ArticleTranslational oncology2020
Mutation analysis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors using RNA obtained via endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration.
Article in Translational oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- RNA-Based and DNA-Based Next-Generation Sequencing of KIT and PDGFRA Mutations in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: Analytical Performance and Epidemiologic Insights.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- Current status of the diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal schwannoma.Oncology letters · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNA) is useful for pathologically diagnosing gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) before surgery. However, its role in mutation analysis remains unclear. To examine the feasibility of analyzing GIST mutations using mRNA obtained with EUS-FNA, we prospectively enrolled 41 patients with subepithelial lesion from which EUS-FNA was successfully acquired tissue sample. Thirty-two, 5, and 4 subepithelial lesions were diagnosed as GISTs, schwannomas, and leiomyomas, respectively. After RNA was extracted from FNA sample, RNA was converted to cDNA. Full-length sequence of the KIT cDNA amplified via the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was successful in 31 (96.9%) out of 32 GIST and three out of 9 non-GIST (33.3%). The KIT mutation statuses of 31 GISTs in which KIT cDNA was amplified were successfully determined through directional sequencing. Furthermore, 15 of 16 surgically excised GISTs exhibited the same mutation status in both the EUS-FNA and resected samples. In vitro experiment, the minimum number of cells required to amplify full-length of KIT cDNA from RNA was one-tenth of that required to amplify KIT exon11 gene from DNA. This study clarifies that mutation analysis using RNA obtained with EUS-FNA is feasible and reliable. Moreover, our data would support that RNA-based mutation is superior to DNA-based mutation analysis in GIST.
Identifiers
What 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.