The utility of transbronchial rebiopsy for peripheral pulmonary lesions in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.
Diagnostic yield
Molecular profile
Radial endobronchial ultrasound
Rebiopsy
Transbronchial biopsy
Journal
BMC pulmonary medicine
ISSN: 1471-2466
Titre abrégé: BMC Pulm Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968563
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 Sep 2020
09 Sep 2020
Historique:
received:
23
04
2020
accepted:
31
08
2020
entrez:
10
9
2020
pubmed:
11
9
2020
medline:
25
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Patients treated for non-squamous (non-Sq) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) often require repeat biopsies to determine the optimal subsequent treatment. However, the differences between rebiopsy and initial biopsy in terms of their diagnostic yields and their ability to test the molecular profiles using bronchoscopy with radial endobronchial ultrasound guidance in patients with advanced NSCLC remain unclear. Hence, we aimed to compare the diagnostic yields and ability for molecular analyses of rebiopsies with those of initial biopsies. We investigated 301 patients with advanced non-Sq NSCLC who underwent radial endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial biopsy (TBB) for peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPLs) between August 2014 and July 2017. Patients were divided into the rebiopsy and initial biopsy groups: the latter referred to the biopsy that determined the definitive diagnosis. The diagnostic yields and ability for molecular analyses were compared between the two groups, and the factors affecting the TBB diagnostic yield were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses. The diagnostic yields of the rebiopsy and initial biopsy groups were comparable (86.8 and 90.8%, respectively; p = 0.287). Furthermore, 93.0 and 94.0% of the patients in the rebiopsy and initial biopsy groups, respectively, had adequate specimens for gene profiling and mutational analysis (p = 0.765). The factors that increased the diagnostic yield were a positive bronchus sign (p < 0.001) and tumour location within the internal two-thirds of the lungs (p = 0.026). The PPL diagnostic yield of the rebiopsy group was as high as that of the initial biopsy group. Hence, TBB for PPLs is feasible for patients requiring rebiopsy as well as for those with initial diagnoses. Adequate, high-quality biopsy specimens can be obtained by transbronchial rebiopsy for molecular testing.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Patients treated for non-squamous (non-Sq) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) often require repeat biopsies to determine the optimal subsequent treatment. However, the differences between rebiopsy and initial biopsy in terms of their diagnostic yields and their ability to test the molecular profiles using bronchoscopy with radial endobronchial ultrasound guidance in patients with advanced NSCLC remain unclear. Hence, we aimed to compare the diagnostic yields and ability for molecular analyses of rebiopsies with those of initial biopsies.
METHODS
METHODS
We investigated 301 patients with advanced non-Sq NSCLC who underwent radial endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial biopsy (TBB) for peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPLs) between August 2014 and July 2017. Patients were divided into the rebiopsy and initial biopsy groups: the latter referred to the biopsy that determined the definitive diagnosis. The diagnostic yields and ability for molecular analyses were compared between the two groups, and the factors affecting the TBB diagnostic yield were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The diagnostic yields of the rebiopsy and initial biopsy groups were comparable (86.8 and 90.8%, respectively; p = 0.287). Furthermore, 93.0 and 94.0% of the patients in the rebiopsy and initial biopsy groups, respectively, had adequate specimens for gene profiling and mutational analysis (p = 0.765). The factors that increased the diagnostic yield were a positive bronchus sign (p < 0.001) and tumour location within the internal two-thirds of the lungs (p = 0.026).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The PPL diagnostic yield of the rebiopsy group was as high as that of the initial biopsy group. Hence, TBB for PPLs is feasible for patients requiring rebiopsy as well as for those with initial diagnoses. Adequate, high-quality biopsy specimens can be obtained by transbronchial rebiopsy for molecular testing.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32907572
doi: 10.1186/s12890-020-01277-6
pii: 10.1186/s12890-020-01277-6
pmc: PMC7487475
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
238Références
Nature. 2008 Apr 3;452(7187):564-70
pubmed: 18385730
J Thorac Oncol. 2019 Oct;14(10):1766-1783
pubmed: 31228625
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Aug 10;35(23):2613-2618
pubmed: 28520527
N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 10;375(19):1823-1833
pubmed: 27718847
Eur Clin Respir J. 2015 Dec 17;2:28947
pubmed: 26689214
Chest. 2012 Aug;142(2):385-393
pubmed: 21980059
Acta Oncol. 2016 Jun;55 Suppl 2:2-9
pubmed: 27056247
Lung Cancer. 2014 Nov;86(2):170-3
pubmed: 25214431
N Engl J Med. 2004 May 20;350(21):2129-39
pubmed: 15118073
Pulm Med. 2016;2016:5048961
pubmed: 27957340
Lung Cancer (Auckl). 2016 Jun 17;7:83-90
pubmed: 28210164
Thorax. 2011 Dec;66(12):1072-7
pubmed: 21749984
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2017 Dec;6(Suppl 1):S21-S34
pubmed: 29299405
N Engl J Med. 2002 Jan 10;346(2):92-8
pubmed: 11784875
Target Oncol. 2015 Jun;10(2):247-53
pubmed: 25119973
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 11;378(2):113-125
pubmed: 29151359
BMJ Open Respir Res. 2017 Jan 10;4(1):e000163
pubmed: 28123750
N Engl J Med. 2005 Feb 24;352(8):786-92
pubmed: 15728811
Cancer Sci. 2016 Jul;107(7):1001-5
pubmed: 27145431
Cancer. 2015 Feb 15;121(4):631-9
pubmed: 25345567
Clin Lung Cancer. 2018 Mar;19(2):e247-e252
pubmed: 28866043
N Engl J Med. 2017 Feb 16;376(7):629-640
pubmed: 27959700
Clin Respir J. 2017 Mar;11(2):185-192
pubmed: 26072931
Respir Investig. 2014 Nov;52(6):317-21
pubmed: 25453374
BMC Pulm Med. 2016 Jul 26;16(1):106
pubmed: 27457475
Oncotarget. 2016 Oct 25;7(43):71013-71035
pubmed: 27589834
Respiration. 2015;90(2):129-35
pubmed: 26112297
J Cancer. 2018 Mar 2;9(6):1113-1120
pubmed: 29581791
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Oct;18(10):1307-1316
pubmed: 28919011
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2016 Dec;5(6):695-708
pubmed: 28149764
Lancet. 2019 May 4;393(10183):1819-1830
pubmed: 30955977
J Thorac Dis. 2017 Sep;9(Suppl 10):S1047-S1058
pubmed: 29214064
N Engl J Med. 2010 Oct 28;363(18):1693-703
pubmed: 20979469