ArticleCancer2017
Integrating next-generation sequencing into pediatric oncology practice: An assessment of physician confidence and understanding of clinical genomics.
Article in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
47 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors that influence the uptake of precision-guided treatment recommendations in paediatric cancer: a systematic review.British journal of cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Factors Associated With Implementation of Biomarker Testing and Strategies to Improve Its Clinical Uptake in Cancer Care: Systematic Review Using Theoretical Domains Framework.JCO precision oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Multilevel barriers and facilitators of communication in pediatric oncology: A systematic review.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Genomic medicine knowledge, self-assessment, and training needs among Turkish pediatricians: a cross-sectional survey.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Preparedness for working with genomic medicine among Swedish non-genetics physicians - a nation-wide survey study.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Self-assessed knowledge of genomic medicine among non-genetics physicians - results from a nationwide Swedish survey.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Parental perspectives on the use of tumor molecular profiling and germline genetic testing during their children's cancer treatment.Familial cancer · 2025Article
- A qualitative study to evaluate the preparedness of community paediatricians for genomic medicine in England - ready for take-off?Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Ethical Issues in Pediatric Precision Oncology in Singapore.Asian bioethics review · 2025Article
- Narrative review on ethical and psychological issues raised by genetic and genomic testing in pediatric oncology care.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Review
- Optimizing a Patient-Centered Report of Somatic and Germline Genetic Test Results.JCO precision oncology · 2025Article
- Delivering Trio Germline Whole Genome Sequencing to Patients Newly Diagnosed With Childhood Cancer: Healthcare Professionals' Perspectives of the PREDICT Study.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Parent and patient knowledge and attitudes about cancer predisposition syndrome genetic testing in pediatric oncology: Understanding sociodemographic and parent-child differences.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Non-Genetic Healthcare Providers' Experiences and Perspectives with Rapid Genome-Wide Sequencing in Canadian Neonatal Intensive Care Units.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Preparing tomorrow's doctors for the genomics era: A nationwide survey of UK medical students.Future healthcare journal · 2024Article
- Bridging the educational gaps of health professionals in oncogenomics: results from a pilot e-learning course.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Parents' expectations, preferences, and recall of germline findings in a childhood cancer precision medicine trial.Cancer · 2023Article
- Integrating China in the international consortium for personalised medicine. a position paper on healthcare professionals' education and citizens' empowerment in personalised medicine.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- Assessing Oncologists' Attitudes Concerning Comprehensive Genomic Profiling in Stage IV Lung Adenocarcinoma in Brazil.JTO clinical and research reports · 2022Article
- Clinicians' Perceptions towards Precision Medicine Tools for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Stratification in South Africa.Journal of personalized medicine · 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
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe incorporation of genomic testing to identify targetable somatic alterations and predisposing germline mutations into the clinical setting is becoming increasingly more common. Despite its potential usefulness, to the authors' knowledge physician confidence with regard to understanding and applying genomic testing remains unclear, particularly within the realm of pediatric oncology.
methodsBefore initiating an institutional feasibility study regarding the integration of clinical genomic testing, the authors surveyed pediatric oncologists regarding their confidence around understanding of genomic testing, perceived usefulness of test results, preferences around the disclosure of germline test results, and possible risks and benefits of testing.
resultsAmong survey respondents (52 of 88 contacted; response rate of 59%), only a minority were confident in interpreting, using, and discussing somatic (35%) or germline (27%) genomic test results. Providers who were confident in interpreting somatic results were significantly more likely to anticipate using the results to plan the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory cancers (P = .009). Similarly, providers who reported confidence in interpreting germline results were significantly more likely to discuss and use these results as part of clinical care (P<.0001). The majority of physicians (93%), regardless of their level of confidence, wanted to speak to a genetic counselor before disclosing germline test results.
conclusionsAmong physicians at a comprehensive pediatric cancer center, confidence in the interpretation, use, and discussion of oncology-based genomic test results appears to be low, both in terms of somatic and germline testing. To optimize the integration of genomic sequencing into cancer care, methods must be developed to improve basic competencies around cancer-based genomic testing. Given the complexities surrounding variant interpretation and genotype-phenotype relationships, interdisciplinary collaborations are warranted. Cancer 2017;123:2352-2359. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
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.