Suppr超能文献

对比内镜超声引导下细针活检与细针抽吸在胰腺癌基因谱分析和 DNA 产量方面的效果:一项随机交叉试验。

Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy versus fine-needle aspiration for genomic profiling and DNA yield in pancreatic cancer: a randomized crossover trial.

机构信息

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.

Department of Laboratory Medicine & Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.

出版信息

Endoscopy. 2021 Apr;53(4):376-382. doi: 10.1055/a-1223-2171. Epub 2020 Aug 6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

National guidelines recommend genomic profiling of tumor tissue to guide precision therapy. We compared the specimen adequacy for genomic profiling and yield of DNA between endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB) and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA).

METHODS

In our tandem, randomized controlled trial, consecutive patients undergoing EUS for evaluation of pancreatic masses underwent both conventional EUS-FNA with a 25-gauge needle and paired EUS-FNB (19 or 22-gauge needle), with the order randomized (EUS-FNA first followed by EUS-FNB, or vice versa). A minimum of one pass with each needle was obtained for histology. Second and third passes were performed to collect DNA. Specimens were evaluated by a cytopathologist blinded to the needle type. Specimen adequacy for genomic profiling was calculated based on FoundationOne clinical diagnostic (CDx) adequacy requirements. We compared the adequacy for genomic profiling DNA (quantity) and histology yields with both needles.

RESULTS

Analysis included 50 patients (25 men; mean age 68 [standard deviation (SD) 13] years), with a mean lesion size of 38 (SD 17) mm; 37 lesions (74 %) were pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The mean DNA concentrations in PDAC by FNB and FNA needles were 5.930 (SD 0.881) µg/mL vs. 3.365 (SD 0.788) µg/mL, respectively ( = 0.01). The median standardized histology score per pass with EUS-FNB was 5 (sufficient for histology) and for EUS-FNA was 2 (enough for cytology). Specimen adequacy for genomic profiling and yield of DNA was significantly higher with FNB than with FNA needles.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, adequacy for genomic profiling, DNA, and histology yield were considerably superior using an EUS-FNB needle compared with an EUS-FNA needle.

摘要

背景

国家指南建议对肿瘤组织进行基因组分析,以指导精准治疗。我们比较了内镜超声(EUS)引导下细针活检(FNB)和 EUS 引导下细针抽吸(FNA)两种方法获取用于基因组分析的标本充足性和 DNA 产量。

方法

在我们的串联、随机对照试验中,连续接受 EUS 评估胰腺肿块的患者均接受常规 EUS-FNA(25 号针)和配对 EUS-FNB(19 号或 22 号针),顺序随机(EUS-FNA 先行,然后是 EUS-FNB,或反之亦然)。每种针至少进行一次以获取组织学标本。进行第二和第三次穿刺以收集 DNA。细胞学病理学家对针的类型进行盲法评估。根据 FoundationOne 临床诊断(CDx)充足性要求计算基因组分析标本的充足性。我们比较了两种针的基因组分析 DNA(数量)和组织学产量的充足性。

结果

分析包括 50 名患者(25 名男性;平均年龄 68[标准差(SD)13]岁),平均病变大小为 38(SD 17)mm;37 个病变(74%)为胰腺导管腺癌(PDAC)。FNB 和 FNA 针获得的 PDAC 平均 DNA 浓度分别为 5.930(SD 0.881)μg/mL 和 3.365(SD 0.788)μg/mL( = 0.01)。EUS-FNB 每针的标准化组织学评分中位数为 5(足以进行组织学检查),EUS-FNA 为 2(足以进行细胞学检查)。FNB 针的基因组分析标本充足性和 DNA 产量显著高于 FNA 针。

结论

在这项研究中,与 EUS-FNA 针相比,EUS-FNB 针的基因组分析标本充足性、DNA 和组织学产量均明显更高。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验