Fluorescence in situ hybridization and K-ras analyses improve diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic masses

Pancreas

Volumn 40, Issue 7, 2011, Pages 1057-1062

  Reicher, Sofiya ^a   Boyar, Fatih Z ^b   Albitar, Maher ^b   Sulcova, Vladimira ^b   Agersborg, Sally ^b   Nga, Visal ^a   Zhou, Ying ^c   Li, Gang ^c   Venegas, Rose ^a   French, Samuel W ^a   Chung, David S ^a   Stabile, Bruce E ^a   Eysselein, Viktor E ^a   Anguiano, Arturo ^b  

^a HARBOR UCLA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b QUEST DIAGNOSTICS NICHOLS INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

atypical cytology; diagnostic accuracy; endoscopic ultrasound; pancreatic cancer

Indexed keywords

DNA TOPOISOMERASE (ATP HYDROLYSING); EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; K RAS PROTEIN; PROTEIN P16; PROTEIN P53;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASPIRATION BIOPSY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CYTOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; ENDOSCOPIC ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; FOLLOW UP; GENE; HUMAN; LPL GENE; MALE; MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; ONCOGENE C MYC; PANCREAS CANCER; PANCREAS CYST; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY, FINE-NEEDLE; CALIFORNIA; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; DNA MUTATIONAL ANALYSIS; ENDOSONOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMANS; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION, FLUORESCENCE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MUTATION; PANCREATIC DISEASES; PANCREATIC NEOPLASMS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; PROTO-ONCOGENE PROTEINS; RAS PROTEINS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME FACTORS; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR PROTEIN P53;

EID: 80052966491     PISSN: 08853177     EISSN: 15364828     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0b013e3182200201     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics. Cancer J Clin. 2006;56:106-130.
2. Savides TJ, Donohue M, Gordon H, et al. EUS-guided FNA diagnostic yield of malignancy for solid pancreatic masses: A benchmark for quality performance measurement. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;66:277-282. (Pubitemid 47079034)
3. Turner BG, Cizginer S, Agarwal D, et al. Diagnosis of pancreatic neoplasia with EUS and FNA: A report of accuracy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71:91-98.
4. Fisher L, Segarajasingam DS, Stewart C, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: Performance and outcomes. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;24:90-96.
5. Ramirez-Luna MA, Zepeda-Gomez S, Chavez-Tapia NC, et al. Diagnostic yield and therapeutic impact of fine-needle aspiration biopsies guided by endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic lesions. Rev Invest Clin. 2008;60:11-14. (Pubitemid 351833257)
6. Cohen MB, Egerter DP, Holly EA, et al. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Regression analysis to identify improved cytologic criteria. Diagn Cytopathol. 1991;7:341-345.
7. Lin F, Staerkel G. Cytologic criteria for well differentiated adenocarcinoma of the pancreas in fine-needle aspiration biopsy specimens. Cancer Cytopathol. 2003;99:44-50. (Pubitemid 36267966)
8. Enayati PG, Traverso LW, Galagan K, et al. The meaning of equivocal pancreatic cytology in patients thought to have pancreatic cancer. Am J Surg. 1996;171:525-528. (Pubitemid 26189781)
9. Payne M, Staerkel G, Gong Y. Indeterminate diagnosis in fine-needle aspiration of the pancreas: Reasons and clinical implications. Diagn Cytopathol. 2009;37:21-29.
10. Eloubeidi MA, Varadarajulu S, Desai S, et al. Value of repeat endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for suspected pancreatic cancer. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;23:567-570. (Pubitemid 351501144)
11. Barr Fritcher EG, Kipp BR, Halling KC, et al. A multivariable model using advanced cytologic methods for the evaluation of indeterminate pancreaticobiliary strictures. Gastroenterology. 2009;136:2180-2186.
12. Jiang F, Katz R. Use of interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization as a powerful diagnostic tool in cytology. Diagn Mol Pathol. 2002;11:47-57. (Pubitemid 34171212)
13. Koorstra JB, Hustinx SR, Offerhouse GJ, et al. Pancreatic carcinogenesis. Pancreatology. 2008;8:110-125. (Pubitemid 351670364)
14. Eloubeidi MA, Tamhane A. Prospective assessment of diagnostic utility and complications of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration. Results from newly developed academic endoscopic ultrasound program. Dig Dis. 2008;26:356-363.
15. Mitchell ML, Carney CN. Cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 1985;83:171-176. (Pubitemid 15128842)
16. Griffin CA, Morsberger L, Hawkins AL, et al. Molecular cytogenetic characterization of pancreas cancer cell lines reveals high complexity chromosomal alterations. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2007;118:148-156. (Pubitemid 350125251)
17. Schleger C, Verbeke C, Hildenbrand R, et al. c-Myc activation in primary and metastatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas: Incidence, mechanisms, and clinical significance. Mod Pathol. 2002;15:462-469. (Pubitemid 34326956)
18. Lefter LP, Sunamura M, Furukawa T, et al. Inserting chromosome 18 into pancreatic cancer cells switches them to a dormant metastatic phenotype. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9:5044-5052. (Pubitemid 37323312)
19. Shiraishi K, Okita K, Kusano N, et al. A comparison of DNA copy number changes detected by comparative genomic hybridization in malignancies of the liver, biliary tract and pancreas. Oncology. 2001;60:151-161. (Pubitemid 32245334)
20. Dancer J, Takei H, Ro JY, et al. Coexpression of EGFR and HER-2 in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; a comparative study using immunocytochemistry correlated with gene amplification by fluorescent in situ hybridization. Oncol Rep. 2007;18:151-155.
21. Tsiambas E, Karameris A, Lazaris AC, et al. EGFR alterations in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A chromogenic in situ hybridization analysis based on tissue microarrays. Hepatogastroenterology. 2006;53:452-457. (Pubitemid 43954426)
22. Mahlamaki EH, Barlund M, Tanner M, et al. Frequent amplification of 8q24, 11q, 17q and 20q-specific genes in pancreatic cancer. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2002;35:353-358. (Pubitemid 35246993)
23. Hansel DE, Ashfaq R, Rahman A, et al. A subset of pancreatic adenocarcinoma demonstrates coamplification of topoisomerase IIa and HER2/neu: Use of ummunolabeling and multicolor FISH for potential patient screening and treatment. Am J Clin Pathol. 2005;123:28-35. (Pubitemid 40066169)
24. Jones JS. DNA-based molecular cytology for bladder cancer surveillance. Urology. 2006;67:35-47. (Pubitemid 43344220)
25. Wolff AC, Hammond EH, Schwartz JN, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:118-145. (Pubitemid 350003059)
26. Wiktor AE, Van Dyke DL, Stupca PJ, et al. Preclinical validation of fluorescence in situ hybridization assays for clinical practice. Genet Med. 2006;8:16-23.
27. Armitage P, Berry G, Matthews JNS. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. 4th ed. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell; 2001.
28. Voss M, Hammel P, Molas G, et al. Value of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses. Gut. 2000;46:244-249. (Pubitemid 30305852)
29. Dagrada GP, Mezzelani A, Alasio L, et al. HER-2/neu assessment in primary chemotherapy treated breast carcinoma: No evidence of gene profile changing. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2003;80:207-214. (Pubitemid 36886509)
30. Marano A, Pan Y, Li C, et al. Chromosomal numerical aberrations detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization on bladder washings from patients with bladder cancer. Eur Urol. 2000;37:358-365. (Pubitemid 30122274)
31. Prindiville SA, Ried T. Interphase cytogenetics of sputum cells for the early detection of lung carcinogenesis. Cancer Prev Res. 2010;3:416-419.
32. Zhong M, de Angelo P, Osborne L, et al. Dual-color, break-apart FISH assay on paraffin-embedded tissues as a adjunct to diagnosis of Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinoma and alveolar soft part sarcoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34:757-766.
33. Levy MJ, Clain JE, Clayton A, et al. Preliminary experience comparing routine cytology results with the composite results of digital image analysis and fluorescence in situ hybridization in patients undergoing EUS-guided FNA. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;66:483-490. (Pubitemid 47304419)
34. Dewald GW, Smyrk TC, Thorland EC, et al. Fluorescence in situ hybridization to visualize genetic abnormalities in interphase cells of acinar cell carcinoma, ductal adenocarcinoma, and islet cell carcinoma of the pancreas. Mayo Clin Proc. 2009;84:801-810.
35. Genevay M, Dumonceau J-M, Pepey B, et al. Fluorescence in situ hybridization as a tool to characterize genetic alterations in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Pancreas. 2010;39:543-544.
36. Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B, et al. Trastuzumab after adjuvant therapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:1659-1672. (Pubitemid 41464705)
37. Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J, et al. Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: A phase III trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1960-1966. (Pubitemid 46972777)
38. Shepherd FA, Rodrigues Pereira J, Ciuleanu T, et al. Erlotinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:123-155.
39. Jahng AW, Reicher S, Chung D, et al. Staining for p53 and Ki-67 increases the sensitivity of EUS-FNA to detect pancreatic malignancy. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;2:362-368.