King's College London

Research portal

Robust BRCA1-like classification of copy number profiles of samples repeated across different datasets and platforms

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Philip C Schouten, Anita Grigoriadis, Thomas Kuilman, Hasan Mirza, Johnathan A Watkins, Saskia A Cooke, Ewald van Dyk, Tesa M Severson, Oscar M Rueda, Marlous Hoogstraat, Caroline V M Verhagen, Rachael Natrajan, Suet-Feung Chin, Esther H Lips, Janneke Kruizinga, Arno Velds, Marja Nieuwland, Ron M Kerkhoven, Oscar Krijgsman, Conchita Vens & 6 more Daniel Peeper, Petra M Nederlof, Carlos Caldas, Andrew N Tutt, Lodewyk F Wessels, Sabine C Linn

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1274-86
Number of pages13
JournalMolecular Oncology
Volume9
Issue number7
Early online date20 Mar 2015
DOIs
Accepted/In press11 Mar 2015
E-pub ahead of print20 Mar 2015
PublishedAug 2015

Documents

  • 1-s2.0-S1574789115000514-main

    1_s2.0_S1574789115000514_main.pdf, 2.36 MB, application/pdf

    Uploaded date:29 Apr 2016

    Version:Final published version

    Licence:CC BY-NC-ND

King's Authors

Abstract

Breast cancers with BRCA1 germline mutation have a characteristic DNA copy number (CN) pattern. We developed a test that assigns CN profiles to be 'BRCA1-like' or 'non-BRCA1-like', which refers to resembling a BRCA1-mutated tumor or resembling a tumor without a BRCA1 mutation, respectively. Approximately one third of the BRCA1-like breast cancers have a BRCA1 mutation, one third has hypermethylation of the BRCA1 promoter and one third has an unknown reason for being BRCA1-like. This classification is indicative of patients' response to high dose alkylating and platinum containing chemotherapy regimens, which targets the inability of BRCA1 deficient cells to repair DNA double strand breaks. We investigated whether this classification can be reliably obtained with next generation sequencing and copy number platforms other than the bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) array Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH) on which it was originally developed. We investigated samples from 230 breast cancer patients for which a CN profile had been generated on two to five platforms, comprising low coverage CN sequencing, CN extraction from targeted sequencing panels (CopywriteR), Affymetrix SNP6.0, 135K/720K oligonucleotide aCGH, Affymetrix Oncoscan FFPE (MIP) technology, 3K BAC and 32K BAC aCGH. Pairwise comparison of genomic position-mapped profiles from the original aCGH platform and other platforms revealed concordance. For most cases, biological differences between samples exceeded the differences between platforms within one sample. We observed the same classification across different platforms in over 80% of the patients and kappa values of at least 0.36. Differential classification could be attributed to CN profiles that were not strongly associated to one class. In conclusion, we have shown that the genomic regions that define our BRCA1-like classifier are robustly measured by different CN profiling technologies, providing the possibility to retro- and prospectively investigate BRCA1-like classification across a wide range of CN platforms.

Download statistics

No data available

View graph of relations

© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454