Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33119213›Full record

ArticleCancer cytopathology2021

Utilization of cytology smears improves success rates of RNA-based next-generation sequencing gene fusion assays for clinically relevant predictive biomarkers.

Nisha S Ramani, Hui Chen, Russell R Broaddus, Alexander J Lazar, Rajyalakshmi Luthra, L Jeffrey Medeiros, Keyur P Patel, Asif Rashid, Mark J Routbort, John Stewart and 6 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer cytopathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cost-Efficient Detection ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nisha S RamaniDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0003-4110-7392
Hui ChenDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Russell R BroaddusDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Alexander J LazarDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Rajyalakshmi LuthraDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
L Jeffrey MedeirosDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Keyur P PatelDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Asif RashidDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Mark J RoutbortDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
John StewartDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Zhenya TangDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Roland BassettDepartment of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Jawad ManekiaDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Bedia A BarkohDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Hyvan DangDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Sinchita Roy-ChowdhuriDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0002-9447-7701
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Biostatistics Resource GroupNCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of RNA-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays to detect gene fusions for targeted therapy has rapidly become an essential component of comprehensive molecular profiling. For cytology specimens, the cell block (CB) is most commonly used for fusion testing; however, insufficient cellularity and/or suboptimal RNA quality are often limiting factors. In the current study, the authors evaluated the factors affecting RNA fusion testing in cytology and the added value of smears in cases with a suboptimal or inadequate CB.

methodsA 12-month retrospective review was performed to identify cytology cases that were evaluated by a targeted RNA-based NGS assay. Samples were sequenced by targeted amplicon-based NGS for 51 clinically relevant genes on a proprietary platform. Preanalytic factors and NGS quality parameters were correlated with the results of RNA fusion testing.

resultsThe overall success rate of RNA fusion testing was 92%. Of the 146 cases successfully sequenced, 14% had a clinically relevant fusion detected. NGS testing success positively correlated with RNA yield (P = .03) but was independent of the tumor fraction, the tumor size, or the number of slides used for extraction. CB preparations were adequate for testing in 45% cases, but the inclusion of direct smears increased the adequacy rate to 92%. There was no significant difference in testing success rates between smears and CB preparations.

conclusionsThe success of RNA-based NGS fusion testing depends on the quality and quantity of RNA extracted. The use of direct smears significantly improves the adequacy of cytologic samples for RNA fusion testing for predictive biomarkers.

Indexed as

Gene FusionAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorBiopsy, Fine-NeedleCytodiagnosisCytological TechniquesFemaleHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesBiomarkers, Tumorcytology smearsmolecular testingnext-generation sequencing (NGS)NGS successpreanalytical factorsquality metricsRNA fusion

Identifiers

PMID33119213
PMCPMC12002355
OpenAlexW3095652692

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.