Cargando…
Molecular analysis with pancreaseq® in evaluation and management of pancreatic cysts: A cohort of 28 patients
OBJECTIVES: Herein, we present the PancreaSeq® results of 28 patients and emphasize the usefulness of molecular testing in evaluation of pancreatic cysts. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 10 (35.7%) non-diagnostic, 6 (21.4%) negative, 5 (17.8%) atypical, and 7 (25%) were positive for mucinous cystic...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Scientific Scholar
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10481854/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37681071 http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/Cytojournal_28_2023 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVES: Herein, we present the PancreaSeq® results of 28 patients and emphasize the usefulness of molecular testing in evaluation of pancreatic cysts. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 10 (35.7%) non-diagnostic, 6 (21.4%) negative, 5 (17.8%) atypical, and 7 (25%) were positive for mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN) pancreatic cyst aspirates were analyzed with PancreaSeq® at Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville between September 2021 and February 2023. RESULTS: Three non-diagnostic, two negative, three atypical, and two positive for MCN cysts were positive for KRAS and GNAS mutations. They were interpreted as intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) with low risk for progression to high-grade dysplasia/adenocarcinoma. One negative case was positive for KRAS and GNAS mutation and RNF43 copy number alteration. It was interpreted as IPMN with a low risk of progression. Two non-diagnostic, one negative, and two positive for MCN cysts were positive for KRAS mutation. All were interpreted as IPMN/MCNs with low risk of progression. One positive for MCN case was positive for GNAS mutation and ALK fusion and one positive for MCN case was positive for GNAS mutation, ALK fusion, and RNF43 copy number alteration. Both were interpreted as IPMN and their risk of progression was interpreted as not well understood. One atypical case was positive for KRAS and TP53 mutation and was interpreted as IPMN/ MCNs with a high risk of progression. VHL mutation was present in one non-diagnostic case. It was interpreted as serous cystadenoma and the risk for progression was low. CONCLUSION: Molecular analysis of pancreatic cysts with PancreaSeq® is useful in accurate diagnosis, especially when cytologic material is non-diagnostic and helps improve patient management. |
---|