ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2013
EGFR molecular testing in African-American non-small cell lung cancer patients - a review of discrepant data.
Review in Translational lung cancer research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deficits of Molecular Prognosis/Diagnosis Studies in Underserved Populations.JCO oncology practice · 2024Review
- Article
- Fewer actionable mutations but higher tumor mutational burden characterizes NSCLC in black patients at an urban academic medical center.Oncotarget · 2019Article
- Underutilization and disparities in access to EGFR testing among Medicare patients with lung cancer from 2010 - 2013.BMC cancer · 2018Article
- Precision medicine: does ethnicity information complement genotype-based prescribing decisions?Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2018Review
- Prevalence of EGFR Mutations in Lung Cancer in Uruguayan Population.Journal of cancer epidemiology · 2017Article
- Are there any differences in genomic characterization of non-small cell lung cancer between African Americans and Whites?Journal of thoracic disease · 2016Article
- Driver oncogenes in Sub-Saharan African patients with non-small cell lung cancer.Lung Cancer (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2016Article
- Somatic Mutation Spectrum of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in African Americans: A Pooled Analysis.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Substantial discrepancy in the literature has recently emerged regarding epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutational frequency in African American (AA) NSCLC. The first wave of tissue profiling studies, including by our group in 2009, consistently observed a significantly lower frequency of EGFR mutation in AA vs. White NSCLC, whereas three recent reports appear to directly contradict these findings. Reasons for this discrepancy are unclear, but one plausible explanation arises from Simpson's paradox, the consequence of aggregating heterogeneous study cohorts (in this case, the proportion of never-smokers in the study cohort). Our review of all prior studies (combined total 386 AA NSCLC cases) underscores the wide variation in the proportion of AA never-smokers among various studies (13-57%), calling inter-study comparisons into question. In parallel, we assessed objective response by RECIST to EGFR targeted therapy for AA NSCLC in the community setting, prior to the advent of routine EGFR testing. We observed a trend toward reduced response for community-based treatment of unselected AA NSCLC (5%; 3/57) as compared to overall response rates of 10% reported by large North American trials of primarily White NSCLC patients, but this was not significant (P=0.223).
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.