Login
Register
Need Help?
ABOUT
ABOUT THE EGA
EGA
Privacy Notice
Security
Team
STATISTICS
Bibliography
Growth
Community
Archive
Distribution
Catalog
PROJECTS AND FUNDERS
Projects
Funders
GA4GH
Federated EGA
Beacon
DISCOVERY
CATALOGUE
Studies
Datasets
DACs
Synthetic Data
METADATA
Search Box
Public Metadata API
SUBMISSION
DATA
File preparation
Uploading files
METADATA
EGA Schema
Sequencing & Phenotype
Submitter Portal
Submitter Portal API
Array
Programmatic Submission XML
ACCESS
DATA ACCESS COMMITTEE
What is a DAC?
Best Practices
DAC Portal
Data Use Conditions
REQUEST DATA
How to request data?
Quality Control Reports
DOWNLOAD
Metadata
Files
PyEGA3
Live Outbox
Visualisation
FUSE Client
EGA QuickView
Tips on how to search
DACs
EGAC00001001212
Data Sharing Request Committee - CA209-026
Request Access
This DAC controls 1 dataset
Dataset ID
Description
Technology
Samples
EGAD00001005035
Tumor mutational burden (TMB) has emerged as a predictive biomarker of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Standardization of TMB measurement is essential for implementing diagnostic tools to guide treatment. Here we evaluate bioinformatic TMB analysis by whole exome sequencing (WES) in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples. In CheckMate 026, TMB was retrospectively assessed in 312 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (58% of the intent-to-treat population) who received first-line nivolumab treatment or chemotherapy. We examined the sensitivity of TMB assessment to bioinformatic filtering methods and assessed concordance between TMB data derived by WES and the FoundationOne CDx™ assay. TMB scores comprising synonymous, indel, frameshift, and nonsense mutations (all mutations) were 3.1-fold higher than data including missense mutations only, but values were highly correlated (Spearman’s r = 0.99). Scores from CheckMate 026 samples including missense mutations only were similar to those generated from data in The Cancer Genome Atlas, but those including all mutations were generally higher. Using databases for germline subtraction (instead of matched controls) showed a trend for race-dependent increases in TMB scores. Parameter variation can therefore impact TMB calculations, highlighting the need for standardization. Encouragingly, WES and FoundationOne CDx outputs were highly correlated (Spearman’s r = 0.90) and differences could be accounted for by empirical calibration, suggesting that reliable TMB assessment across assays, platforms and centers is achievable.
Illumina HiSeq 2500
368