Julie Woolworth Hirschhorn1, Jessica S Snider2, Kathyrn G Lindsey2, Cynthia A Schandl2. 1. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina. Electronic address: woolworj@musc.edu. 2. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In cases of suspected intraocular malignancy, vitreous may be the preferred pathologic sample; however, cellularity may be insufficient for definitive cytopathological diagnosis. Ancillary methodology to study vitreous fluid aspiration for mutational analysis may assist in treatment decisions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three individual patient vitreous humor samples were received in the laboratory for mutation testing. The samples were collected during standard of care and analyzed for routine cytopathology. In each case, cytopathology was inconclusive and mutational analyses to support diagnostic suspicions were clinically requested. Based on the clinically and pathologically suspected diagnoses, an appropriate massively parallel sequencing assay previously validated for clinical use was performed using DNA extracted from vitreous samples that had previously undergone various processing. Nucleic acid yield was assessed by fluorometric or spectrophotometric methods, with yield ranging from 2.7 to 86.5 ng. Library preparations were performed using standard laboratory protocols. RESULTS: Two of the cases were suspicious for melanoma and a 50-gene solid tumor panel was performed. The third case was worrisome for vitreoretinal lymphoma and a 49-gene myeloid panel was performed. CONCLUSIONS: In all cases, the molecular profiling assisted with the clinical assessment and/or management of each patient.
INTRODUCTION: In cases of suspected intraocular malignancy, vitreous may be the preferred pathologic sample; however, cellularity may be insufficient for definitive cytopathological diagnosis. Ancillary methodology to study vitreous fluid aspiration for mutational analysis may assist in treatment decisions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three individual patient vitreous humor samples were received in the laboratory for mutation testing. The samples were collected during standard of care and analyzed for routine cytopathology. In each case, cytopathology was inconclusive and mutational analyses to support diagnostic suspicions were clinically requested. Based on the clinically and pathologically suspected diagnoses, an appropriate massively parallel sequencing assay previously validated for clinical use was performed using DNA extracted from vitreous samples that had previously undergone various processing. Nucleic acid yield was assessed by fluorometric or spectrophotometric methods, with yield ranging from 2.7 to 86.5 ng. Library preparations were performed using standard laboratory protocols. RESULTS: Two of the cases were suspicious for melanoma and a 50-gene solid tumor panel was performed. The third case was worrisome for vitreoretinal lymphoma and a 49-gene myeloid panel was performed. CONCLUSIONS: In all cases, the molecular profiling assisted with the clinical assessment and/or management of each patient.
Authors: Tiffany G Baker; Jay Alden; Adrian M Dubuc; Cynthia T Welsh; Iya Znoyko; Linda D Cooley; Midhat S Farooqi; Stuart Schwartz; Yvonne Y Li; Andrew D Cherniack; Scott M Lindhorst; Melissa Gener; Daynna J Wolff; David M Meredith Journal: Neurooncol Adv Date: 2020-11-12
Authors: Andi K Cani; Marcus A Toral; Daniel A Balikov; Bryan L Betz; Kevin Hu; Chia-Jen Liu; Matthew V Prifti; Arul M Chinnaiyan; Scott A Tomlins; Vinit B Mahajan; Rajesh C Rao Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2021-06-05 Impact factor: 5.923