Confocal endomicroscopy for phenotypic diagnosis of gastric cancer

Kakunori Banno, Yasumasa Niwa, Ryoji Miyahara, Masanao Nakamura, Toshihiko Nagaya, Tetsuro Nagasaka, Osamu Watanabe, Takafumi Ando, Hiroki Kawashima, Naoki Omiya, Akihiro Itoh, Yoshiki Hirooka, Hidemi Goto

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and Aim: Relationships between mucin phenotype and malignant potential in gastric cancers have attracted attention. We attempted to assess the possibility of obtaining phenotypic diagnoses by confocal endomicroscopy. Methods: Confocal images of target lesions were obtained in 29 of 40 patients with gastric cancer. Appearances of the brush border, goblet cells, and gastric foveolar epithelium were investigated with immunohistochemical staining using CD10, MUC2, and human gastric mucin to evaluate phenotypic expression in gastric carcinomas. Confocal images were compared with immunohistochemical findings for goblet cells and brush borders. Results: Both the endoscopists and the pathologist obtained high accuracy rates for differential diagnosis. Sensitivity and specificity for goblet cells were 85.7% and 92.3% (Endoscopist A), and 85.7% and 88.5% (Endoscopist B). The κ-value for correspondence between two endoscopists for the diagnosis of goblet cells in confocal images was 0.73. Sensitivity and specificity for the brush border were 93.8% and 91.7% (Endoscopist A), and 81.3% and 91.7% (Endoscopist B). The κ-value for correspondence between two endoscopists for diagnosis of the brush border in confocal images was 0.79. Intestinal phenotypic gastric cancers show a brush border, goblet cells, or both. Sensitivity and specificity for the intestinal phenotype in confocal endomicroscopy were 90.9% and 77.8% (Endoscopist A), and 86.4% and 83.3% (Endoscopist B). Conclusion: The confocal endomicroscopic diagnosis of the mucin phenotype in gastric cancers was limited to intestinal and mixed phenotypes, but may be useful for the diagnosis of mucin phenotype and differential diagnosis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)712-718
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia)
Volume25
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-01-2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Goblet Cells
Microvilli
Stomach Neoplasms
Phenotype
Mucins
Sensitivity and Specificity
Stomach
Differential Diagnosis
Gastric Mucins
Epithelium
Staining and Labeling
Carcinoma

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Gastroenterology
  • Hepatology

Cite this

Banno, K., Niwa, Y., Miyahara, R., Nakamura, M., Nagaya, T., Nagasaka, T., ... Goto, H. (2010). Confocal endomicroscopy for phenotypic diagnosis of gastric cancer. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia), 25(4), 712-718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1746.2009.06169.x
Banno, Kakunori ; Niwa, Yasumasa ; Miyahara, Ryoji ; Nakamura, Masanao ; Nagaya, Toshihiko ; Nagasaka, Tetsuro ; Watanabe, Osamu ; Ando, Takafumi ; Kawashima, Hiroki ; Omiya, Naoki ; Itoh, Akihiro ; Hirooka, Yoshiki ; Goto, Hidemi. / Confocal endomicroscopy for phenotypic diagnosis of gastric cancer. In: Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia). 2010 ; Vol. 25, No. 4. pp. 712-718.
@article{de9aae0d6b5a4eab967d7ad62f983671,
title = "Confocal endomicroscopy for phenotypic diagnosis of gastric cancer",
abstract = "Background and Aim: Relationships between mucin phenotype and malignant potential in gastric cancers have attracted attention. We attempted to assess the possibility of obtaining phenotypic diagnoses by confocal endomicroscopy. Methods: Confocal images of target lesions were obtained in 29 of 40 patients with gastric cancer. Appearances of the brush border, goblet cells, and gastric foveolar epithelium were investigated with immunohistochemical staining using CD10, MUC2, and human gastric mucin to evaluate phenotypic expression in gastric carcinomas. Confocal images were compared with immunohistochemical findings for goblet cells and brush borders. Results: Both the endoscopists and the pathologist obtained high accuracy rates for differential diagnosis. Sensitivity and specificity for goblet cells were 85.7{\%} and 92.3{\%} (Endoscopist A), and 85.7{\%} and 88.5{\%} (Endoscopist B). The κ-value for correspondence between two endoscopists for the diagnosis of goblet cells in confocal images was 0.73. Sensitivity and specificity for the brush border were 93.8{\%} and 91.7{\%} (Endoscopist A), and 81.3{\%} and 91.7{\%} (Endoscopist B). The κ-value for correspondence between two endoscopists for diagnosis of the brush border in confocal images was 0.79. Intestinal phenotypic gastric cancers show a brush border, goblet cells, or both. Sensitivity and specificity for the intestinal phenotype in confocal endomicroscopy were 90.9{\%} and 77.8{\%} (Endoscopist A), and 86.4{\%} and 83.3{\%} (Endoscopist B). Conclusion: The confocal endomicroscopic diagnosis of the mucin phenotype in gastric cancers was limited to intestinal and mixed phenotypes, but may be useful for the diagnosis of mucin phenotype and differential diagnosis.",
author = "Kakunori Banno and Yasumasa Niwa and Ryoji Miyahara and Masanao Nakamura and Toshihiko Nagaya and Tetsuro Nagasaka and Osamu Watanabe and Takafumi Ando and Hiroki Kawashima and Naoki Omiya and Akihiro Itoh and Yoshiki Hirooka and Hidemi Goto",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1440-1746.2009.06169.x",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "712--718",
journal = "Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia)",
issn = "0815-9319",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

Banno, K, Niwa, Y, Miyahara, R, Nakamura, M, Nagaya, T, Nagasaka, T, Watanabe, O, Ando, T, Kawashima, H, Omiya, N, Itoh, A, Hirooka, Y & Goto, H 2010, 'Confocal endomicroscopy for phenotypic diagnosis of gastric cancer', Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia), vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 712-718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1746.2009.06169.x

Confocal endomicroscopy for phenotypic diagnosis of gastric cancer. / Banno, Kakunori; Niwa, Yasumasa; Miyahara, Ryoji; Nakamura, Masanao; Nagaya, Toshihiko; Nagasaka, Tetsuro; Watanabe, Osamu; Ando, Takafumi; Kawashima, Hiroki; Omiya, Naoki; Itoh, Akihiro; Hirooka, Yoshiki; Goto, Hidemi.

In: Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia), Vol. 25, No. 4, 01.01.2010, p. 712-718.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Confocal endomicroscopy for phenotypic diagnosis of gastric cancer

AU - Banno, Kakunori

AU - Niwa, Yasumasa

AU - Miyahara, Ryoji

AU - Nakamura, Masanao

AU - Nagaya, Toshihiko

AU - Nagasaka, Tetsuro

AU - Watanabe, Osamu

AU - Ando, Takafumi

AU - Kawashima, Hiroki

AU - Omiya, Naoki

AU - Itoh, Akihiro

AU - Hirooka, Yoshiki

AU - Goto, Hidemi

PY - 2010/1/1

Y1 - 2010/1/1

N2 - Background and Aim: Relationships between mucin phenotype and malignant potential in gastric cancers have attracted attention. We attempted to assess the possibility of obtaining phenotypic diagnoses by confocal endomicroscopy. Methods: Confocal images of target lesions were obtained in 29 of 40 patients with gastric cancer. Appearances of the brush border, goblet cells, and gastric foveolar epithelium were investigated with immunohistochemical staining using CD10, MUC2, and human gastric mucin to evaluate phenotypic expression in gastric carcinomas. Confocal images were compared with immunohistochemical findings for goblet cells and brush borders. Results: Both the endoscopists and the pathologist obtained high accuracy rates for differential diagnosis. Sensitivity and specificity for goblet cells were 85.7% and 92.3% (Endoscopist A), and 85.7% and 88.5% (Endoscopist B). The κ-value for correspondence between two endoscopists for the diagnosis of goblet cells in confocal images was 0.73. Sensitivity and specificity for the brush border were 93.8% and 91.7% (Endoscopist A), and 81.3% and 91.7% (Endoscopist B). The κ-value for correspondence between two endoscopists for diagnosis of the brush border in confocal images was 0.79. Intestinal phenotypic gastric cancers show a brush border, goblet cells, or both. Sensitivity and specificity for the intestinal phenotype in confocal endomicroscopy were 90.9% and 77.8% (Endoscopist A), and 86.4% and 83.3% (Endoscopist B). Conclusion: The confocal endomicroscopic diagnosis of the mucin phenotype in gastric cancers was limited to intestinal and mixed phenotypes, but may be useful for the diagnosis of mucin phenotype and differential diagnosis.

AB - Background and Aim: Relationships between mucin phenotype and malignant potential in gastric cancers have attracted attention. We attempted to assess the possibility of obtaining phenotypic diagnoses by confocal endomicroscopy. Methods: Confocal images of target lesions were obtained in 29 of 40 patients with gastric cancer. Appearances of the brush border, goblet cells, and gastric foveolar epithelium were investigated with immunohistochemical staining using CD10, MUC2, and human gastric mucin to evaluate phenotypic expression in gastric carcinomas. Confocal images were compared with immunohistochemical findings for goblet cells and brush borders. Results: Both the endoscopists and the pathologist obtained high accuracy rates for differential diagnosis. Sensitivity and specificity for goblet cells were 85.7% and 92.3% (Endoscopist A), and 85.7% and 88.5% (Endoscopist B). The κ-value for correspondence between two endoscopists for the diagnosis of goblet cells in confocal images was 0.73. Sensitivity and specificity for the brush border were 93.8% and 91.7% (Endoscopist A), and 81.3% and 91.7% (Endoscopist B). The κ-value for correspondence between two endoscopists for diagnosis of the brush border in confocal images was 0.79. Intestinal phenotypic gastric cancers show a brush border, goblet cells, or both. Sensitivity and specificity for the intestinal phenotype in confocal endomicroscopy were 90.9% and 77.8% (Endoscopist A), and 86.4% and 83.3% (Endoscopist B). Conclusion: The confocal endomicroscopic diagnosis of the mucin phenotype in gastric cancers was limited to intestinal and mixed phenotypes, but may be useful for the diagnosis of mucin phenotype and differential diagnosis.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77950171430&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77950171430&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2009.06169.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2009.06169.x

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 712

EP - 718

JO - Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia)

JF - Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia)

SN - 0815-9319

IS - 4

ER -