Abstract
Purpose
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has become a preferred technique to evaluate pancreatic masses. The clinical management of a “suspicious for adenocarcinoma” cytological diagnosis is unclear in unresectable cases. We sought to determine whether a suspicious diagnosis in the setting of a high clinical suspicion of malignancy could be sufficient for initiating non-operative therapy, such as chemotherapy, in unresectable patients.
Methods
Twenty-nine solid pancreatic mass cytology specimens obtained by EUS-FNA with a diagnosis of suspicious for adenocarcinoma were identified from 2000 to 2012. Pathology, clinical, and radiologic data were analyzed.
Results
Additional procedures were performed in 21 of the 29 patients. Sixteen of the 21 patients had confirmation of malignancy on further tissue sampling and an additional 2 had confirmed unresectable cancers during surgical exploration. Three of the 21 patients had benign diagnoses on subsequent tissue sampling. Of the remaining eight patients who did not undergo additional diagnostic procedures, six were deemed clinically malignant and treated, one died within a year of the EUS-FNA, and one was lost to follow-up.
Conclusions
Consideration of a suspicious diagnosis on EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses as sufficient for initiating non-operative therapy is reasonable in the setting of a high clinical suspicion of malignancy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
National Cancer Institute. Pancreatic Cancer. National Cancer Institute website. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/types/pancreatic. Accessed 23 April 2014.
Winek T, Hamre D, Mozell E, et al. Prognostic factors for survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for malignant disease. Am J Surg. 1990;159:454–6.
Eloubeidi MA, Varadarajulu S, Desai S, et al. Value of repeat endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for suspected pancreatic cancer. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;23(4):567–70.
Al-Haddad M, Eloubeidi MA. Interventional EUS for the diagnosis and treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer. JOP. 2010;11(1):1–7.
Hewitt MJ, McPhail MJ, Possamai L, et al. EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75(2):319–31.
Pang JC, Minter RM, Kwon RS, et al. The role of cytology in the preoperative assessment and management of patients with pancreaticobiliary tract neoplasms. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17:501–10.
Eloubeidi MA, Jhala D, Chhieng DC, Chen VK, Eltoum I, Vickers S, et al. Yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy in patients with suspected pancreatic carcinoma. Cancer. 2003;99(5):285–92.
Wiersman MJ, Vilmann P, Giovannini M, et al. Endosonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy: diagnostic accuracy and complication assessment. Gastroenterology. 1997;112:1087–95.
Gress F, Gottlieb K, Sherman S, et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy of suspected pancreatic cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:459–64.
Collins BT, Faris MM, Wang JF, et al. Rapid on-site evaluation for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy of pancreas decreases the incidence of repeat biopsy procedures. Cancer Cytopathology. 2013;121(9):518–24.
Dina R, Tran-Dang MA, Mauri F, et al. Pancreaticobiliary cytology in the multidisciplinary setting. Cytopathology. 2013;24:150–8.
Siddiqui AA, Kowalski TE, Shahid H, et al. False-positive EUS-guided FNA cytology for solid pancreatic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;74(3):535–40.
Jing X, Wamsteker EJ, Li H, et al. Combining fine needle aspiration with brushing cytology has improved yields in diagnosing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Diagn Cytopathol. 2009;37(8):574–8.
Afify AM, Al-Khafaji BM, Kim B, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of the pancreas. Diagnostic utility and accuracy. Acta Cytol. 2003;47(3):341–8.
Basir A, Pello N, Dayer AM, et al. Accuracy of cytologic interpretation of pancreatic neoplasms by fine needle aspiration and pancreatic duct brushings. Acta Cytol. 2003;47(5):733–8.
Mitsuhashi T, Ghafari S, Chang CY, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of the pancreas: cytomorphological evaluation with emphasis on adequacy assessment, diagnostic criteria and contamination from the gastrointestinal tract. Cytopathology. 2006;17(1):34–41.
Shin HJ, Lahoti S, Sneige N. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in 179 cases: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Cancer. 2002;96(3):174–80.
Volmar KE, Vollmer RT, Routbort MJ, et al. Pancreatic and bile duct brushing cytology in 1000 cases: review of findings and comparison of preparation methods. Cancer. 2006;108(4):231–8.
Layfield LJ, Dodd, Factor R, Schmidt RL. Malignancy risk associated with diagnostic categories defined by the Papanicalaou Socitey of Cytopathology pancreaticobiliary guidelines. Diagn Cytopath. In Press.
Brugge WR, Lewandrowski K, Lee-Lewandrowski E, et al. Dignosis of pancreatic cystic neoplasms: a report of the cooperative pancreatic cyst study. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:1330–6.
Maker AV, Lee LS, Raut CP, et al. Cytology from pancreatic cysts has marginal utility in surgical decision-making. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:3187–92.
Turner BG, Cizginer S, Agarwal D, et al. Diagnosis of pancreatic neoplasia with EUS and FNA: a report of accuracy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71(1):91–8.
Lee KJ, Yi SW, Chung MJ, et al. Serum CA19-9 and CEA levels as a prognostic factor in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Yonsei Med J. 2013;54(3):643–9.
Bunger S, Laubert T, Roblick UF, et al. Serum biomarkers for improved diagnosis of pancreatic cancer: a current overview. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2011;137:375–89.
Tempero MA, Uchida E, Takasaki H, et al. Relationship of carbohydrate antigen 19-9 and Lewis antigens in pancreatic cancer. Cancer Res. 1987;47:5501–3.
Goonetilleke KS, Siriwardena AK. Systematic review of carbohydrate antigen (CA19-9) as a biochemical marker in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33:266–70.
Ni XG, Bai XF, Mao YL, et al. The clinical value of serum CEA, CA 19-9, and CA242 in the diagnosis and prognosis of pancreatic cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005;31:164–9.
Mann DV, Edwards SH, Lau WY, Glazer G. Elevated tumour marker CA19-9: clinical interpretation and influence of obstructive jaundice. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2000;26:474–9.
Kim H, Kim M, Myung S, et al. A new strategy for the application of CA 19-9 in the differentiation of pancreaticobiliary cancer: analysis using a receiver operating characteristic curve. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1941–6.
Ritts JRE, Nagorney D, Jacobsen D, et al. Comparison of preoperative serum CA19-9 levels with results of diagnostic imaging modalities in patients undergoing laparotomy for suspected pancreatic or gallbladder disease. Pancreas. 1994;9:707–16.
Malesci A, Montorsi M, Mariani A, et al. Clinical utility of the serum CA19-9 test for diagnosing pancreatic cancer in symptomatic patients: a prospective study. Pancreas. 1992;7:497–502.
Yang D, MoezArdalan K, Collins DP, Chauhan SS, et al. Predictors of malignancy in patients with suspicious or indeterminate cytology on pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration—a multivariate model. Pancreas. 2014;43(6):922–6.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shi, J., Lew, M., Zalupski, M.M. et al. Implication of Suspicious Cytology in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration for Pancreatic Cancer. J Gastrointest Canc 46, 54–59 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-014-9681-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-014-9681-0