Literature DB >> 26596524

Next-Generation Sequencing and Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization Have Comparable Performance Characteristics in the Analysis of Pancreaticobiliary Brushings for Malignancy.

Jonathan C Dudley1, Zongli Zheng1, Thomas McDonald1, Long P Le1, Dora Dias-Santagata1, Darrell Borger1, Julie Batten1, Kathy Vernovsky1, Brenda Sweeney1, Ronald N Arpin1, William R Brugge2, David G Forcione2, Martha B Pitman3, A John Iafrate4.   

Abstract

Cytological evaluation of pancreatic or biliary duct brushings is a specific, but insensitive, test for malignancy. We compared adjunctive molecular testing with next-generation sequencing (NGS) relative to fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for detection of high-risk neoplasia or malignancy. Bile duct brushings from 81 specimens were subjected to cytological analysis, FISH using the UroVysion probe set, and targeted NGS. Specimens were placed into negative/atypical (negative) or suspicious/positive (positive) categories depending on cytology and negative or positive categories on the basis of FISH and NGS results. Performance characteristics for each diagnostic modality were calculated on the basis of clinicopathologic follow-up and compared in a receiver operating characteristic analysis. There were 33 high-risk neoplasia/malignant strictures (41%) and 48 benign (59%). NGS revealed driver mutations in 24 cases (30%), including KRAS (21 of 24 cases), TP53 (14 of 24 cases), SMAD4 (6 of 24 cases), and CDKN2A (4 of 24 cases). Cytology had a sensitivity of 67% (95% CI, 48%-82%) and a specificity of 98% (95% CI, 89%-100%). When added to cytology, NGS increased the sensitivity to 85% (95% CI, 68%-95%), leading to a significant increase in the area under the curve in a receiver operating characteristic analysis (P = 0.03). FISH increased the sensitivity to 76% (95% CI, 58%-89%), without significantly increasing the area under the curve. These results suggest that ancillary NGS testing offers advantages over FISH, although studies with larger cohorts are needed to verify these findings.
Copyright © 2016 American Society for Investigative Pathology and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26596524     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2015.08.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mol Diagn        ISSN: 1525-1578            Impact factor:   5.568


  15 in total

Review 1.  Metal, magnet or transplant: options in primary sclerosing cholangitis with stricture.

Authors:  Jawad Ahmad
Journal:  Hepatol Int       Date:  2018-11-14       Impact factor: 6.047

Review 2.  Cholangiocarcinoma - evolving concepts and therapeutic strategies.

Authors:  Sumera Rizvi; Shahid A Khan; Christopher L Hallemeier; Robin K Kelley; Gregory J Gores
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-10-10       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  DNA flow cytometric analysis of paraffin-embedded tissue for the diagnosis of malignancy in bile duct biopsies.

Authors:  Hannah Lee; Peter S Rabinovitch; Aras N Mattis; Sanjay Kakar; Won-Tak Choi
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 3.466

Review 4.  [Pancreatic cytology-morphology and ancillary markers].

Authors:  E Hewer
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 1.011

Review 5.  Emerging Technologies for the Diagnosis of Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Sumera Rizvi; John Eaton; Ju Dong Yang; Vinay Chandrasekhara; Gregory J Gores
Journal:  Semin Liver Dis       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 6.115

6.  Clinical, Genomic, and Transcriptomic Data Profiling of Biliary Tract Cancer Reveals Subtype-Specific Immune Signatures.

Authors:  Kabir Mody; Prerna Jain; Sherif M El-Refai; Nilofer S Azad; Daniel J Zabransky; Marina Baretti; Rachna T Shroff; R Katie Kelley; Anthony B El-Khouiery; Adam J Hockenberry; Denise Lau; Gregory B Lesinski; Mark Yarchoan
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2022-06

Review 7.  Targeted therapies for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: preclinical and clinical development and prospects for the clinic.

Authors:  Massimiliano Cadamuro; Alberto Lasagni; Angela Lamarca; Laura Fouassier; Maria Guido; Samantha Sarcognato; Enrico Gringeri; Umberto Cillo; Mario Strazzabosco; Jose Jg Marin; Jesus M Banales; Luca Fabris
Journal:  Expert Opin Investig Drugs       Date:  2021-02-23       Impact factor: 6.206

Review 8.  Transpathology: molecular imaging-based pathology.

Authors:  Mei Tian; Xuexin He; Chentao Jin; Xiao He; Shuang Wu; Rui Zhou; Xiaohui Zhang; Kai Zhang; Weizhong Gu; Jing Wang; Hong Zhang
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-02-13       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  Next-generation sequencing of residual cytologic fixative preserved DNA from pancreatic lesions: A pilot study.

Authors:  Clifton G Fulmer; Kyung Park; Thomas Dilcher; Mai Ho; Susanna Mirabelli; Susan Alperstein; Erika M Hissong; Meredith Pittman; Momin Siddiqui; Jonas J Heymann; Rhonda K Yantiss; Alain C Borczuk; Helen Fernandes; Carlie Sigel; Wei Song; Juan Miguel Mosquera; Rema Rao
Journal:  Cancer Cytopathol       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 4.264

10.  Performance of the UroVysion® FISH assay for the diagnosis of malignant effusions using two cutoff strategies.

Authors:  Débora C B Rosolen; Daniel K Faria; Caroline S Faria; Leila Antonangelo
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2018-03-25       Impact factor: 4.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.