Advertisement
Brief Report|Articles in Press, 100497

Biopsy Method and Needle Size on Success of Next-Generation Sequencing in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Brief Report

Open AccessPublished:March 10, 2023DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtocrr.2023.100497
Biopsy Method and Needle Size on Success of Next-Generation Sequencing in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Brief Report
Previous ArticleHigh levels of CD47 expression in thymic epithelial tumors
Next ArticleRacial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Characteristics Independently Predict for Cachexia Risk and Associated Survival Outcomes in Stage IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Brief Report
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.

      Abstract

      Introduction

      Next generation sequencing (NGS) is essential to the care of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, NGS is dependent on adequate material from biopsy. We evaluated the impact of biopsy method and needle gauge necessary for optimizing success in tissue NGS.

      Methods

      A total of 1660 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples were submitted to Caris Life Sciences from 2007-2022 for tumor profiling. The results of NGS assays were linked with retrospective biopsy data for lung cancer patients treated at USC/Norris Cancer Center to create a database with the following parameters: demographics, biopsy method, tumor location (lung mass vs lymph node vs metastasis), needle gauge, number of needle passes, complications, tumor volume, DNA content, and status of NGS. Fisher’s exact test and ANOVA analysis were performed to determine the impact of biopsy method and needle gauge (G).

      Results

      77 CT-guided transthoracic core needle biopsies (CT-TTCN), 74 endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS)-guided transbronchial needle aspirations (TBNA), 27 bronchial forceps biopsies, and 107 surgical resections were included. 41 of 77 CT-TTCN biopsies (53.2%), 43 of 74 EBUS-TBNAs (58.1%), 22 of 27 bronchial forceps biopsies (81.5%), and 105 of 107 surgical resections (98.1%) underwent successful NGS assays. The probability of successful NGS completion for lung cancers was highest in surgical resections and bronchial forceps biopsies. Needle based biopsies were more successful when a needle larger than 20G was used. Complication rates were higher for CT-TTCN biopsies compared to EBUS-TBNA (p<0.0001). Overall, the DNA yield was significantly higher in EBUS-TBNA compared to CT-TTCN biopsies in primary lung sites (p = 0.0002). EBUS-TBNA demonstrated higher success rates in NGS compared to CT-TTCN for both primary lung lesions (p= 0.023) and lymph node targets (p=0.035).

      Conclusions

      The less invasive EBUS-TBNAs demonstrated higher success rates in NGS than CT-TTCN biopsies and resulted in higher DNA concentrations. In CT-TTCN biopsies, use of 20G or smaller needles is associated with a higher risk of obtaining an inadequate specimen regardless of the number of passes taken. Surgical and bronchial forceps biopsies had highest success in achieving NGS.

      Article info

      Publication history

      Accepted: March 5, 2023
      Received in revised form: March 3, 2023
      Received: November 17, 2022

      Publication stage

      In Press Journal Pre-Proof

      Footnotes

      Disclosures- Jorge Nieva, MD-Consulting: Aadi Biosciences, Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Fujirebio, G1 Therapeutics, Genentech, Mindmed, Naveris, Takeda, Western Oncolytics

      Research Support: Genentech, Merck

      Intellectual Property: Cansera

      Ownership Interests: Cansera, Epic Sciences, Indee Bio, Quantgene.

      CRediT Statement

      Raymond Diep: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data Curation, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing

      Madeline MacDonald: Methodology, Investigation, Data Curation, Writing – Original Draft

      Ryan Cooper: Conceptualization

      Anna Grzegorczyk: Conceptualization

      Rastko Rakocevic: Conceptualization

      Ching-Fei Chang: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

      Angeline Uy: Writing – Review & Editing

      Nicholas Cowgill: Writing – Review & Editing

      Jorge Nieva: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing, Supervision

      Identification

      DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtocrr.2023.100497

      Copyright

      © 2023 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

      User license

      Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial – NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) |
      How you can reuse Information Icon
      Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial – NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

      Permitted

      For non-commercial purposes:

      • Read, print & download
      • Redistribute or republish the final article
      • Text & data mine
      • Translate the article (private use only, not for distribution)
      • Reuse portions or extracts from the article in other works

      Not Permitted

      • Sell or re-use for commercial purposes
      • Distribute translations or adaptations of the article

      Elsevier's open access license policy

      ScienceDirect

      Access this article on ScienceDirect

      Linked Article

      The content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals.


      We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content. To update your cookie settings, please visit the Cookie Preference Center for this site.
      Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties.


      RELX