Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27895743›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2016

Diagnosis of pancreatic lesions collected by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration using next-generation sequencing.

Eri Kameta, Kazuya Sugimori, Takashi Kaneko, Tomohiro Ishii, Haruo Miwa, Takeshi Sato, Yasuaki Ishii, Soichiro Sue, Tomohiko Sasaki, Yuki Yamashita and 3 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology letters, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Invited review-next-generation sequencing: a modern tool in cytopathology.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2019
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eri KametaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan.
Kazuya SugimoriGastroenterological Centre, Yokohama City University Medical Centre, Yokohama 232-0024, Japan.
Takashi KanekoGastroenterological Centre, Yokohama City University Medical Centre, Yokohama 232-0024, Japan.
Tomohiro IshiiGastroenterological Centre, Yokohama City University Medical Centre, Yokohama 232-0024, Japan.
Haruo MiwaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan.
Takeshi SatoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan.
Yasuaki IshiiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan.
Soichiro SueDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan.
Tomohiko SasakiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan.
Yuki YamashitaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan.
Wataru ShibataDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan; Advanced Medical Research Center, Yokohama City University, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan.
Naomichi MatsumotoDepartment of Human Genetics, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan.
Shin MaedaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan.
Yokohama City University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUF-FNA) has improved the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) facilitates the production of millions of sequences concurrently. Therefore, in the current study, to improve the detectability of oncogenic mutations in pancreatic lesions, an NGS system was used to diagnose EUS-FNA samples. A total of 38 patients with clinically diagnosed EUS-FNA specimens were analyzed; 27 patients had pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and 11 had non-PDAC lesions. DNA samples were isolated and sequenced by NGS using an Ion Personal Genome Machine system. The Cancer Hotspot Panel v2, which includes 50 cancer-related genes and 2,790 COSMIC mutations, was used. A >2% mutation frequency was defined as positive.

Indexed as

endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspirationKRASnext-generation sequencingpancreatic ductal adenocarcinomaTP53

Identifiers

PMID27895743
PMCPMC5104195
OpenAlexW2521366554

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.