Search

Molecular profiling of glioblastoma has revealed complex cytogenetic, epigenetic, and molecular abnormalities that are necessary for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. Our neuro-oncology group has developed a data-driven, institutional consensus guideline for efficient and optimal workup of glioblastomas based on our routine performance of molecular testing. We describe our institution’s testing algorithm, assay development, and genetic findings in glioblastoma, to illustrate current practices and challenges in neuropathology related to molecular and genetic testing. We have found that coordination of test requisition, tissue handling, and incorporation of results into the final pathologic diagnosis by the neuropathologist improve patient care. Here, we present analysis of O 6 -methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase promoter methylation and next-generation sequencing results of 189 patients, obtained utilizing our internal processes led by the neuropathology team. Our institutional pathway for neuropathologist-driven molecular testing has streamlined the management of glioblastoma samples for efficient return of results for incorporation of genomic data into the pathological diagnosis and optimal patient care.

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a powerful platform for identifying cancer mutations. Routine clinical adoption of NGS requires optimized quality control metrics to ensure accurate results. To assess the robustness of our clinical NGS pipeline, we analyzed the results of 304 solid tumor and hematologic malignancy specimens tested simultaneously by NGS and one or more targeted single-gene tests (EGFR, KRAS, BRAF, NPM1, FLT3, and JAK2). For samples that passed our validated tumor percentage and DNA quality and quantity thresholds, there was perfect concordance between NGS and targeted single-gene tests with the exception of two FLT3 internal tandem duplications that fell below the stringent pre-established reporting threshold but were readily detected by manual inspection. In addition, NGS identified clinically significant mutations not covered by single-gene tests. These findings confirm NGS as a reliable platform for routine clinical use when appropriate quality control metrics, such as tumor percentage and DNA quality cutoffs, are in place. Based on our findings, we suggest a simple workflow that should facilitate adoption of clinical oncologic NGS services at other institutions.