Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27561634›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2017

Sponge Sampling with Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization as a Screening Tool for the Early Detection of Esophageal Cancer.

Kelly R Haisley, James P Dolan, Susan B Olson, Sergio A Toledo-Valdovinos, Kyle D Hart, Gene Bakis, Brintha K Enestvedt, John G Hunter

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. UroVysionFrontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. UroVysionCancers · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kelly R HaisleyDivision of Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Pk Rd, L223A, Portland, OR, 97239, USA.
James P DolanDivision of Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Pk Rd, L223A, Portland, OR, 97239, USA.
Susan B OlsonDepartment of Molecular and Medical Genetics, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Sergio A Toledo-ValdovinosDivision of Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Pk Rd, L223A, Portland, OR, 97239, USA.
Kyle D HartDivision of Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Pk Rd, L223A, Portland, OR, 97239, USA.
Gene BakisDepartment of Gastroenterology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Brintha K EnestvedtDepartment of Gastroenterology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
John G HunterDivision of Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Pk Rd, L223A, Portland, OR, 97239, USA. hunterj@ohsu.edu.
Oregon Health & Science University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSponge cytology is a novel screening tool for esophageal cancer but has been unable to be validated for widespread use. Our aim was to apply fluorescent in situ hybridization to sponge cytology samples in order to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this modality in screening for esophageal cancer. MATERIALS AND

methodsAt a single, multidisciplinary, NCI-designated cancer center, patients completed sponge cytology sampling prior to upper endoscopy. Samples were analyzed by p53 fluorescent in situ hybridization, and results were compared to the endoscopic diagnosis.

resultsFifty patients were enrolled (96 % Caucasian, 68 % male, median age of 67). All patients successfully swallowed the capsule. No complications (string breakage, bleeding, mucosal injury) occurred. Endoscopy revealed that 38 % had normal esophageal mucosa and 62 % had an esophageal mucosal abnormality. In total, six samples demonstrated p53 loss (94 % specificity for any abnormality). The sensitivity of the p53 fluorescent in situ hybridization probe was13.3 % for any abnormality, 10 % for intestinal metaplasia, and 0 % for dysplasia or esophageal cancer. DISCUSSION: Esophageal sponge cytology is a promising, safe, and tolerable method for collecting esophageal cell samples. However, our data suggest that p53 fluorescent in situ hybridization does not improve the sensitivity for detecting cancer in these samples.

Indexed as

Surgical SpongesAgedCross-Sectional StudiesCytodiagnosisEarly Detection of CancerEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagoscopyFemaleHumansIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMaleMiddle AgedSpecimen HandlingEsophageal cancerEsophageal spongeFluorescent in situ hybridizationOesophageal cancerScreening

Identifiers

PMID27561634
OpenAlexW2509653080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.