Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31581388›Full record

ArticleGut and liver2020

Factors of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition for Successful Next-Generation Sequencing in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

Jae Keun Park, Ji Hyeon Lee, Dong Hyo Noh, Joo Kyung Park, Kyu Taek Lee, Jong Kyun Lee, Kwang Hyuck Lee, Kee-Taek Jang, Juhee Cho

Open access · diamondAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Gut and liver, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jae Keun ParkDigestive Disease Center and Research Institute, Department of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University School of Medicine, Bucheon, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-3367-1770
Ji Hyeon LeeDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-8035-5634
Dong Hyo NohDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-6431-0890
Joo Kyung ParkDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9652-5287
Kyu Taek LeeDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2233-3511
Jong Kyun LeeDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1298-0494
Kwang Hyuck LeeDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5558-0415
Kee-Taek JangDepartment of Pathology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-7987-4437
Juhee ChoDepartment of Clinical Research Design and Evaluation, Samsung Advanced Institute for Health Sciences & Technology (SAIHST), Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-9081-0266
Samsung Medical Center · KRSamsung (South Korea) · KRSoonchunhyang University · KRJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/Aims: Recent advances in understanding the genetics of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have led to the potential for a personalized approach. Several studies have described the feasibility of generating genetic profiles of PDAC with next-generation sequencing (NGS) of samples obtained through endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA). The aim of this study was to find the best EUS-TA approach for successful NGS of PDAC. Methods: We attempted to perform NGS with tissues from 190 patients with histologically proven PDAC by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy at Samsung Medical Center between November 2011 and February 2015. The medical records of these patients were retrospectively reviewed for parameters including tumor factors (size, location, and T stage), EUS-TA factors (needle gauge [G], needle type, and number of needle passes) and histologic factors (cellularity and blood contamination). The sample used for NGS was part of the EUS-TA specimen that underwent cytological and histological analysis. Results: NGS could be successfully performed in 109 patients (57.4%). In the univariate analysis, a large needle G (p=0.003) and tumor located in the body/tail (p=0.005) were associated with successful NGS. The multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the needle G was an independent factor of successful NGS (odds ratio, 2.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.08 to 4.47; p=0.031). Conclusions: The needle G is an independent factor associated with successful NGS. This finding may suggest that the quantity of cells obtained from EUS-TA specimens is important for successful NGS.

Indexed as

High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingAgedCarcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalEndoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle AspirationFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisNeedlesPancreasPancreatic NeoplasmsPrecision MedicineRetrospective StudiesEndoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspirationEndoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle biopsyEndoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisitionNext-generation sequencingPancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Identifiers

PMID31581388
PMCPMC7234878
OpenAlexW2978962369

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.