Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28125075›Full record

ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2017

Assigning clinical meaning to somatic and germ-line whole-exome sequencing data in a prospective cancer precision medicine study.

Arezou A Ghazani, Nelly M Oliver, Joseph P St Pierre, Andrea Garofalo, Irene R Rainville, Elaine Hiller, Daniel J Treacy, Vanesa Rojas-Rudilla, Sam Wood, Elizabeth Bair and 32 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Development and evaluation of INTFrontiers in oncology · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Racial Differences in the Association Between Luminal Master Regulator Gene Expression Levels and Breast Cancer Survival.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2020
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

42 authors.

Arezou A GhazaniCenter for Cancer Precision Medicine, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4439-8554
Nelly M OliverCenter for Cancer Precision Medicine, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Joseph P St PierreDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8162-4944
Andrea GarofaloBroad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1104-4271
Irene R RainvilleDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5865-3467
Elaine HillerDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Daniel J TreacyCenter for Cancer Precision Medicine, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Vanesa Rojas-RudillaDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Sam WoodDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1962-9963
Elizabeth BairDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0389-4022
Michael ParelloDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Franklin HuangDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Marios GiannakisDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Frederick H WilsonDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Elizabeth H StoverDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6578-3216
Steven M CorselloDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Tom NguyenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Huma Q RanaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1598-6752
Alanna J ChurchDepartment of Pathology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4835-5770
Carol LowensteinDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0593-8869
Carrie CibulskisBroad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Ali Amin-MansourBroad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0548-1328
Jennifer HengDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Lauren BraisDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abigail SantosDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Patrick BauerDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2540-7451
Amanda WaldronDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7967-5454
Peter LoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8292-8619
Megan GormanDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8984-8248
Christine A LydonDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Marisa WelchDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8279-8727
Philip McNamaraDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9279-6824
Stacey GabrielBroad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Lynette M ShollDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9532-9735
Neal I LindemanDepartment of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Judy E GarberDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Steven JoffeDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0667-7384
Eliezer M Van AllenCenter for Cancer Precision Medicine, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Stacy W GrayDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6948-0143
Pasi A Ja NneDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7821-4928
Levi A GarrawayCenter for Cancer Precision Medicine, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3739-0471
Nikhil WagleCenter for Cancer Precision Medicine, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeImplementing cancer precision medicine in the clinic requires assessing the therapeutic relevance of genomic alterations. A main challenge is the systematic interpretation of whole-exome sequencing (WES) data for clinical care.

methodsOne hundred sixty-five adults with metastatic colorectal and lung adenocarcinomas were prospectively enrolled in the CanSeq study. WES was performed on DNA extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor biopsy samples and matched blood samples. Somatic and germ-line alterations were ranked according to therapeutic or clinical relevance. Results were interpreted using an integrated somatic and germ-line framework and returned in accordance with patient preferences.

resultsAt the time of this analysis, WES had been performed and results returned to the clinical team for 165 participants. Of 768 curated somatic alterations, only 31% were associated with clinical evidence and 69% with preclinical or inferential evidence. Of 806 curated germ-line variants, 5% were clinically relevant and 56% were classified as variants of unknown significance. The variant review and decision-making processes were effective when the process was changed from that of a Molecular Tumor Board to a protocol-based approach.

conclusionThe development of novel interpretive and decision-support tools that draw from scientific and clinical evidence will be crucial for the success of cancer precision medicine in WES studies.Genet Med advance online publication 26 January 2017.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAdenocarcinoma of LungAdultColorectal NeoplasmsDatabases, GeneticExomeExome SequencingGenomicsGerm-Line MutationHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansLung NeoplasmsMutationPrecision MedicineProspective StudiesSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID28125075

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.