ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound
Adequacy of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration and fine-needle biopsy for next-generation sequencing in pancreatic malignancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sotorasib combined with 3-methyladenine for the treatment of KRAS G12C-mutant pancreatic cancer and its underlying mechanisms.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- Targeted Therapy in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Current Advances and Challenges.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
- Deep Learning on H&E Pathology Images PredictsDiseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- EUS-Anchored Multimodal Evaluation of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: Toward a Conceptual Diagnostic Framework.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Endoscopic ultrasound molecular evaluation of pancreatic cancer trial to profile molecular landscape of inoperable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Toward Precision Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Cancer Guided by Transcriptomic Signatures.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Review
- Atypical R-loops in cancer: decoding molecular chaos for therapeutic gain.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Oral microbiome as a diagnostic biomarker for pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.Journal of oral microbiology · 2025Review
- Diagnostic value of EUS-guided tissue acquisition in suspected autoimmune pancreatitis: A 15-year single-center retrospective study.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Establishing a single-cell RNA sequencing workflow using EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Utility of archived EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy samples for next-generation sequencing in pancreatic adenocarcinoma.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: A majority of pancreatic malignancies are unresectable at the time of presentation and require EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration or fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB) for diagnosis. With the advent of precision therapy, there is an increasing need to use EUS-FNA/FNB sample for genetic analysis. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a preferred technology to detect genetic mutations with high sensitivity in small specimens. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the adequacy of EUS-FNA/FNB for NGS in pancreatic malignancies. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from database inception to November 11, 2023. The primary outcome was the proportion of sufficient sample acquired by EUS-FNA/FNB in pancreatic malignancies for NGS. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of sufficient sample for NGS in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and the detection rates of mutations in KRAS, TP53, CDKN2A, and SMAD4 and actionable mutations in PDAC. The pooled proportions were calculated using a random-effects model. Potential sources of heterogeneity were investigated with subgroup analyses and meta-regression. Results: Twenty studies with 881 samples were included. The pooled adequacy of EUS-FNA/FNB sample for NGS was 89.9% (95% CI, 80.8%-96.7%) in pancreatic malignancies and 92.0% (95% CI, 81.3%-98.8%) in PDAC. Screening sample suitability before NGS testing was associated with lower adequacy in subgroup analysis (79.7% Conclusions: In the majority of cases, EUS-FNA/FNB can acquire adequate sample for NGS and identify tumor-specific mutations in patients with pancreatic malignancies. Strict pre-analysis screening criteria may negatively impact the sample adequacy and the success rate for NGS.
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.