BACKGROUND: The detection of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations on small biopsy or fine-needle aspiration samples is required to guide therapy in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this study, the authors compared results from EGFR mutation testing on both cytologic smears and surgical specimens and also compared the performance of platforms using 2 different technologies (pyrosequencing and real-time polymerase chain reaction) for both specimen types. METHODS: Specimens from 114 patients were divided into 2 subsets. The first subset had 60 paired cytology smears and surgical specimens, including 37 paired specimens from the same site and 23 paired specimens from different sites. The second subset consisted of nonpaired cytology smears and formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues (including 8 cell blocks), which were compared on the pyrosequencing and real-time polymerase chain reaction platforms. Laser-capture microscopy was used to enrich tumor in the FFPE specimens before DNA extraction. RESULTS: All cytology smears that were used in the study were adequate for analysis on both platforms. Comparison between smears and concurrent FFPE tissues from the same anatomic site had a concordance rate of 97%. The concordance rate between the pyrosequencing platform and the real-time polymerase chain reaction platform was 84% and 85% for FFPE tissues and cytology smears, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The current results indicated that direct extraction and analysis of EGFR mutations from cytology smears can be performed successfully on both a pyrosequencing platform and a real-time polymerase chain reaction platform with results comparable to those achieved in matched surgical specimens. In fine-needle aspiration/endobronchial ultrasound samples with limited tissue, cytology smears can be important for molecular analysis. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2013;121:361-369.
BACKGROUND: The detection of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations on small biopsy or fine-needle aspiration samples is required to guide therapy in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this study, the authors compared results from EGFR mutation testing on both cytologic smears and surgical specimens and also compared the performance of platforms using 2 different technologies (pyrosequencing and real-time polymerase chain reaction) for both specimen types. METHODS: Specimens from 114 patients were divided into 2 subsets. The first subset had 60 paired cytology smears and surgical specimens, including 37 paired specimens from the same site and 23 paired specimens from different sites. The second subset consisted of nonpaired cytology smears and formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues (including 8 cell blocks), which were compared on the pyrosequencing and real-time polymerase chain reaction platforms. Laser-capture microscopy was used to enrich tumor in the FFPE specimens before DNA extraction. RESULTS: All cytology smears that were used in the study were adequate for analysis on both platforms. Comparison between smears and concurrent FFPE tissues from the same anatomic site had a concordance rate of 97%. The concordance rate between the pyrosequencing platform and the real-time polymerase chain reaction platform was 84% and 85% for FFPE tissues and cytology smears, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The current results indicated that direct extraction and analysis of EGFR mutations from cytology smears can be performed successfully on both a pyrosequencing platform and a real-time polymerase chain reaction platform with results comparable to those achieved in matched surgical specimens. In fine-needle aspiration/endobronchial ultrasound samples with limited tissue, cytology smears can be important for molecular analysis. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2013;121:361-369.
Authors: Sinchita Roy-Chowdhuri; Hui Chen; Rajesh R Singh; Savitri Krishnamurthy; Keyur P Patel; Mark J Routbort; Jawad Manekia; Bedia A Barkoh; Hui Yao; Sharjeel Sabir; Russell R Broaddus; L Jeffrey Medeiros; Gregg Staerkel; John Stewart; Rajyalakshmi Luthra Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2017-01-13 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Jonas J Heymann; William A Bulman; Roger A Maxfield; Charles A Powell; Balazs Halmos; Joshua Sonett; Nike T Beaubier; John P Crapanzano; Mahesh M Mansukhani; Anjali Saqi Journal: Cytojournal Date: 2014-05-22 Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Sang Hwa Lee; Wan Seop Kim; Yoo Duk Choi; Jeong Wook Seo; Joung Ho Han; Mi Jin Kim; Lucia Kim; Geon Kook Lee; Chang Hun Lee; Mee Hye Oh; Gou Young Kim; Sun Hee Sung; Kyo Young Lee; Sun Hee Chang; Mee Sook Rho; Han Kyeom Kim; Soon Hee Jung; Se Jin Jang Journal: J Pathol Transl Med Date: 2015-10-13