Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32457409›Full record

ArticleModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2020

Tiny but mighty: use of next generation sequencing on discarded cytocentrifuged bile duct brushing specimens to increase sensitivity of cytological diagnosis.

Aparna Harbhajanka, Claire W Michael, Nafiseh Janaki, Hamza N Gokozan, Jay Wasman, Philip Bomeisl, Jennifer Yoest, Navid Sadri

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Aparna HarbhajankaDepartment of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Claire W MichaelDepartment of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Nafiseh JanakiDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School Boston, Boston, MA, USA.
Hamza N GokozanDepartment of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8782-9908
Jay WasmanDepartment of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Philip BomeislDepartment of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Jennifer YoestDepartment of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Navid SadriDepartment of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA. navid.sadri@uhhospitals.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5051-717X
University Hospitals of Cleveland · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bile duct brushing (BDB) is used to evaluate pancreatobiliary lesions as it widely samples lesions with a low complication rate. Cytological evaluation of BDB is a specific but insensitive test. There is limited literature on the use of post-cytocentrifuged (PCC) samples, which are usually discarded, for next-generation sequencing (NGS) as an adjunct to cytological diagnosis of BDB. In this study we investigate whether molecular analysis by NGS of PCC specimens improves the sensitivity of diagnosis. PCC samples from 100 consecutive BDB specimens spanning 93 unique patients were retained. DNA was extracted and mutational analysis was performed agnostic of morphologic or clinical findings. Each BDB specimen was characterized as negative, atypical or positive based on morphological analysis by trained cytopathologists. Performance characteristics for mutational profiling and morphological analysis were calculated on the basis of clinicopathologic follow-up. There was sufficient clinicopathologic follow-up to classify 94 of 100 cases as either malignant (n = 43) or benign (n = 51). Based on morphologic analysis of cytology, these 94 cases were classified as either benign (n = 55), atypical (n = 18), or as at least suspicious or positive for malignancy (n = 21). Morphologic analysis of cytology showed a sensitivity of 49% and a specificity of 100% if atypical cases were considered negative. NGS revealed oncogenic alterations in 40/43 (93%) of malignant cases based on clinicopathologic follow-up. The most common alterations were in KRAS and TP53, observed in 77% and 49% of malignant cases respectively. No alterations were observed in the 51 benign cases classified based on clinicopathologic follow-up. Supplementing cytomorphologic analysis with molecular profiling of PCC by targeted NGS analysis increased the sensitivity to 93% and maintained specificity at 100%. This study provides evidence for the utility of NGS molecular profiling of PCC specimens to increase the sensitivity of BDB cytology samples, although studies with larger cohorts are needed to verify these findings.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBile Duct NeoplasmsBile DuctsCytodiagnosisFemaleHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMaleMiddle AgedPancreatic NeoplasmsSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID32457409
OpenAlexW3031115373

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.