| Literature DB >> 34884991 |
Keigo Uchimura1, Komei Yanase1,2, Tatsuya Imabayashi1, Yuki Takeyasu1,3, Hideaki Furuse1, Midori Tanaka1, Yuji Matsumoto1,3, Shinji Sasada1, Takaaki Tsuchida1.
Abstract
The success rate of next-generation sequencing (NGS) with specimens obtained through endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) among patients with lung cancer as well as the related clinical factors remain unclear. We aimed to determine the optimal number of punctures and core tissues during EBUS-TBNA for NGS in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) as well as the association of chest computed tomography (CT) and EBUS findings with successful NGS. We retrospectively reviewed 156 consecutive patients with NSCLC who underwent EBUS-TBNA for NGS (OncomineTM Dx Target Test). Using the receiver operating characteristic curve, we calculated the optimal numbers of punctures and core tissues for NGS and evaluated CT and EBUS findings suggestive of necrosis and vascular pattern within the lesion. The success rate of NGS was 83.3%. The cut-off value for the number of core tissues was 4, and the sensitivity and specificity of successful NGS were 73.8% and 61.5%, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the number of core tissues (≥4) was the sole predictor of successful NGS. CT and EBUS findings were not associated with successful NGS. Bronchoscopists should obtain sufficient core tissues for successful NGS using EBUS-TBNA specimens.Entities:
Keywords: bronchoscopy; endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA); lung cancer; next-generation sequencing
Year: 2021 PMID: 34884991 PMCID: PMC8656878 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13235879
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Figure 1A thread-like specimen called “core tissue” obtained by a single endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration in a formalin bottle.
Cancer-related genes that can be analyzed with next-generation sequencing using the OncomineTM Dx Target Test.
| Sample Type | Gene Name | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DNA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| RNA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Figure 2Flow diagram for next-generation sequencing (OncomineTM Dx Target Test). EBUS-TBNA, endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; SCLC, small cell lung cancer; NGS, next-generation sequencing.
Baseline characteristics of patients who underwent next-generation sequencing using specimens obtained through endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration.
| Characteristics | All Cases | Success Cases | Failure Cases | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | ( | ||
| Age, years | 70 (31–91) | 70 (31–87) | 70 (51–91) | 0.54 |
| Sex, male | 103 (66.0) | 84 (64.6) | 19 (73.1) | 0.50 |
| Smoking history | 0.47 | |||
| Current or past | 116 (74.4) | 95 (73.1) | 21 (80.8) | |
| Never | 40 (25.6) | 35 (26.9) | 5 (19.2) | |
| Tumor clinical stage | 0.81 | |||
| II | 3 (1.9) | 3 (2.3) | 0 (0) | |
| III | 64 (41.0) | 53 (40.8) | 11 (42.3) | |
| IV | 77 (49.4) | 65 (50.0) | 12 (46.2) | |
| Recurrence | 12 (7.7) | 9 (6.9) | 3 (11.5) | - |
| Size of lymph nodes | 0.45 | |||
| Short axis on CT, mm | 14.5 (5.2–66.8) | 14.6 (5.2–66.8) | 14.1 (7.5–43.7) | |
| Necrotic finding on CT | 0.52 | |||
| Positive | 70 (44.9) | 60 (46.2) | 10 (38.5) | |
| Negative | 86 (55.1) | 70 (53.8) | 16 (61.5) | |
| Location of lymph nodes | 0.62 | |||
| Upper paratracheal (2R, 2L, 3p) | 11 (7.1) | 9 (6.9) | 2 (7.7) | |
| Lower paratracheal (4R, 4L) | 60 (38.5) | 51 (39.2) | 9 (34.6) | |
| Subcarinal (7) | 43 (27.6) | 34 (26.2) | 9 (34.6) | |
| Hilar (10R, 10L) | 2 (1.3) | 1 (0.8) | 1 (3.8) | |
| Interlobar and lobar (11, 12) | 19 (12.3) | 16 (12.3) | 3 (11.5) | |
| Others (lung, pleura) | 21 (13.5) | 19 (14.6) | 2 (7.7) | |
| Pathological diagnosis | 0.48 | |||
| Adenocarcinoma | 101 (64.7) | 86 (66.2) | 15 (57.7) | |
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 21 (13.5) | 18 (13.8) | 3 (11.5) | |
| Other subtypes or not otherwise specified | 34 (21.8) | 26 (20.0) | 8 (30.8) | |
| SUVmax on PET-CT | 0.15 | |||
| ≥2.5 | 127 (81.4) | 109 (83.8) | 18 (69.2) | |
| <2.5 | 17 (10.9) | 13 (10.0) | 4 (15.4) | |
| Not evaluated | 12 (7.7) | 8 (6.2) | 4 (15.4) | |
Data are presented as number (%) or median (range). † Calculated using Fisher’s exact test or Mann–Whitney U test. CT, computed tomography; SUVmax, maximum standardized uptake value; PET, positron emission tomography.
Figure 3Number of punctures and core tissues in failure and success cases of NGS (OncomineTM Dx Target Test) analysis using specimens obtained through EBUS-TBNA. (A) Success cases showed a higher number of punctures than failure cases (5 vs. 4, p = 0.021, Mann–Whitney U test). (B) ROC curve analysis yielded a cut-off value of 4 for the number of punctures. Using this cut-off value, the sensitivity and specificity of the number of punctures for predicting successful NGS were 38.5% and 86.9%, respectively. The area under the curve was 0.637 (95% confidence interval, 0.51–0.765). (C) Success cases showed a higher number of core tissues than failure cases (4 vs. 3, p < 0.001, Mann–Whitney U test). (D) ROC curve analysis yielded a cut-off value of four for the number of core tissues. With this cut-off value, the sensitivity and specificity of the number of core tissues for predicting successful NGS were 61.5% and 73.8%, respectively. The area under the curve was 0.718 (95% confidence interval, 0.613–0.823). In (A) and (C), the bottom and top of the boxes indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. The middle line of the boxes indicates the median. The whiskers indicate the 10th and 90th percentiles, and cases lying beyond these range are marked as circle dots.
Figure 4Success rate of NGS (OncomineTM Dx Target Test) with specimens obtained through EBUS-TBNA according to the (A) number of punctures and (B) core tissues. Higher numbers of punctures and core tissues were significantly associated with successful NGS (p = 0.028 and p < 0.001, Cochran–Armitage test). The number in the bar graph shows the number of cases.
Logistic regression analysis of clinical factors affecting the success rate of next-generation sequencing using specimens obtained through EBUS-TBNA.
| Variables | Univariable Analysis | Multivariable Analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Success Cases/All Cases (%) | Odds Ratio (95 %CI) | |||
| Needle size | 0.79 | - | - | |
| 25-gauge | 23/28 (82.1) | |||
| 22-gauge | 107/128 (83.6) | |||
| Systemic staging | 1.0 | - | - | |
| Performed | 41/49 (83.7) | |||
| Not performed | 89/107 (83.2) | |||
| Necrotic finding on CT | 0.52 | - | - | |
| Positive | 55/64 (85.9) | |||
| Negative | 75/92 (81.5) | |||
| B-mode categories | ||||
| Short axis, mm | 0.62 | - | - | |
| ≤10 | 32/37 (86.5) | |||
| >10 | 98/119 (82.4) | |||
| Shape | 0.82 | - | - | |
| Round | 42/51 (82.4) | |||
| Oval | 88/105 (83.8) | |||
| Margin | 0.63 | - | - | |
| Distinct | 97/115 (84.3) | |||
| Indistinct | 33/41 (80.5) | |||
| Echogenicity | 1.0 | - | - | |
| Heterogeneous | 128/154 (83.1) | |||
| Homogeneous | 2/2 (100) | |||
| Central hilar structure | 0.21 | - | - | |
| Presence | 11/11 (100) | |||
| Absence | 119/145 (82.1) | |||
| Coagulation necrosis sign | 1.0 | - | - | |
| Presence | 37/44 (84.1) | |||
| Absence | 93/112 (83.0) | |||
| Color/power Doppler images | 1.0 | - | - | |
| Vascular pattern II–III | 76/91 (83.5) | |||
| Vascular pattern 0–I | 54/65 (83.1) | |||
| Number of punctures | 0.004 | 1.67 (0.49–5.62) | 0.41 | |
| <4 | 17/27 (63.0) | |||
| ≥4 | 113/129 (87.6) | |||
| Number of core tissues | <0.001 | 3.39 (1.09–10.6) | 0.035 | |
| <4 | 34/50 (68.0) | |||
| ≥4 | 96/106 (92.5) | |||
Data are presented as number (%). † Calculated using Fisher’s exact test. Calculated using logistic regression analysis. CT, computed tomography.