Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24211365›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD2014

Validation of a next-generation sequencing assay for clinical molecular oncology.

Catherine E Cottrell, Hussam Al-Kateb, Andrew J Bredemeyer, Eric J Duncavage, David H Spencer, Haley J Abel, Christina M Lockwood, Ian S Hagemann, Stephanie M O'Guin, Lauren C Burcea and 22 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

85 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Molecular Biomarkers for the Evaluation of Colorectal Cancer.American journal of clinical pathology · 2017
    Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Dental DNA as an Indicator of Post-Mortem Interval (PMI): A Pilot Research.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Somatic PIK3R1 variation as a cause of vascular malformations and overgrowth.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

32 authors.

Catherine E CottrellDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Hussam Al-KatebDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. Electronic address: halkateb@path.wustl.edu.
Andrew J BredemeyerDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Eric J DuncavageDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
David H SpencerDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Haley J AbelDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Christina M LockwoodDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Ian S HagemannDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Stephanie M O'GuinDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Lauren C BurceaDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Christopher S SawyerDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Dayna M OschwaldDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Jennifer L StratmanDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Dorie A SherDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Mark R JohnsonDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Justin T BrownDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Paul F CliftenDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Bijoy GeorgeDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Leslie D McIntoshDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Savita ShrivastavaDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Tudung T NguyenDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Jacqueline E PaytonDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Mark A WatsonDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Seth D CrosbyDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Richard D HeadDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Robi D MitraDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Rakesh NagarajanDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Shashikant KulkarniDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri; Department of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Karen SeibertDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Herbert W VirginDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Jeffrey MilbrandtDepartment of Genetics, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
John D PfeiferDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Genomics and Pathology Services, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, oncology testing includes molecular studies and cytogenetic analysis to detect genetic aberrations of clinical significance. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) allows rapid analysis of multiple genes for clinically actionable somatic variants. The WUCaMP assay uses targeted capture for NGS analysis of 25 cancer-associated genes to detect mutations at actionable loci. We present clinical validation of the assay and a detailed framework for design and validation of similar clinical assays. Deep sequencing of 78 tumor specimens (≥ 1000× average unique coverage across the capture region) achieved high sensitivity for detecting somatic variants at low allele fraction (AF). Validation revealed sensitivities and specificities of 100% for detection of single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) within coding regions, compared with SNP array sequence data (95% CI = 83.4-100.0 for sensitivity and 94.2-100.0 for specificity) or whole-genome sequencing (95% CI = 89.1-100.0 for sensitivity and 99.9-100.0 for specificity) of HapMap samples. Sensitivity for detecting variants at an observed 10% AF was 100% (95% CI = 93.2-100.0) in HapMap mixes. Analysis of 15 masked specimens harboring clinically reported variants yielded concordant calls for 13/13 variants at AF of ≥ 15%. The WUCaMP assay is a robust and sensitive method to detect somatic variants of clinical significance in molecular oncology laboratories, with reduced time and cost of genetic analysis allowing for strategic patient management.

Indexed as

DNAGenetic TestingGenome, HumanHaplotypesHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesNeoplasmsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSensitivity and SpecificitySequence Analysis, DNADNA

Identifiers

PMID24211365
PMCPMC5762937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.