ArticleJournal of oncology2016
Clinical Performance and Management Outcomes with the DecisionDx-UM Gene Expression Profile Test in a Prospective Multicenter Study.
Article in Journal of oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02376920 (CLEAR Registry Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 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.
CLEAR Registry Study: An Open, 5-year Registry Study to Track Clinical Application of DecisionDx-UM Multigene Assay Results and Associated Patient Outcomes.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Gene Signatures and Oncology Treatment Implications.Hematology/oncology clinics of North America · 2025Review
- Integrating the 40-Gene Expression Profile (40-GEP) Test Improves Metastatic Risk-Stratification Within Clinically Relevant Subgroups of High-Risk Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (cSCC) Patients.Dermatology and therapy · 2024Article
- Validation of the Prognostic Usefulness of the Gene Expression Profiling Test in Patients with Uveal Melanoma.Ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Diagnostic Aqueous Humor Proteome Predicts Metastatic Potential in Uveal Melanoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Extrascleral extension of choroidal melanoma after iodine-125 brachytherapy treatment: a case series.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Comparative Metastatic Rates in GEP Class 1A versus 1B Posterior Uveal Melanoma: Results Contrary to Expectations.Ocular oncology and pathology · 2023Article
- Decision impact studies, evidence of clinical utility for genomic assays in cancer: A scoping review.PloS one · 2023Article
- Uveal melanoma patient attitudes towards prognostic testing using gene expression profiling.Melanoma management · 2022Article
- Future perspectives of uveal melanoma blood based biomarkers.British journal of cancer · 2022Review
- Improved Prognostic Precision in Uveal Melanoma through a Combined Score of Clinical Stage and Molecular Prognostication.Ocular oncology and pathology · 2022Article
- TRPM4 and TRPV2 are two novel prognostic biomarkers and promising targeted therapy in UVM.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022Article
- Review
- Novel Guarded Needle Trans-Scleral Biopsy for Uveal Melanoma: A Pilot Study.Ocular oncology and pathology · 2021Article
- Gene Expression Profiling in Uveal Melanoma: Five-Year Prospective Outcomes and Meta-Analysis.Ocular oncology and pathology · 2020Article
- Prospective evaluation of risk-appropriate management of uveal melanoma patients informed by gene expression profiling.Melanoma management · 2020Article
- ECHO-7 oncolytic virus Rigvir® in an adjuvant setting for stage I uveal melanoma; A retrospective case report.American journal of ophthalmology case reports · 2020Article
- Multicenter External Validation of the Liverpool Uveal Melanoma Prognosticator Online: An OOG Collaborative Study.Cancers · 2020Article
- Prognostic Implications of Novel Ten-Gene Signature in Uveal Melanoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Uveal melanoma management is challenging due to its metastatic propensity. DecisionDx-UM is a prospectively validated molecular test that interrogates primary tumor biology to provide objective information about metastatic potential that can be used in determining appropriate patient care. To evaluate the continued clinical validity and utility of DecisionDx-UM, beginning March 2010, 70 patients were enrolled in a prospective, multicenter, IRB-approved study to document patient management differences and clinical outcomes associated with low-risk Class 1 and high-risk Class 2 results indicated by DecisionDx-UM testing. Thirty-seven patients in the prospective study were Class 1 and 33 were Class 2. Class 1 patients had 100% 3-year metastasis-free survival compared to 63% for Class 2 (log rank test p = 0.003) with 27.3 median follow-up months in this interim analysis. Class 2 patients received significantly higher-intensity monitoring and more oncology/clinical trial referrals compared to Class 1 patients (Fisher's exact test p = 2.1 × 10(-13) and p = 0.04, resp.). The results of this study provide additional, prospective evidence in an independent cohort of patients that Class 1 and Class 2 patients are managed according to the differential metastatic risk indicated by DecisionDx-UM. The trial is registered with Clinical Application of DecisionDx-UM Gene Expression Assay Results (NCT02376920).
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.