Routine molecular testing in acute myeloid leukemia involves screening several genes of therapeutic and prognostic significance for mutations. A comprehensive analysis using single-gene assays requires large amounts of DNA, is cumbersome and timely consolidation of results for clinical reporting is challenging. High throughput, next-generation sequencing platforms widely used in research have not been tested vigorously for clinical application. Here we describe the clinical application of MiSeq, a next-generation sequencing platform to screen mutational hotspots in 54 cancer-related genes including genes relevant in acute myeloid leukemia (NRAS, KRAS, FLT3, NPM1, DNMT3A, IDH1/2, JAK2, KIT and EZH2). We sequenced 63 samples from patients with acute myeloid leukemia/myelodysplastic syndrome using MiSeq and compared the results with those obtained using another next-generation sequencing platform, Ion-Torrent Personal Genome Machine and other conventional testing platforms. MiSeq detected a total of 100 single nucleotide variants and 23 NPM1 insertions that were confirmed by Ion Torrent or conventional platforms, indicating complete concordance. FLT3-internal tandem duplications (n=10) were not detected; however, re-analysis of the MiSeq output by Pindel, an indel detection algorithm, did detect them. Dilution studies of cancer cell-line DNA showed that the quantitative accuracy of mutation detection was up to an allelic frequency of 1.5% with a high level of inter- and intra-run assay reproducibility, suggesting potential utility for monitoring response to therapy, clonal heterogeneity and evolution. Examples demonstrating the advantages of MiSeq over conventional platforms for disease monitoring are provided. Easy work-flow, high throughput multiplexing capability, 4-day turnaround time and simultaneous assessment of routinely tested and emerging markers make MiSeq highly applicable for clinical molecular testing in acute myeloid leukemia.

Mutations in the isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) and IDH2 genes are reported in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We studied the frequency and the clinicopathologic features of IDH1 and IDH2 mutations in AML. Mutations in IDH1 (IDH1R132) and IDH2 (IDH2R172) were assessed by Sanger sequencing in 199 AML cases. Point mutations in IDH1R132 were detected in 12 (6.0%) of 199 cases and in IDH2R172 in 4 (2.0%) of 196 cases. Of the 16 mutated cases, 15 (94%) were cytogenetically normal, for an overall frequency in this group of 11.8%. IDH1R132 and IDH2R172 mutations were mutually exclusive. Concurrent mutations in NPM1, FLT3, CEBPA, and NRAS were detected only in AML with the IDH1R132 mutation. The clinical and laboratory variables of patients with AML with IDH mutations showed no significant differences compared with patients with wild-type IDH. We conclude that IDH1R132 and IDH2R172 mutations occur most often in cytogenetically normal AML cases with an overall frequency of approximately 11.8%.

The application of next-generation sequencing (NGS) to characterize cancer genomes has resulted in the discovery of numerous genetic markers. Consequently, the number of markers that warrant routine screening in molecular diagnostic laboratories, often from limited tumor material, has increased. This increased demand has been difficult to manage by traditional low- and/or medium-throughput sequencing platforms. Massively parallel sequencing capabilities of NGS provide a much-needed alternative for mutation screening in multiple genes with a single low investment of DNA. However, implementation of NGS technologies, most of which are for research use only (RUO), in a diagnostic laboratory, needs extensive validation in order to establish Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) and College of American Pathologists (CAP)-compliant performance characteristics. Here, we have reviewed approaches for validation of NGS technology for routine screening of tumors. We discuss the criteria for selecting gene markers to include in the NGS panel and the deciding factors for selecting target capture approaches and sequencing platforms. We also discuss challenges in result reporting, storage and retrieval of the voluminous sequencing data and the future potential of clinical NGS.