Cargando…
Fluorescence in situ hybridization test for detection of endometrial carcinoma cells by non‐invasive vaginal swab
Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynaecological malignancy with increasing incidence in developed countries. As gold standard, hysteroscopy confirms only 30% of suspected ECs. The detection of EC cells in the vagina by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) after a smear test could redu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9889703/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36625073 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcmm.17658 |
_version_ | 1784880789778857984 |
---|---|
author | Weimer, Jörg Hüttmann, Martje Nusilati, Asiyan Andreas, Svenja Röseler, Jona Tribian, Nils Rogmans, Christoph Stope, Matthias Bernhard Dahl, Edgar Mustea, Alexander Stickeler, Elmar Hedemann, Nina Flörkemeier, Inken Tiemann, Katharina Magadeeva, Svetlana Dempfle, Astrid Arnold, Norbert Maass, Nicolai Bauerschlag, Dirk |
author_facet | Weimer, Jörg Hüttmann, Martje Nusilati, Asiyan Andreas, Svenja Röseler, Jona Tribian, Nils Rogmans, Christoph Stope, Matthias Bernhard Dahl, Edgar Mustea, Alexander Stickeler, Elmar Hedemann, Nina Flörkemeier, Inken Tiemann, Katharina Magadeeva, Svetlana Dempfle, Astrid Arnold, Norbert Maass, Nicolai Bauerschlag, Dirk |
author_sort | Weimer, Jörg |
collection | PubMed |
description | Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynaecological malignancy with increasing incidence in developed countries. As gold standard, hysteroscopy confirms only 30% of suspected ECs. The detection of EC cells in the vagina by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) after a smear test could reduce invasive procedures in the future. Using array‐based comparative genome hybridization (aCGH) on 65 endometrial carcinomas, most frequently imbalanced regions of the tumour genome were identified. Bacterial artificial chromosomes were used to generate FISH‐probes homologue to these human regions. The FISH test was hybridized on swabs specimens collected from the vaginal cavity. Samples from six patients without EC were selected as a negative control and on 13 patients with known EC as a positive control. To distinguish between benign and EC cases, the cut‐off value has been defined. A first validation of this EC‐FISH Test was performed with swabs from 41 patients with suspected EC. The most common genomic imbalances in EC are around the CTNNB1, FBXW7 and APC genes. The cut‐off is defined at 32% of analysed cells without diploid signal pattern. This differs significantly between the positive and negative controls (p < 0.001). In a first validation cohort of 41 patients with suspected EC, the EC‐FISH Test distinguishes patients with and without EC with a sensitivity of 91% and a specificity of 83%. The negative predictive value is 96%. This is the first report of a non‐invasive EC‐FISH Test to predict EC in women with suspected EC. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9889703 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98897032023-02-02 Fluorescence in situ hybridization test for detection of endometrial carcinoma cells by non‐invasive vaginal swab Weimer, Jörg Hüttmann, Martje Nusilati, Asiyan Andreas, Svenja Röseler, Jona Tribian, Nils Rogmans, Christoph Stope, Matthias Bernhard Dahl, Edgar Mustea, Alexander Stickeler, Elmar Hedemann, Nina Flörkemeier, Inken Tiemann, Katharina Magadeeva, Svetlana Dempfle, Astrid Arnold, Norbert Maass, Nicolai Bauerschlag, Dirk J Cell Mol Med Original Articles Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynaecological malignancy with increasing incidence in developed countries. As gold standard, hysteroscopy confirms only 30% of suspected ECs. The detection of EC cells in the vagina by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) after a smear test could reduce invasive procedures in the future. Using array‐based comparative genome hybridization (aCGH) on 65 endometrial carcinomas, most frequently imbalanced regions of the tumour genome were identified. Bacterial artificial chromosomes were used to generate FISH‐probes homologue to these human regions. The FISH test was hybridized on swabs specimens collected from the vaginal cavity. Samples from six patients without EC were selected as a negative control and on 13 patients with known EC as a positive control. To distinguish between benign and EC cases, the cut‐off value has been defined. A first validation of this EC‐FISH Test was performed with swabs from 41 patients with suspected EC. The most common genomic imbalances in EC are around the CTNNB1, FBXW7 and APC genes. The cut‐off is defined at 32% of analysed cells without diploid signal pattern. This differs significantly between the positive and negative controls (p < 0.001). In a first validation cohort of 41 patients with suspected EC, the EC‐FISH Test distinguishes patients with and without EC with a sensitivity of 91% and a specificity of 83%. The negative predictive value is 96%. This is the first report of a non‐invasive EC‐FISH Test to predict EC in women with suspected EC. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9889703/ /pubmed/36625073 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcmm.17658 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine published by Foundation for Cellular and Molecular Medicine and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Weimer, Jörg Hüttmann, Martje Nusilati, Asiyan Andreas, Svenja Röseler, Jona Tribian, Nils Rogmans, Christoph Stope, Matthias Bernhard Dahl, Edgar Mustea, Alexander Stickeler, Elmar Hedemann, Nina Flörkemeier, Inken Tiemann, Katharina Magadeeva, Svetlana Dempfle, Astrid Arnold, Norbert Maass, Nicolai Bauerschlag, Dirk Fluorescence in situ hybridization test for detection of endometrial carcinoma cells by non‐invasive vaginal swab |
title | Fluorescence in situ hybridization test for detection of endometrial carcinoma cells by non‐invasive vaginal swab |
title_full | Fluorescence in situ hybridization test for detection of endometrial carcinoma cells by non‐invasive vaginal swab |
title_fullStr | Fluorescence in situ hybridization test for detection of endometrial carcinoma cells by non‐invasive vaginal swab |
title_full_unstemmed | Fluorescence in situ hybridization test for detection of endometrial carcinoma cells by non‐invasive vaginal swab |
title_short | Fluorescence in situ hybridization test for detection of endometrial carcinoma cells by non‐invasive vaginal swab |
title_sort | fluorescence in situ hybridization test for detection of endometrial carcinoma cells by non‐invasive vaginal swab |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9889703/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36625073 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcmm.17658 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT weimerjorg fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT huttmannmartje fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT nusilatiasiyan fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT andreassvenja fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT roselerjona fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT tribiannils fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT rogmanschristoph fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT stopematthiasbernhard fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT dahledgar fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT musteaalexander fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT stickelerelmar fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT hedemannnina fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT florkemeierinken fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT tiemannkatharina fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT magadeevasvetlana fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT dempfleastrid fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT arnoldnorbert fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT maassnicolai fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab AT bauerschlagdirk fluorescenceinsituhybridizationtestfordetectionofendometrialcarcinomacellsbynoninvasivevaginalswab |