Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41917794›Full record

ArticleJournal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences2026

Tumor Cell Count and Total Cell Count as Surrogate Indicators of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Success in Pancreatic Cancer Specimens Collected by Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Tissue Acquisition.

Go Ikeda, Susumu Hijioka, Yuka Takahashi, Yoshikuni Nagashio, Shota Harai, Daiki Yamashige, Yasuhiro Komori, Atsushi Horiike, Takuji Okusaka, Nobuyoshi Hiraoka

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Go IkedaDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-7333-7095
Susumu HijiokaDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0394-6876
Yuka TakahashiDepartment of Diagnostic Pathology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Yoshikuni NagashioDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Shota HaraiDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Daiki YamashigeDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6152-8920
Yasuhiro KomoriDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Atsushi HoriikeDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Showa Medical University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Takuji OkusakaDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Nobuyoshi HiraokaDepartment of Diagnostic Pathology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 24K02254National Cancer CenterSysmex Corporation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe aimed to establish the tumor cell count and total cell count as surrogate criteria on the basis of the tissue area of biopsy specimen by endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) for comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) in pancreatic cancer.

methodsSamples from 114 patients with unresectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were analyzed. Tumor cells were visually counted, and total cells were quantified with imaging software. Receiver operating characteristic curves determined optimal cutoffs for achieving DNA yield ≥ 200 ng using the OncoGuide NCC Oncopanel.

resultsThresholds of 2300 tumor cells (AUC 0.653, 95% CI 0.552-0.750) and 5923 total cells (AUC 0.671, 95% CI 0.565-0.778) were identified. For ≥ 2300 tumor cells, sensitivity was 48.7% and specificity 91.2%, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 92.9%. For ≥ 5923 total cells, sensitivity was 52.5% and specificity 82.4%, with a PPV of 87.5%. A clinically practical threshold of 6000 total cells yielded a sensitivity of 48.8%, a specificity of 82.4%, and a PPV of 86.7%.

conclusionTumor cell counts ≥ 2300 and total cell counts ≥ 6000 may serve as surrogate criteria for tissue area to determine EUS-TA specimen suitability for CGP in pancreatic cancer. Given that tumor cell count is a more biologically relevant indicator, total cell count should be used as a supplementary indicator.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalEndosonographyGene Expression ProfilingPancreatic NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overCell CountEndoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle AspirationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsROC CurveSensitivity and Specificitycomprehensive genomic profilingendoscopic ultrasound‐guided tissue acquisitionpancreatic cancertotal cell counttumor cell count

Identifiers

PMID41917794
PMCPMC13397167

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.