ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental pathology2018
Identification of EGFR mutations in cytological specimens of non-small cell lung carcinoma from a single institute.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental pathology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation testing is pivotal for the precise treatment of non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). Generally, detection of EGFR mutations in surgical specimens is the most accurate and the most reliable. However, some NSCLC patients in advanced stages are inoperable. Therefore, other specimens such as cytological samples are alternative options for EGFR mutation detection. In this study, cytological samples from 291 NSCLC patients were tested for EGFR mutations using the amplification-refractory mutation system (ARMS). The results showed that the EGFR mutation rate was 45.3%, and the most common mutation type was deletion in exon 19 (19del), followed by L858R mutation in exon 21. The results were consistent with that of the large cohort histological samples. This study demonstrates that using cell block for EGFR mutation detection has a high success rate and can yield reliable results. It also solidifies that the use of cytological samples possesses relatively high clinical practicability, so that cytological samples may substitute histological samples. In addition, an assessment of the tumor cell quantity prior to detection could improve the positive rate. Considering tumor heterogeneity, both histological and cytological samples are suggested to be collected for testing, if possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31938186PMC6958025What 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.