ArticleCancer genetics2016
Increased yield of actionable mutations using multi-gene panels to assess hereditary cancer susceptibility in an ethnically diverse clinical cohort.
Article in Cancer genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04533555 (Randomized Trial of Universal vs. Guideline-directed Germline Testing Among Young Adults With Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 51 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.
Randomized Trial of Universal vs. Guideline-directed Germline Testing Among Young Adults With Cancer
Who cites it
51 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing models of delivery for cancer genetics services among patients receiving primary care who meet criteria for genetic evaluation in two healthcare systems: BRIDGE randomized controlled trial.BMC health services research · 2021Trial
- Value of Knowing the Risk of Developing a Neurodegenerative Disease: A Discrete Choice Experiment.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Ancestry-informative markers and variants of uncertain significance on hereditary cancer panels.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Provider perceptions and insights on polygenic risk scores for colorectal cancer: A qualitative study.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Next-generation sequencing in cancer diagnosis and treatment: clinical applications and future directions.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- Universal Genetic Counseling and Testing for Black Women: A Risk-Stratified Approach to Addressing Breast Cancer Disparities.Clinical breast cancer · 2025Review
- Reclassification of variants of uncertain significance by race, ethnicity, and ancestry for patients at risk for breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Genomic Newborn Screening for Pediatric Cancer Predisposition Syndromes: A Holistic Approach.Cancers · 2024Review
- Gynecologic Care of Black Breast Cancer Survivors.Current breast cancer reports · 2024Article
- Review
- Promoting diagnostic equity: specifying genetic similarity rather than race or ethnicity.Journal of medical ethics · 2023Article
- Next-Generation Sequencing and Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Insights and Applications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Article
- Development and evaluation of INTFrontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Association between Health Insurance Type and Genetic Testing and/or Counseling for Breast and Ovarian Cancer.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Genetic Testing and/or Counseling for Colorectal Cancer by Health Insurance Type.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Block, Blood, or Both? Outcomes, Opportunities, and Barriers in Colorectal Cancer Universal Testing.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2022Article
- Racial and ethnic variation in multigene panel testing in a cohort of BRCA1/2-negative individuals who had genetic testing in a large urban comprehensive cancer center.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Hereditary cancer panel testing challenges and solutions for the latinx community: costs, access, and variants.Journal of community genetics · 2022Article
- Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Germline Genetic Testing of Patients With Young-Onset Colorectal Cancer.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aims to assess multi-gene panel testing in an ethnically diverse clinical cancer genetics practice. We conducted a retrospective study of individuals with a personal or family history of cancer undergoing clinically indicated multi-gene panel tests of 6-110 genes, from six commercial laboratories. The 475 patients in the study included 228 Hispanics (47.6%), 166 non-Hispanic Whites (35.4%), 55 Asians (11.6%), 19 Blacks (4.0%), and seven others (1.5%). Panel testing found that 15.6% (74/475) of patients carried deleterious mutations for a total of 79 mutations identified. This included 7.4% (35/475) of patients who had a mutation identified that would not have been tested with a gene-by-gene approach. The identification of a panel-added mutation impacted clinical management for most of cases (69%, 24/35), and genetic testing was recommended for the first degree relatives of nearly all of them (91%, 32/35). Variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) were identified in a higher proportion of tests performed in ethnic minorities. Multi-gene panel testing increases the yield of mutations detected and adds to the capability of providing individualized cancer risk assessment. VUSs represent an interpretive challenge due to less data available outside of White, non-Hispanic populations. Further studies are necessary to expand understanding of the implementation and utilization of panels across broad clinical settings and patient populations.
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.