ArticleDer Pathologe2009
[Predictive EGFR gene analyses in cytology].
Article in Der Pathologe, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nonsmall cell lung carcinoma: diagnostic difficulties in small biopsies and cytological specimens: Number 2 in the Series "Pathology for the clinician" Edited by Peter Dorfmüller and Alberto Cavazza.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2017Review
- [Resistance to medicinal tumor therapy. Current status].Der Pathologe · 2013Review
- [Non-small cell lung cancer. Subtyping and predictive molecular marker investigations in cytology].Der Pathologe · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
EGFR mutations and EGFR gene copy number are considered as predictive markers for response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).NSCLC are often diagnosed by cytology alone. The isolation or selection of a pure tumour cell population is critical for mutation analysis by PCR and sequencing in order to avoid an admixture of tumour DNA with normal DNA of adjacent benign cells. The collection of tumour cells is easily possible by laser microdissection (LMD).EGFR FISH analysis on cytological specimens with a high proportion of benign respiratory cells should be performed after automated relocation of carcinoma cells. The only hitherto established EGFR-FISH criteria were developed using histological specimens and cannot be applied to cytological specimens as such. The cell nuclei in cytological specimens are intact, while they are often truncated in histological specimens. Therefore, when applying the Colorado criteria, the rate of FISH positive results is higher in cytological than in histological specimens and in fact represents false positive results in cytology.Cytological specimens are equally well suited for EGFR gene analyses and FISH analysis as histological specimens. At present, the value of EGFR-FISH analysis is limited by the lack of validated criteria for FISH positivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19859710What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.