Literature DB >> 28017843

Mutation Profile and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Analyses Increase Detection of Malignancies in Biliary Strictures.

Tamas A Gonda1, Domenico Viterbo2, Valerie Gausman2, Claudine Kipp2, Amrita Sethi2, John M Poneros2, Frank Gress2, Tina Park2, Ali Khan2, Sara A Jackson3, Megan Blauvelt3, Nicole Toney3, Sydney D Finkelstein3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: It is a challenge to detect malignancies in biliary strictures. Various sampling methods are available to increase diagnostic yield, but these require additional procedure time and expertise. We evaluated the combined accuracy of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and polymerase chain reaction-based DNA mutation profiling (MP) of specimens collected using standard brush techniques.
METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 107 consecutive patients treated for biliary strictures by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography from June 2012 through June 2014. We performed routine cytology and FISH analyses on cells collected by standard brush techniques, and analyzed supernatants for point mutations in KRAS and loss-of-heterozygosity mutations in tumor-suppressor genes at 10 loci (MP analysis was performed at Interpace Diagnostics). Strictures were determined to be nonmalignant based on repeat image analysis or laboratory test results 12 months after the procedure. Malignant strictures were identified based on subsequent biopsy or cytology analyses, pathology analyses of samples collected during surgery, or death from biliary malignancy. We determined the sensitivity and specificity with which FISH and MP analyses detected malignancies using the exact binomial test.
RESULTS: Our final analysis included 100 patients; 41% had biliary malignancies. Cytology analysis identified patients with malignancies with 32% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Addition of FISH or MP results to cytology results increased the sensitivity of detection to 51% (P < .01) without reducing specificity. The combination of cytology, MP, and FISH analyses detected malignancies with 73% sensitivity (P < .001). FISH identified an additional 9 of the 28 malignancies not detected by cytology analysis, and MP identified an additional 8 malignancies. FISH and MP together identified 17 of the 28 malignancies not detected by cytology analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Addition of FISH and mutation analyses to cytology analysis significantly increased the level of sensitivity with which we detected malignancy in biliary strictures, with 100% specificity. These techniques can be performed using standard brush samples collected during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, with mutations detected in free DNA in supernatant fluid of samples. The tests are complementary and therefore should be used sequentially in the diagnostic evaluation of biliary strictures.
Copyright © 2017 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer Detection; Diagnosis; ERCP; Mutation Profile

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28017843     DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.12.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 1542-3565            Impact factor:   11.382


  8 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Combination of ERCP-Based Modalities Increases Diagnostic Yield for Biliary Strictures.

Authors:  Samuel Han; Philip Tatman; Sanjana Mehrotra; Sachin Wani; Augustin R Attwell; Steven A Edmundowicz; Brian C Brauer; Mihir S Wagh; Hazem T Hammad; Raj J Shah
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 3.  New technologies for indeterminate biliary strictures.

Authors:  Roberto Oleas; Juan Alcívar-Vasquez; Carlos Robles-Medranda
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2022-04-25

4.  An Increased Chromosome 7 Copy Number in Endoscopic Bile Duct Biopsy Specimens Is Predictive of a Poor Prognosis in Cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Akihisa Kato; Itaru Naitoh; Katsuyuki Miyabe; Kazuki Hayashi; Michihiro Yoshida; Yasuki Hori; Makoto Natsume; Naruomi Jinno; Go Asano; Hiroyuki Kato; Toshiya Kuno; Satoru Takahashi; Hiromi Kataoka
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-09-12       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Analysis of transcriptome in the relationship between expression of PRC1 protein and prognosis of patients with cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Qing Wang; Shaoqiong Lu; Ying Chen; Hua He; Weihui Lu; Kanru Lin
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 1.671

Review 6.  Modern work-up and extended resection in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: the AMC experience.

Authors:  F Rassam; E Roos; K P van Lienden; J E van Hooft; H J Klümpen; G van Tienhoven; R J Bennink; M R Engelbrecht; A Schoorlemmer; U H W Beuers; J Verheij; M G Besselink; O R Busch; T M van Gulik
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 3.445

7.  A Predictive Model Based on the Gut Microbiota Improves the Diagnostic Effect in Patients With Cholangiocarcinoma.

Authors:  Tan Zhang; Sina Zhang; Chen Jin; Zixia Lin; Tuo Deng; Xiaozai Xie; Liming Deng; Xueyan Li; Jun Ma; Xiwei Ding; Yaming Liu; Yunfeng Shan; Zhengping Yu; Yi Wang; Gang Chen; Jialiang Li
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2021-11-23       Impact factor: 5.293

8.  The Diagnostic Yield of Malignancy Comparing Cytology, FISH, and Molecular Analysis of Cell Free Cytology Brush Supernatant in Patients With Biliary Strictures Undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiography (ERC): A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Vladimir M Kushnir; Daniel K Mullady; Koushik Das; Gabriel Lang; Thomas G Hollander; Faris M Murad; Sara A Jackson; Nicole A Toney; Sydney D Finkelstein; Steven A Edmundowicz
Journal:  J Clin Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.062

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.