Observational studyJournal of clinical pathology2014
Comparison of KRAS mutation analysis of colorectal cancer samples by standard testing and next-generation sequencing.
Observational study in Journal of clinical pathology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of two highly-multiplexed custom panels for massively parallel semiconductor sequencing on paraffin DNA.PloS one · 2015Trial
- Therapy optimization in metastatic colorectal cancer guided by discordant KRAS mutation status between primary and metachronous recurrent lesions: a precision oncology case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
- Mutational and co-mutational landscape of early onset colorectal cancer.Biomarkers : biochemical indicators of exposure, response, and susceptibility to chemicals · 2025Article
- The Genomic Landscape of Colorectal Cancer in the Saudi Arabian Population Using a Comprehensive Genomic Panel.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The ideal reporting ofPathologica · 2023Review
- The regulatory landscape of precision oncology laboratory medicine in the United States - Perspective on the past 5 years and considerations for future regulation.Practical laboratory medicine · 2020Article
- High-resolution melting for detectingBiomedical reports · 2019Article
- The gene mutational discrepancies between primary and paired metastatic colorectal carcinoma detected by next-generation sequencing.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2018Article
- Benefit of everolimus as a monotherapy for a refractory breast cancer patient bearing multiple genetic mutations in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway.Cancer biology & medicine · 2018Article
- A novel cell line generated using the CRISPR/Cas9 technology as universal quality control material for KRAS G12V mutation testing.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2018Article
- Next-generation sequencing: recent applications to the analysis of colorectal cancer.Journal of translational medicine · 2017Review
- OutLyzer: software for extracting low-allele-frequency tumor mutations from sequencing background noise in clinical practice.Oncotarget · 2016Article
- Article
- Circulating Cell-Free Tumour DNA in the Management of Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsBased on KRAS testing, the subset of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) that could benefit from anti-EGFR therapy can be better delineated. Though KRAS testing has become significantly more prevalent over the last few years, methods for testing remain heterogeneous and discordance has been reported between methods.
methodsIn this study, we examined a CRC patient population and compared KRAS testing done in Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) approved laboratories as part of standard clinical care and by next-generation sequencing (NGS) using the Illumina platform. Discordances were further evaluated with manual review of the NGS testing.
resultsOut of 468 CRC patient samples, 77 had KRAS testing done by both CLIA assay and NGS. There were concordant results between testing methodologies in 74 out of 77 patients, or 96% (95% CI 89% to 99%). There were three patient samples that showed discordant results between the two methods of testing. Upon further investigation of the NGS results for the three discordant cases, one sample showed a low level of the mutation seen in the standard testing, one sample showed low tumour fraction and a third did not show any evidence of the mutation that was found with the standard assay. Five patients had KRAS mutations not typically tested with standard testing.
conclusionsOverall there was a high concordance rate between NGS and standard testing for KRAS. However, NGS revealed mutations that are not tested for with standard KRAS assays that might have clinical impact with regards to the role for anti-EGFR therapy.
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.