ArticleCancer medicine2017
Low utility of Oncotype DX® in the clinic.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2017. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Disparities in the Occurrence of Long-Term Effects of Bone Marrow Suppression after Treatment in Adolescent Young Adult Breast Cancer Survivors.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Deep Learning Model for Predicting Lung Adenocarcinoma Recurrence from Whole Slide Images.Cancers · 2024Article
- Survival Disparities in US Black Compared to White Women with Hormone Receptor Positive-HER2 Negative Breast Cancer.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Integrating Genomic Information with Tumor-Immune Microenvironment in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Oncotype DX Risk Recurrence Score and Total Mortality for Early-Stage Breast Cancer by Race/Ethnicity.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022Article
- Grading of invasive breast carcinoma: the way forward.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022Review
- Inference on moderation effect with third-variable effect analysis - application to explore the trend of racial disparity in oncotype dx test for breast cancer treatment.Journal of applied statistics · 2022Article
- Trend and survival benefit of Oncotype DX use among female hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients in 17 SEER registries, 2004-2015.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2020Article
- Low utility of Oncotype DX® in the clinic.Cancer medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Precision medicine tools are currently making their way into the clinic and being utilized to diagnose, prognose, and individualize cancer care. The multi-gene expression-based assay, Oncotype DX® (ODX), is a genomic tumor profiling tool that determines the expression of 21 tumor- associated genes; it helps determine the risk for distant recurrence and whether chemotherapy is an appropriate course of treatment in patients with early stage, estrogen receptor (ER) positive, HER2 negative, and lymph node negative (or 1-3 positive lymph nodes) invasive BCa. The aim of this study was to determine the overall utilization and uptake of the ODX genomic test in a cross-sectional analysis of the Virginia Tumor registry, compare utilization in African Americans (AAs) and Caucasian Americans (CAs), and determine the profile of patients referred for testing. Caucasian (89.7%) patients made up the majority of the ODX testers compared to AAs (10.3%) (P < 0.0001). Those who received ODX testing were less likely to have higher grade and higher stage tumors, and were less likely to be ER negative (RR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.01-0.31), progesterone receptor (PR) negative (RR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.27-0.45), HER2 amplified (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.17-0.43), or triple negative (RR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.14-0.33). Of the patients that were eligible (n = 3924), 10.5% (n = 412) received ODX testing. Specifically, 11.7% of the Caucasian patients and 5.1% of AAs patients received ODX testing (P < 0.001). Our analysis confirmed that the utilization of ODX was low and that AAs were much less likely to receive ODX testing.
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.