Concurrent fine needle aspirations and core needle biopsies: a comparative study of substrates for next-generation sequencing in solid organ malignancies

Abstract

Minimally invasive procedures, such as fine needle aspiration and core needle biopsy, are commonly used for the diagnosis in solid organ malignancies. In the era of targeted therapy, it is crucial for molecular testing to be performed on these limited volume specimens. Although several recent studies have demonstrated the utility of small biopsy specimens for molecular testing, there remains debate as to whether core needle biopsy specimens are more reliable than fine needle aspiration for molecular studies. In this study, we reviewed concurrently acquired fine needle aspiration and core needle biopsy samples (n=24), and compared overall cellularity, tumor fraction, and the results of next-generation sequencing. All somatic mutations detected in core needle biopsy samples were also detected in fine needle aspiration samples. The estimated tumor fraction was significantly higher in fine needle aspiration smears than core needle biopsy samples (P=0.003), whereas the overall DNA yield from smears was significantly lower than that obtained from the core needle biopsy specimens (P=0.01). The normalized average amplicon coverage for the genes analyzed was significantly higher in cytology smears than paired core needle biopsy samples, with lower numbers of failed amplicons and higher overall mutation allelic frequencies seen in the former. We further evaluated 100 malignant fine needle aspiration and core needle biopsy samples, acquired concurrently, for overall cellularity and tumor fraction. Overall cellularity and tumor fraction of fine needle aspiration samples was significantly higher than concurrently acquired core needle biopsy samples (P<0.001). In conclusion, we show that fine needle aspiration samples frequently provide better cellularity, higher tumor fraction, and superior sequencing metrics than concurrently acquired core needle biopsy samples. Cytologic specimens, therefore, should be better integrated into routine molecular diagnostics workflow to maximize limited tissues for clinically relevant genomic testing.