Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) testing of high-grade serous carcinoma using cytological samples.

Created on 08 Aug 2026

Authors

Izadora Demmer, Michael Bento Schmid, Diana Born, Gabriel Handschin, Wolfram Jochum

Published in

BJC reports. Volume 4. Issue 1. Aug 07, 2026. Epub Aug 07, 2026.

Abstract

Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) is associated with increased sensitivity to PARP inhibitor therapy in various cancer types, including high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). Current guidelines recommend HRD testing to guide treatment decisions in HGSG. The majority of HRD assays rely on tumour tissue analysis. The main objective of this study was to assess cytological HGSC samples for HRD testing.
Next generation sequencing using the Oncomine™ Comprehensive Assay Plus (OCAP) panel was performed on 110 matched cytological and histological samples from 55 treatment-naïve HGSC patients to determine the mutational status of 15 homologous recombination repair (HRR)-associated genes including BRCA1/2, and the HRD status based on BRCA1/2 mutational status and genomic instability metric (GIM). Concordance analysis was performed.
Compared to matched histological samples, cytological HGSC samples revealed an overall concordance rate of 89.7% for HRR-associated gene mutations and of 100% for BRCA1/2 mutations, respectively. A moderate correlation between GIM values (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.48), but an overall concordance rate of 90.9% for the HRD status was observed.
Our findings demonstrate that cytological HGSC samples can be employed for HRR-associated gene mutation and HRD testing using next generation sequencing with the OCAP panel.

PMID:
42567896
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 08 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 6
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement