↓ Skip to main content

Using “residual” FNA rinse and body fluid specimens for next‐generation sequencing: An institutional experience

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Cytopathology, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Using “residual” FNA rinse and body fluid specimens for next‐generation sequencing: An institutional experience
Published in
Cancer Cytopathology, December 2015
DOI 10.1002/cncy.21666
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Tissue specimens are typically considered optimal for molecular testing; however, in the current era of personalized medicine, cytopathology specimens are increasingly recognized as potential sources for molecular testing. This is often accomplished by using cell block specimens and/or fine-needle aspiration (FNA) smear preparations. In this study, the authors investigated the feasibility, performance, and quality of "residual" FNA rinse and body effusion fluids used for next-generation sequencing (NGS). Sequence data were generated from 17 malignancies in 16 patients from 13 FNA (10 lymph nodes, 1 lung, and 2 bone lesions) and 4 effusion (3 pleural and 1 pericardial) specimens. Malignancies included carcinomas (lung, breast, ovarian, and unknown primary), melanoma, and myeloma. Paired NGS testing was performed in 7 patients who had surgical biopsy or cell block specimens available. Routinely processed residual FNA rinse material and body fluids were used for DNA extraction and NGS (targeted gene panel). NGS was successfully performed on all 17 specimens. A significant amount of DNA was obtained from the residual FNA rinse (176.3 ng/μL) compared with the paired cell block slides (10.6 ng/μL). Two of the 10 lung adenocarcinomas (20%) demonstrated epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations, including 1 leucine-to-arginine substitution at codon 858 (L858R) in exon 21 and 1 codon 2235_2249 deletion (resulting in an in-frame deletion of 5 amino acids from position 746 to 750 [glutamic acid, leucine, arginine, glutamic acid, and alanine]; E746_A750del) in exon 19. Three KRAS [Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog] mutations, 1 BRAF (v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1) mutation, and 1 NRAS (neuroblastoma RAS viral oncogene homolog) mutation were identified in the remaining lung adenocarcinomas. Patients who underwent paired testing demonstrated 100% concordant mutations. Targeted NGS can be performed on residual FNA rinse and body fluid specimens. This approach is particularly important when a paucicellular cell block or biopsy specimen is encountered. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2015. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 21%
Other 6 14%
Student > Master 4 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 12 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 16 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2017.
All research outputs
#3,278,540
of 26,876,847 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Cytopathology
#432
of 1,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,323
of 398,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Cytopathology
#5
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,876,847 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,510 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 398,543 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.