ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound
The EUS molecular evaluation of pancreatic cancer: A prospective multicenter cohort trial.
Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endoscopic ultrasound molecular evaluation of pancreatic cancer trial to profile molecular landscape of inoperable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Case Report: Two cases of long-term survival in advanced pancreatic cancer patients following treatment withFrontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Diagnosis of mediastinal cysts: the role and safety of EUS-FNA with 19-gauge needle: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for smooth benign appearing malignant esophageal stricture: a cross-sectional study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Exceptional Response to Olaparib and Pembrolizumab for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma With GermlineJCO precision oncology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesPatients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (A-PDAC) are not candidates for surgical resection and are often offered palliative chemotherapy. The ready availability of a safe and effective tumor sampling technique to provide material for both diagnosis and comprehensive genetic profiling is critical for informing precision medicine in A-PDAC, thus potentially increasing survival. The aim of this study is to examine the feasibility and benefits of routine comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of A-PDAC using EUS-FNA material.
methodsThis is a prospective cohort study to test the clinical utility of fresh frozen or archival EUS-FNA samples in providing genetic material for CGP. The results of the CGP will be reviewed at a molecular tumor board. The proportion of participants that have a change in their treatment recommendations based on their individual genomic profiling will be assessed. Correlations between CGP and stage, prognosis, response to treatment and overall survival will also be investigated. This study will open to recruitment in 2020, with a target accrual of 150 A-PDAC patients within 36 months, with a 2-year follow-up. It is expected that the majority of participants will be those who have already consented for their tissue to be biobanked in the Victorian Pancreatic Cancer Biobank at the time of diagnostic EUS-FNA. Patients without archival or biobanked material that is suitable for CGP may be offered a EUS-FNA procedure for the purposes of obtaining fresh frozen material. DISCUSSION: This trial is expected to provide crucial data regarding the feasibility of routine CGP of A-PDAC using EUS-FNA material. It will also provide important information about the impact of this methodology on patients' survival.
Indexed as
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.