Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26288231›Full record

ReviewCancer cytopathology2015

Preanalytic parameters in epidermal growth factor receptor mutation testing for non-small cell lung carcinoma: A review of cytologic series.

Gilda da Cunha Santos, Mauro Ajaj Saieg

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer cytopathology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. UncommonLung Cancer (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Concurrent fine needle aspirations and core needle biopsies: a comparative study of substrates for next-generation sequencing in solid organ malignancies.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2017
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gilda da Cunha SantosDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Mauro Ajaj SaiegDepartment of Pathology, Santa Casa Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.
University Health Network · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The results from molecular assays can be affected significantly by the preanalytic condition of cytologic samples. The authors review current knowledge on the use of cytologic samples for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation testing in non-small cell lung cancer with a focus on preanalytic parameters. A systematic electronic search of the MEDLINE database was performed to identify original articles that reported the use of cytologic samples for EGFR molecular analysis and included a minimum of 100 samples. The information collected included author(s), journal, and year of publication; number of patients and samples; sampling method; type of preparation; type of fixative; staining techniques; mutation analysis techniques; tumor cellularity; the percentage of tumor cells; data on DNA quantity, quality, and concentration; failed assays; and the mutation rate. EGFR mutation analysis was conducted on 4999 cytologic samples from 22 studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Fine-needle aspirates and pleural effusions were the most common types of specimens used. DNA was mainly extracted from cell blocks and smears, and the most commonly reported fixatives included formalin, ethanol, and CytoLyt. Cellularity assessments and DNA yields were available from 5 studies each. The average success rate for the assays that used cytologic specimens was 95.87% (range, 85.2%-100%). The mutation rate ranged from 6% to 50.46%, and a higher mutation detection rate and lower numbers of insufficient cases were reported for pleural effusions and lymph node samples from endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration compared with histologic specimens. Low cellularity and a low percentage of tumor cells were associated with higher test failure rates. Future guidelines should consider the current data for specific recommendations regarding cytologic samples.

Indexed as

Biopsy, Fine-NeedleCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungDNA Mutational AnalysisErbB ReceptorsFemaleGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansImage-Guided BiopsyImmunohistochemistryLung NeoplasmsMaleSensitivity and SpecificityEGFR protein, humanErbB Receptorscell blockscytologyepidermal growth factor receptorfine-needle aspirationmolecular cytopathologymutation analysisnon-small lung cancerpreanalytic

Identifiers

PMID26288231
PMCPMC5042111
OpenAlexW1630105108

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.