ArticleBMC cancer2024
Utility of bronchoscopically obtained frozen cytology pellets for next-generation sequencing.
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prospective multicenter validation of a next-generation sequencing panel using cytology specimens for lung cancer: cPANEL.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Suitability of Frozen Pleural Fluid Pellets for Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Driver Gene Testing in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Thoracic cancer · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNext-generation sequencing (NGS) is essential for lung cancer treatment. It is important to collect sufficient tissue specimens, but sometimes we cannot obtain large enough samples for NGS analysis. We investigated the yield of NGS analysis by frozen cytology pellets using an Oncomine Comprehensive Assay or Oncomine Precision Assay.
methodsWe retrospectively enrolled patients with lung cancer who underwent bronchoscopy at Kobe University Hospital and were enrolled in the Lung Cancer Genomic Screening Project for Individualized Medicine. We investigated the amount of extracted DNA and RNA and determined the NGS success rates. We also compared the amount of DNA and RNA by bronchoscopy methods. To create the frozen cytology pellets, we first effectively collected the cells and then quickly centrifuged and cryopreserved them.
resultsA total of 132 patients were enrolled in this study between May 2016 and December 2022; of them, 75 were subjected to frozen cytology pellet examinations and 57 were subjected to frozen tissue examinations. The amount of DNA and RNA obtained by frozen cytology pellets was nearly equivalent to frozen tissues. Frozen cytology pellets collected by endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration yielded significantly more DNA than those collected by transbronchial biopsy methods. (P < 0.01) In RNA content, cytology pellets were not inferior to frozen tissue. The success rate of NGS analysis with frozen cytology pellet specimens was comparable to the success rate of NGS analysis with frozen tissue specimens.
conclusionsOur study showed that frozen cytology pellets may have equivalent diagnostic value to frozen tissue for NGS analyses. Bronchial cytology specimens are usually used only for cytology, but NGS analysis is possible if enough cells are collected to create pellet specimens. In particular, the frozen cytology pellets obtained by endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration yielded sufficient amounts of DNA.
trial registrationThis was registered with the University Medical Hospital Information Network in Japan (UMINCTR registration no. UMIN000052050).
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.