4.4 Article

Sputum Cell-Free DNA Valued Surrogate Sample for Detection of EGFR Mutation in Patients with Advanced Lung Adenocarcinoma

Journal

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS
Volume 22, Issue 7, Pages 934-942

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2020.04.208

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [8164114]
  2. Beiijng Hospital Clinical Research 121 project
  3. Key Research Program for Health Care in China [W2016ZD01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sputum is a common cytologic sample type, but its potential use in EGFR mutation detection in patients with lung cancer is not fully evaluated. This study established an improved sputum cell-free DNA (cfDNA) extraction method study and applied a super-amplification refractory mutation system to detect the EGFR mutation status in sputum cfDNA. The sputum sediments were used for cytology evaluation. The study included 102 lung adenocarcinoma patients; 65 patients (63.7%) were positive for EGFR mutations in tumor samples. EGFR mutation status was positive in 30 patients (29.4%) by sputum cfDNA testing, achieving an overall sensitivity and specificity of 46.2% and 100%, respectively. Comparison of EGFR mutation status in tumor samples revealed that the sensitivity of testing sputum cfDNA in 40 patients with stage I to IIIA versus 62 patients with stage IIIB to IV was 24% (6/25) versus 65.0% (26/40). Through cytology evaluation, the sputum specimens from 62 advanced patients were classified into three categories: 10 were unsatisfactory; 34 were satisfactory but had no malignant cells; and 18 had malignant cells. The sensitivities of these three categories were 0 % (0/8), 71.4% (15/21), and 100% (11/11), respectively. These findings revealed that with the improved cfDNA extraction method and sputum cytology evaluation, sputum cfDNA is a valuable surrogate sample type for detecting clinical EGFR mutations in advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available