Direct histological processing of EUS biopsies enables rapid molecular biomarker analysis for interventional pancreatic cancer trials

Pancreatology

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 8-15

  Brais, Rebecca J ^a   Davies, Susan E ^a   O'Donovan, Maria ^a   Simpson, Ben W ^a   Cook, Natalie ^a,b   Darbonne, Walter C ^c   Chilcott, Sian ^a   Lolkema, Martijn P ^a,b,d   Neesse, Albrecht ^b   Lockley, Michelle ^e   Corrie, Pippa G ^a   Jodrell, Duncan I ^a,b   Praseedom, Raaj K ^a   Huguet, Emmanuel L ^a   Jah, Asif ^a   Jamieson, Neville V ^a   De Sauvage, Frederic J ^c   Tuveson, David A ^a,b   Carroll, Nicholas R ^a  

^a ADDENBROOKE S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b Cambridge Research Institute   (United Kingdom)

^c GENENTECH INC   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^e QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Diagnostic biomarkers; Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS); Fine needle aspiration (FNA) histology; Molecular pathology; Pancreatic tumours

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; FORMALDEHYDE; MESSENGER RNA; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR GLI1; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR HES 1;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASPIRATION BIOPSY; CANCER CELL; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER TISSUE; CYTOPATHOLOGY; ENDOSCOPIC BIOPSY; ENDOSCOPIC ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LASER CAPTURE MICRODISSECTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MYOFIBROBLAST; PANCREAS CANCER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STROMA CELL; TISSUE FIXATION;

EID: 84862204209     PISSN: 14243903     EISSN: 14243911     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2011.12.009     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Rafique A, Freeman S, Carroll N. A clinical algorithm for the assessment of pancreatic lesions: utilization of 16- and 64-section multidetector CT and endoscopic ultrasound. Clin Radiol 2007;62:1142-53. (Pubitemid 350018623)
2. Jenssen C, Dietrich CF. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy and trucut biopsy in gastroenterology e an overview. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2009;23:743-59.
3. Eloubeidi MA, Jhala D, Chhieng DC, Chen VK, Eltoum I, Vickers S, et al. Yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy in patients with suspected pancreatic carcinoma. Cancer 2003;99:285-92.
4. Chang KJ, Nguyen P, Erickson RA, Durbin TE, Katz KD. The clinical utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic carcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc 1997;45:387-93. (Pubitemid 27426180)
5. Krishna NB, Mehra M, Reddy AV, Agarwal B. EUS/EUSeFNA for suspected pancreatic cancer: influence of chronic pancreatitis and clinical presentation with or without obstructive jaundice on performance characteristics. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;70:70-9.
6. Turner BG, Cizginer S, Agarwal D, Yang J, Pitman MB, Brugge WR. Diagnosis of pancreatic neoplasia with EUS and FNA: a report of accuracy. Gastrointest Endosc 2010;71:91-8.
7. Horwhat JD, Paulson EK, McGrath K, Branch MS, Baillie J, Tyler D, et al. A randomized comparison of EUS-guided FNA versus CT or US-guided FNA for the evaluation of pancreatic mass lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2006;63:966-75. (Pubitemid 43776157)
8. Mallery JS, Centeno BA, Hahn PF, Chang Y, Warshaw AL, Brugge WR. Pancreatic tissue sampling guided by EUS, CT/US, and surgery: a comparison of sensitivity and specificity. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;56:218-24.
9. Jhala D, Eloubeidi M, Chhieng DC, Frost A, Eltoum IA, Roberson J, et al. Fine needle aspiration biopsy of the islet cell tumor of pancreas: a comparison between computerized axial tomography and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy. Ann Diagn Pathol 2002;6:106-12. (Pubitemid 34461479)
10. Adler DG, Jacobson BC, Davila RE, Hirota WK, Leighton JA, Qureshi WA, et al. ASGE guideline: complications of EUS. Gastrointest Endosc 2005;61:8-12. (Pubitemid 40169804)
11. Eloubeidi MA, Chen VK, Eltoum IA, Jhala D, Chhieng DC, Jhala N, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of patients with suspected pancreatic cancer: diagnostic accuracy and acute and 30-day complications. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:2663-8. (Pubitemid 38020105)
12. Micames C, Jowell PS, White R, Paulson E, Nelson R, Morse M, et al. Lower frequency of peritoneal carcinomatosis in patients with pancreatic cancer diagnosed by EUS-guided FNA vs. percutaneous FNA. Gastrointest Endosc 2003;58:690-5. (Pubitemid 37370481)
13. Chang KJ. Maximizing the yield of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;56:S28-34.
14. Savides TJ. Tricks for improving EUSeFNA accuracy and maximizing cellular yield. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;69:S130-3.
15. Klapman JB, Logrono R, Dye CE, Waxman I. Clinical impact of on-site cytopathology interpretation on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:1289-94. (Pubitemid 36741524)
16. Logrono R, Waxman I. Interactive role of the cytopathologist in EUS-guided fine needle aspiration: an efficient approach. Gastrointest Endosc 2001;54: 485-90. (Pubitemid 33661155)
17. Espina V, Wulfkuhle JD, Calvert VS, VanMeter A, Zhou W, Coukos G, et al. Laser-capture microdissection. Nat Protoc 2006;1:586-603.
18. Gerke H. Eus-guided FNA: better samples with smaller needles? Gastrointest Endosc 2009;70:1098-100.
19. Itoi T, Tsuchiya T, Itokawa F, Sofuni A, Kurihara T, Tsuji S, et al. Histological diagnosis by EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy in pancreatic solid masses without on-site cytopathologist: a single-center experience. Dig Endosc 2011;23(Suppl. 1):34-8.
20. Cochrane H. Guidelines on staffing and workload for histopathology and cytopathology departments. 2nd ed., wwwrcpathorg/publications; 2005.
21. Plentz R, Park JS, Rhim AD, Abravanel D, Hezel AF, Sharma SV, et al. Inhibition of gamma-secretase activity inhibits tumor progression in a mouse model of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Gastroenterology 2009;136:1741-9. e1746.
22. Giehl K, Skripczynski B, Mansard A, Menke A, Gierschik P. Growth factordependent activation of the ras-raf-mek-mapk pathway in the human pancreatic carcinoma cell line panc-1 carrying activated k-ras: implications for cell proliferation and cell migration. Oncogene 2000;19:2930-42. (Pubitemid 30389083)
23. Tian H, Callahan CA, DuPree KJ, Darbonne WC, Ahn CP, Scales SJ, et al. Hedgehog signaling is restricted to the stromal compartment during pancreatic carcinogenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009;106:4254-9.
24. Moller K, Papanikolaou IS, Toermer T, Delicha EM, Sarbia M, Schenck U, et al. EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: high yield of 2 passes with combined histologic-cytologic analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;70: 60-9.
25. Yusuf TE, Ho S, Pavey DA, Michael H, Gress FG. Retrospective analysis of the utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUSeFNA) in pancreatic masses, using a 22-gauge or 25-gauge needle system: a multicenter experience. Endoscopy 2009;41:445-8.
26. Saftoiu A, Vilmann P, Gorunescu F, Janssen J, Hocke M, Larsen M, et al. Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound elastography used for differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses: a multicenter study. Endoscopy; 2011.
27. Giovannini M, Hookey LC, Bories E, Pesenti C, Monges G, Delpero JR. Endoscopic ultrasound elastography: the first step towards virtual biopsy? Preliminary results in 49 patients. Endoscopy 2006;38:344-8.
28. Itokawa F, Itoi T, Sofuni A, Kurihara T, Tsuchiya T, Ishii K, et al. EUS elastography combined with the strain ratio of tissue elasticity for diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses. J Gastroenterol; 2011.