Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) for Myeloid neoplasms

Next generation sequencing (NGS) permits the simultaneous investigation of multiple genes.   A targeted NGS panel is now in use fo the detection of single nucleotide variants, small insertions and deletions within clinically relevant genes for patients diagnosed with myeloid malignancies (Table 1).   In addition, the panel is able to detect some clinically relevant gene fusions (Table 2).  NGS is performed using the ThermoFisher Oncomine Myeloid Research Panel on the Thermofisher Ion GeneStudio S5 instrument. Analysis of results is performed using the ThermoFisher Torrent Suite and Ion Reporter software, and reported with respect to an appropropriate reference genome.

Patients who fulfill the following criteria may be eligible for testing:

  • Treatment eligible patient with acute myeloid leukaemia
  • Transplant eligible patient with a diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndrome
  • Transplant eligible patient with a diagnosis of primary myelofibrosis
  • For differentiation of hypoplastic MDS and aplastic anaemia
  • Atypical myeloproliferative neoplasm (“triple negative” PMF, MDS/MPN overlap)
  • Relapse AML patient to provide therapeutic information

Please specify to which category the patient belongs when requesting.

Sample Requirements

Myeloid NGS Testing is performed on both DNA and RNA extracted from bone marrow or blood samples. Where possible, the diagnostic bone marrow specimen should be tested.  Samples collected post-therapy are often unsuitable due to the low neoplastic cell content.

Please complete the Myeloid NGS form: 

 

Genes/ Fusions assessed

 The following genes and fusion partners are currently available for assessment:

Table 1: Gene regions analysed

Gene

Region Sequenced

Transcript ID

ASXL1

Exon 14

NM_015338

BCOR

All exons

NM_001123385

CALR

Exon 9

NM_004343

CEBPA

All exons

NM_004364

CSF3R

Exon 14 and 17

NM_156039

DNMT3A

Exons 11-23

NM_022552

EZH2

All exons

NM_004456

FLT3

Exon 14 and 15 and 20

NM_004119

GATA2

Exon 4 and 5

NM_032638

IDH1

Exon 4

NM_005896

IDH2

Exon 4

NM_002168

JAK2

Exon 12 and 14

NM_004972

KIT

Exon 2, 8-11, 13 and 17

NM_000222

KRAS

Exon 2, 3

NM_004985

MPL

Exon 10

NM_005373

NPM1

Exon 11

NM_002520

NRAS

Exon 2, 3

NM_02524

PTPN11

Exon 3, 13

NM_002834

RUNX1

Exons 2-9

NM_001754

SETBP1

Exon 4 (partial)

NM_015559

SF3B1

Exon 13-16

NM_012433

SRSF2

Exon 1

NM_003016

STAG2

All exons

NM_001042749

TET2

Exon 3-11

NM_001127208

TP53

Exon 2-11

NM_000546

U2AF1

Exon 2 and 6

NM_006758

WT1

Exon 7 and 9

NM_024426

ZRSR2

All exons

NM_005089

 

Table 2: Fusion transcripts analysed: the most common fusion transcripts involving these partners will be identified.

 

Fusion Partner

ABL1

ETV6

FGFR1

KMT2A

MECOM

MYH11

NUP214

PDGFRA

PDGFRB

RARA

RUNX1

TCF3

 Assay Limitations

The ThermoFisher Oncomine Myeloid Research Panel is designed to target clinically relevant regions of the target genes; entire genes are not always analysed.  Therefore, the panel may not detect, or detect with reduced sensitivity, some variants located outwith the target regions. A full list of reference gene transcripts and specific target regions are available on request.

The limit of detection (LoD) of the ThermoFisher Oncomine Myeloid Research Panel has been calculated to be 5% for small nucleotide variants and approximately 10% for insertions and deletions.  Variants present at an allele frequency below the LoD will not expected be detected.  The likelihood of missing a low level variant increases in samples with a low neoplastic cell content.

Due to the wide range of regions/amplicons analysed using this NGS panel, it would not be feasible to calculate a limit of detection for every possible variant.  Differences in the LoD may occur in some genomic regions due to factors intrinsic to DNA structure.  Furthermore, the NGS panel may fail to accurately characterise variants located in long homopolymer regions due to limitations in the sequencing technology.  Sequences that are GC rich and areas that form secondary structures may also prove challenging to sequence.  Failure to detect variants located at the end of amplicons cannot be excluded. 

Samples are reported as having “optimal coverage” where there are a minimum of 250 reads for all reportable amplicons. The Association of Molecular Pathology and the College of American Pathologists recommend a minimum of 250 reads per tested amplicon, corresponding to a false positive or false negative rate of <0.5% when there is a 5% limit of detection (Somak et al., 2017).  Please note, for most samples the read depth is significantly higher than 250 across all target regions.

Reporting of Results 

Variant interpretation is performed according to Li,  M. et al. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 2017 Volume 19 , Issue 1 , 4 – 23.  Tier I (variants with strong clinical significance) and Tier II (variants with potential clinical significance) variants will be reported, while Tier III (variants of unknown clinical significance) and Tier IV (benign or likely benign) variants will not be reported.  Variants are reported according to HGVS nomenclature with respect to an appropriate reference sequence. Please note, result interpretation will be correct at the time of reporting, however the significance of variants may change over time.

The NGS panel is designed for the detection of somatic variants only.  Whilst germline variants may be present, it is not possible to differentiate between germline and somatic variants using this protocol technology.  If the presence of a germline variant is suspected, this will be highlighted in the report. 

Turnaround Time

NGS results are expected to be available within 6 weeks of sample receipt.  If testing is urgent please contact the laboratory to discuss.

Accreditation Status

NGS testing using the ThermoFisher Oncomine Myeloid Research Panel and is fully accredited to ISO 15189:2012.

References

Li,  M. et al. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 2017 Volume 19 , Issue 1 , 4 – 23.

Roy, Somak et al.  The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 2017 Volume 20, Issue 1, 4 - 27