinoma: comparison of IHC, FISH and real-time RT-PCR.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Ling Shan
Fang Lian
Lei Guo
Tian Qiu
Yun Ling
Jianming Ying
Dongmei Lin
author_sort Ling Shan
title Detection of ROS1 gene rearrangement in lung adenocarcinoma: comparison of IHC, FISH and real-time RT-PCR.
title_short Detection of ROS1 gene rearrangement in lung adenocarcinoma: comparison of IHC, FISH and real-time RT-PCR.
title_full Detection of ROS1 gene rearrangement in lung adenocarcinoma: comparison of IHC, FISH and real-time RT-PCR.
title_fullStr Detection of ROS1 gene rearrangement in lung adenocarcinoma: comparison of IHC, FISH and real-time RT-PCR.
title_full_unstemmed Detection of ROS1 gene rearrangement in lung adenocarcinoma: comparison of IHC, FISH and real-time RT-PCR.
title_sort detection of ros1 gene rearrangement in lung adenocarcinoma: comparison of ihc, fish and real-time rt-pcr.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2015-01-01
description AIMS:To compare fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), immunohistochemistry (IHC) and quantitative real-time reverse transcription-PCR (qRT-PCR) assays for detection of ROS1 fusion in a large number of ROS1-positive lung adenocatcinoma (ADC) patients. METHODS:Using IHC analysis, sixty lung ADCs including 16 cases with ROS1 protein expression and 44 cases without ROS1 expression were selected for this study. The ROS1 fusion status was examined by FISH and qRT-PCR assay. RESULTS:Among 60 cases, 16 (26.7%), 13 (21.7%) and 20 (33.3%) cases were ROS1 positive revealed by IHC, FISH and qRT-PCR, respectively. Using FISH as a standard method for ROS1 fusion detection, the sensitivity and specificity of IHC were 100% and 93.6%, respectively. Three IHC-positive cases, which showed FISH negative, were demonstrated with ROS1 fusion by qRT-PCR analysis. The sensitivity and specificity of qRT-PCR for detection for ROS1 fusion were 100% and 85.1%, respectively. The total concordance rate between IHC and qRT-PCR were 93.3%. CONCLUSION:IHC is a reliable and rapid screening tool in routine pathologic laboratories for the identification of suitable candidates for ROS1-targeted therapy. Some ROS1 IHC-positive but FISH-negative cases did harbor the translocation events and may benefit from crizotinib.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4351102?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT lingshan detectionofros1generearrangementinlungadenocarcinomacomparisonofihcfishandrealtimertpcr
AT fanglian detectionofros1generearrangementinlungadenocarcinomacomparisonofihcfishandrealtimertpcr
AT leiguo detectionofros1generearrangementinlungadenocarcinomacomparisonofihcfishandrealtimertpcr
AT tianqiu detectionofros1generearrangementinlungadenocarcinomacomparisonofihcfishandrealtimertpcr
AT yunling detectionofros1generearrangementinlungadenocarcinomacomparisonofihcfishandrealtimertpcr
AT jianmingying detectionofros1generearrangementinlungadenocarcinomacomparisonofihcfishandrealtimertpcr
AT dongmeilin detectionofros1generearrangementinlungadenocarcinomacomparisonofihcfishandrealtimertpcr
_version_ 1725078117350899712