RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Is the EBUS TBNA cytology adequate for EGFR analysis? JF European Respiratory Journal JO Eur Respir J FD European Respiratory Society SP P4406 VO 40 IS Suppl 56 A1 Mohammed Harris A1 Shahul Leyakathali khan A1 Sarah Diver A1 Saba Bokhari A1 Jane Edwards A1 Joanna Pickles A1 Mohammed Munavvar YR 2012 UL http://erj.ersjournals.com/content/40/Suppl_56/P4406.abstract AB Background: Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) guided transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) allows safe and reliable sampling of mediastinal and hilar lymph nodes with excellent specificity and good sensitivity. It is a well established technique in the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer including pathologic sub-typing and recent studies have shown that the samples may also be adequate for molecular testing.Aim: To evaluate the adequacy of EBUS TBNA samples used for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation screening.Methods: Retrospective study of 46 consecutive EBUS-TBNA samples obtained from lymph nodes > 5mm short-axis and central lung parenchymal lesions. Fisher's exact test was used to compare the 2 groups.Results: Of the 46 EBUS TBNA samples sent for EGFR testing, 38 were obtained from lymph nodes (19 subcarinal, 9 right paratracheal, 4 left paratracheal, 10 right hilar and 4 left hilar) and 8 from central lung parenchymal masses.In the lymph node group, 35 (92%) samples were negative for EGFR mutation, 3(8%) failed testing and none were positive for EGFR; 30 had adenocarcinoma, 1 adenosquamous, 2 squamous and 5 NSCLC-NOS(not otherwise specified). In the central lung mass group (n=8), one positive with exon19 deletion, 6 negative and one failed testing or was inadequate; 3 had adenocarcinoma, 3 NSCLC-NOS, 1 squamous and 1 adenosquamous.The overall EBUS-TBNA adequacy from both lymph nodes and central lung masses was 91% and there was no difference between the groups.Conclusion: Molecular testing of EBUS TBNA samples obtained from mediastinal and hilar lymph nodes is feasible and our study shows a higher proportion of 92% adequacy. The common reason for failed testing was paucicellular specimen and degraded DNA.