Key result
RT-PCR outperforms FISH for diagnosing synovial sarcoma, achieving ~94% sensitivity.
Why the study?
Molecular detection of SYT-SSX fusion genes is the most reliable tool for diagnosing synovial sarcoma, but the accuracy of RT-PCR and a commercial FISH technique on formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tumor tissue required investigation.
What is the diagnostic accuracy of RT-PCR and FISH for detecting SYT-SSX fusion genes in formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded synovial sarcoma tissues?
Cross-Sectional (n=62)
What is the diagnostic accuracy of RT-PCR and FISH for detecting SYT-SSX fusion genes in formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded synovial sarcoma tissues?
Absolute Event Rate: 94% vs 82%
RT-PCR has higher sensitivity than FISH for diagnosing synovial sarcoma, though FISH is recommended as the first-line method due to economic and microscopic control advantages.
RT-PCR may improve SYT-SSX detection in archival synovial sarcoma tissues; leaves open optimal first-line strategy pending prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Molecular detection of SYT-SSX fusion genes is the most reliable tool for diagnosing synovial sarcoma (SS). The objective of this study was to investigate the accuracy of reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and a commercially available fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) technique for formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tumor tissue. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty tumors with typical SS histology and 12 histologic mimics of SS were included. RT-PCR for SYT-SSX1/SSX2 gene fusions and FISH analysis for SYT gene breaks were performed on these 62 formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tumors. RESULTS: All 50 SS were positive by either RT-PCR or FISH. Forty-seven SS (94%) were true positive by RT-PCR and 41 SS (82%) were true positive by FISH. FISH and RT-PCR results were interpretable and concordant in 38 cases (76%). Two cases were not interpretable by RT-PCR and 6 cases were not interpretable by FISH. One SS was false-negative with RT-PCR and 3 SS were false-negative with FISH. RT-PCR and FISH had a sensitivity of 94% and 82%, a specificity and positive predictive value of 100% and 100% and a negative predictive value of 80% and 75%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RT-PCR had a higher sensitivity than FISH. One of both methods was always positive, whereas both methods were concordant in 76% of cases. From an economic point of view, we advocate to use FISH as a method of first choice, because it allows microscopic control of a true positive result (unpaired fluorescent signals in a break apart assay). Using this approach, 80% of SS can be diagnosed by FISH only and 20% would need to be confirmed by RT-PCR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Heuvel et al. (2008) conducted a cross-sectional in Synovial sarcoma (n=62). RT-PCR vs. FISH was evaluated on Diagnostic sensitivity. RT-PCR demonstrated a higher sensitivity (94%) compared to FISH (82%) for diagnosing synovial sarcoma in formalin-fixed tissues, with both methods showing 100% specificity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: