ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Benefits of macroscopic on-site evaluation in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for comprehensive genomic profiling.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) in the Era of Precision Medicine for Pancreatic Cancer Through Next-Generation Sequencing Technology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Beyond the ruler: Measuring what truly matters in endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic cancer genomics.Endoscopy international open · 2025Article
- Clinical utility of macroscopic on-site evaluation in EUS-guided tissue acquisition for autoimmune pancreatitis: A retrospective study.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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Matched therapy based on comprehensive genomic profiling is a potential treatment option for patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer; however, the optimal method for obtaining tissue samples suitable for comprehensive genomic profiling using endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition remains unclear. This study aimed to determine the optimal endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition method to obtain samples for comprehensive genomic profiling. Patients and methods: This retrospective study included 86 consecutive patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent comprehensive genomic profiling using FoundationOne CDx (Foundation Medicine Inc.) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition between June 2019 and January 2023. Macroscopic visible core length was measured using on-site macroscopic evaluation in all patients. Foundation Medicine Inc. reported analysis results categorized as passed (successful FoundationOne CDx), qualified, or failed. We investigated factors predicting successful FoundationOne CDx treatment. Results: Needles sized 22, 20, and 19 gauge were used in 63, one, and 23 patients, respectively. The stylet slow-pull and suction techniques were performed in 43 and 41 patients, respectively. Median total macroscopic visible core length in the formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded blocks subjected to FoundationOne CDx was 41 mm. The success rate for FoundationOne CDx was 66%. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that macroscopic visible core length independently affected successful FoundationOne CDx ( Conclusions: In tissue specimens obtained using endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition, macroscopic visible core length can be associated with an appropriate sample for FoundationOne CDx.
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.