ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2013
Comparative effectiveness research in cancer genomics and precision medicine: current landscape and future prospects.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Estimating Cancer Penetrance in Carriers of BRCA2 Pathogenic Variants Using Cancer-Specific Polygenic Scores.Cancer medicine · 2025Observational
- Development and validation of a genetic probability for venous thromboembolism.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
- Rural-urban and racial-ethnic differences in awareness of direct-to-consumer genetic testing.BMC public health · 2018Article
- Precision oncology in the age of integrative genomics.Nature biotechnology · 2018Article
- Precision medicine: opportunities, possibilities, and challenges for patients and providers.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016Article
- Evaluating the clinical impact of a genomic classifier in prostate cancer using individualized decision analysis.PloS one · 2015Article
- Economic evaluation of first-line and maintenance treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2015Review
- What is translational genomics? An expanded research agenda for improving individual and population health.Applied & translational genomics · 2014Article
- Implementation of quantitative and systems pharmacology in large pharma.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2014Review
- Horizon scanning for translational genomic research beyond bench to bedside.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2014Article
- Clinical integration of next generation sequencing: coverage and reimbursement challenges.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2014Article
- High-risk human papillomavirus detection in oropharyngeal, nasopharyngeal, and oral cavity cancers: comparison of multiple methods.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A major promise of genomic research is information that can transform health care and public health through earlier diagnosis, more effective prevention and treatment of disease, and avoidance of drug side effects. Although there is interest in the early adoption of emerging genomic applications in cancer prevention and treatment, there are substantial evidence gaps that are further compounded by the difficulties of designing adequately powered studies to generate this evidence, thus limiting the uptake of these tools into clinical practice. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is intended to generate evidence on the "real-world" effectiveness compared with existing standards of care so informed decisions can be made to improve health care. Capitalizing on funding opportunities from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the National Cancer Institute funded seven research teams to conduct CER in genomic and precision medicine and sponsored a workshop on CER on May 30, 2012, in Bethesda, Maryland. This report highlights research findings from those research teams, challenges to conducting CER, the barriers to implementation in clinical practice, and research priorities and opportunities in CER in genomic and precision medicine. Workshop participants strongly emphasized the need for conducting CER for promising molecularly targeted therapies, developing and supporting an integrated clinical network for open-access resources, supporting bioinformatics and computer science research, providing training and education programs in CER, and conducting research in economic and decision modeling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.