4.5 Article

Cryobiopsy increases the EGFR detection rate in non-small cell lung cancer

期刊

LUNG CANCER
卷 141, 期 -, 页码 56-63

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2019.12.008

关键词

Cryobiopsy; Non-small cell lung cancer; Epidermal growth factor receptor mutation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Detection of activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation is crucial for individualized treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However little is known about how biopsy technique affects the detection rate of EGFR mutations. This retrospective, single center study evaluated the detection rate of EGFR mutations in tissue obtained by bronchoscopic cryobiopsy and compared this to other standard tissue sampling techniques. Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed 414 patients with histologically confirmed NSCLC and known EGFR mutation status between 3/2008-7/2014. Tumor specimens obtained by tissue preserving bronchoscopic cryobiopsy were compared to those obtained by other techniques. Results and conclusion: Analysis of bronchoscopic cryobiopsy tissue detected 29 activating EGFR mutations in 27 (21.6 %) out of 125 patients, while analysis of tissue obtained by non-cryobiopsy techniques (bronchoscopic forceps biopsies, fine needle aspiration, imaging guided transthoracical and surgical procedures) detected 42 EGFR mutations in 40 (13.8 %) out of 298 patients (p < 0.05). Cryobiopsy increased detection rate of EGFR mutations in central tumors compared with forceps biopsy (19.6 % versus 6.5 %, p < 0.05), while an insignificant trend was detected also for peripheral tumors (33.3 % versus 26.9 %). Bronchosopic cryobiopsy increases the detection rate of activating EGFR mutations in NSCLC in comparison to other tissue sampling techniques. This will help to optimize individualized treatment of patients with advanced tumors. Because of the retrospective nature of this analysis, a prospective trial is mandatory for final assessment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据