Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Comparison of Native Aspirates and Cytological Smears Obtained by EUS-Guided Biopsies for Effective DNA/RNA Marker Testing in Pancreatic Cancer

L. Benesova, T. Halkova, B. Bunganic, B. Belsanova, M. Zavoral, E. Traboulsi, M. Minarik

. 2020 ; 26 (1) : 379-385. [pub] 20181025

Language English Country Switzerland

Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article

Grant support
16-31028A Ministerstvo Zdravotnictví Ceské Republiky
MO1012 Ministerstvo Obrany (CZ)
NV16-31028A MZ0 CEP Register

We compare two types of pancreatic carcinoma samples obtained by EUS-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) in terms of the success rates and clinical validity of analysis of two most commonly investigated DNA/RNA pancreatic cancer markers, KRAS mutations and miR-21 expression. 118 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma underwent EUS-FNB. The collected sample was divided, one part was stored in a stabilizing solution as native aspirate (EUS-FNA) and second part was processed into the cytological smear (EUS-FNC). DNA/RNA extraction was followed by analysis of KRAS mutations and miR-21 expression. For both sample types, the yields of DNA/RNA extraction and success rates of KRAS mutation and miRNA expression were evaluated. Finally, the resulting KRAS mutation frequency and miR-21 prognostic role were compared to literature data from tissue resections. The overall amount of isolated DNA/RNA from EUS-FNC was lower compared to the EUS-FNA, average yield 10 ng vs 147 ng for DNA and average yield 164 vs. 642 ng for RNA, but the success rates for KRAS and miR-21 analysis was 100% for both sample types. The KRAS-mutant detection frequency in EUS-FNC was 12% higher than in EUS-FNA (90 vs 78%). The prognostic role of miR-21 was confirmed in EUS-FNC (p = 0.02), but did not reach statistical significance in EUS-FNA (p = 0.06). Although both types of EUS-FNB samples are suitable for DNA/RNA extraction and subsequent DNA mutation and miRNA expression analysis, reliable results with clinical validity were only obtained for EUS-FNC.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc21013001
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20210716110712.0
007      
ta
008      
210420s2020 sz f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1007/s12253-018-0490-9 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)30361898
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a sz
100    1_
$a Benesova, Lucie $u Centre for Applied Genomics of Solid Tumors (CEGES), Genomac Research Institute, 161 00, Prague, CZ, Czech Republic
245    10
$a Comparison of Native Aspirates and Cytological Smears Obtained by EUS-Guided Biopsies for Effective DNA/RNA Marker Testing in Pancreatic Cancer / $c L. Benesova, T. Halkova, B. Bunganic, B. Belsanova, M. Zavoral, E. Traboulsi, M. Minarik
520    9_
$a We compare two types of pancreatic carcinoma samples obtained by EUS-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) in terms of the success rates and clinical validity of analysis of two most commonly investigated DNA/RNA pancreatic cancer markers, KRAS mutations and miR-21 expression. 118 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma underwent EUS-FNB. The collected sample was divided, one part was stored in a stabilizing solution as native aspirate (EUS-FNA) and second part was processed into the cytological smear (EUS-FNC). DNA/RNA extraction was followed by analysis of KRAS mutations and miR-21 expression. For both sample types, the yields of DNA/RNA extraction and success rates of KRAS mutation and miRNA expression were evaluated. Finally, the resulting KRAS mutation frequency and miR-21 prognostic role were compared to literature data from tissue resections. The overall amount of isolated DNA/RNA from EUS-FNC was lower compared to the EUS-FNA, average yield 10 ng vs 147 ng for DNA and average yield 164 vs. 642 ng for RNA, but the success rates for KRAS and miR-21 analysis was 100% for both sample types. The KRAS-mutant detection frequency in EUS-FNC was 12% higher than in EUS-FNA (90 vs 78%). The prognostic role of miR-21 was confirmed in EUS-FNC (p = 0.02), but did not reach statistical significance in EUS-FNA (p = 0.06). Although both types of EUS-FNB samples are suitable for DNA/RNA extraction and subsequent DNA mutation and miRNA expression analysis, reliable results with clinical validity were only obtained for EUS-FNC.
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a nádorové biomarkery $x analýza $7 D014408
650    _2
$a duktální karcinom slinivky břišní $x diagnóza $7 D021441
650    _2
$a cytodiagnostika $x metody $7 D003581
650    _2
$a DNA $x analýza $7 D004247
650    _2
$a biopsie tenkou jehlou pod endosonografickou kontrolou $7 D061765
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a mikro RNA $x analýza $7 D035683
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a mutace $7 D009154
650    _2
$a nádory slinivky břišní $x diagnóza $7 D010190
650    _2
$a protoonkogenní proteiny p21(ras) $x genetika $7 D016283
650    _2
$a odběr biologického vzorku $x metody $7 D013048
650    _2
$a fixace tkání $x metody $7 D016707
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Halkova, Tereza $u Centre for Applied Genomics of Solid Tumors (CEGES), Genomac Research Institute, 161 00, Prague, CZ, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Bunganic, Bohus $u Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University and Military University Hospital, 169 02, Prague, CZ, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Belsanova, Barbora $u Centre for Applied Genomics of Solid Tumors (CEGES), Genomac Research Institute, 161 00, Prague, CZ, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Zavoral, Miroslav $u Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University and Military University Hospital, 169 02, Prague, CZ, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Traboulsi, Eva $u Pathology department, Military University Hospital, 169 02, Prague, CZ, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Minarik, Marek $u Centre for Applied Genomics of Solid Tumors (CEGES), Genomac Research Institute, 161 00, Prague, CZ, Czech Republic. mminarik@email.com ; Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University and Military University Hospital, 169 02, Prague, CZ, Czech Republic. mminarik@email.com
773    0_
$w MED00180530 $t Pathology oncology research : POR $x 1532-2807 $g Roč. 26, č. 1 (2020), s. 379-385
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30361898 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20210420 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20210716110712 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1651230 $s 1133380
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2020 $b 26 $c 1 $d 379-385 $e 20181025 $i 1532-2807 $m Pathology oncology research $n Pathol Oncol Res $x MED00180530
GRA    __
$a 16-31028A $p Ministerstvo Zdravotnictví Ceské Republiky
GRA    __
$a MO1012 $p Ministerstvo Obrany (CZ)
GRA    __
$a NV16-31028A $p MZ0
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20210420

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...