Jinguo Liu1, Ruiying Zhao, Jie Zhang, Jian Zhang. 1. Department of Pathology, Shanghai Chest Hospital affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong university, No. 241 West Huaihai Road, Shanghai, 200030, China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation analysis is becoming a routine clinical practice for lung adenocarcinoma patients. Most patients with lung cancer are diagnosed at an advanced stage of the disease and are not suitable for surgical therapy. In many cases, cytologic specimens may be the only tissue available for diagnostic and molecular testing. Therefore, it is important to determine what condition the cytologic specimens should be in for adequately analyzing EGFR mutation status. METHODS: Fifty-eight paired cytologic and lung adenocarcinoma histologic specimens that satisfied 3 requisite parameters (>2 ng/μl DNA concentration, >30 tumor cells content, and >25% tumor percentage) were collected. Exons 18 through 21 of the EGFR gene were analyzed by amplification refractory mutations system. RESULTS: The EGFR mutation concordance rate between cytologic specimens and corresponding histologic specimens was 100%. A set of 30 paired specimens from different sites (lung and pleural fluids) from the same patient exhibited 100% concordance in the EGFR mutation analysis results. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, EGFR mutation presented a convenient and reliable method for the analysis of cytologic specimens that satisfied 3 requisite parameters (>2 ng/μl DNA concentration, >30 tumor cells content, and >25% tumor percentage). We concluded that the specimens from both primary lung adenocarcinomas and metastatic lesions (such as pleural fluids) can be used for EGFR mutation analysis.
PURPOSE:Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation analysis is becoming a routine clinical practice for lung adenocarcinomapatients. Most patients with lung cancer are diagnosed at an advanced stage of the disease and are not suitable for surgical therapy. In many cases, cytologic specimens may be the only tissue available for diagnostic and molecular testing. Therefore, it is important to determine what condition the cytologic specimens should be in for adequately analyzing EGFR mutation status. METHODS: Fifty-eight paired cytologic and lung adenocarcinoma histologic specimens that satisfied 3 requisite parameters (>2 ng/μl DNA concentration, >30 tumor cells content, and >25% tumor percentage) were collected. Exons 18 through 21 of the EGFR gene were analyzed by amplification refractory mutations system. RESULTS: The EGFR mutation concordance rate between cytologic specimens and corresponding histologic specimens was 100%. A set of 30 paired specimens from different sites (lung and pleural fluids) from the same patient exhibited 100% concordance in the EGFR mutation analysis results. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, EGFR mutation presented a convenient and reliable method for the analysis of cytologic specimens that satisfied 3 requisite parameters (>2 ng/μl DNA concentration, >30 tumor cells content, and >25% tumor percentage). We concluded that the specimens from both primary lung adenocarcinomas and metastatic lesions (such as pleural fluids) can be used for EGFR mutation analysis.
Authors: D L Aisner; C Deshpande; Z Baloch; C D Watt; L A Litzky; B Malhotra; A R Sepulveda; C Langer; T Evans; V M Van Deerlin Journal: Diagn Cytopathol Date: 2011-11-18 Impact factor: 1.582
Authors: Ruta Gupta; Aditi M Dastane; Farahnaz Forozan; Amin Riley-Portuguez; Fai Chung; Jean Lopategui; Alberto M Marchevsky Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2008-11-07 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Renu Khode; Douglas A Larsen; Brianne C Culbreath; Shane Parrish; Kimberly L Walker; Lubna Sayage-Rabie; Robert S Beissner; Arundhati Rao Journal: Cancer Cytopathol Date: 2013-01-30 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Neal Navani; James M Brown; Matthew Nankivell; Ian Woolhouse; Richard N Harrison; Vandana Jeebun; Mohammed Munavvar; Benjamin J Ng; Doris M Rassl; Mary Falzon; Gabrijela Kocjan; Robert C Rintoul; Andrew G Nicholson; Sam M Janes Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2012-04-13 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: A Kalikaki; A Koutsopoulos; M Trypaki; J Souglakos; E Stathopoulos; V Georgoulias; D Mavroudis; A Voutsina Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2008-09-16 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: S Savic; C Tapia; B Grilli; A Rufle; M P Bihl; A de Vito Barascud; M Herzog; L Terracciano; F Baty; L Bubendorf Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2007-12-18 Impact factor: 7.640
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