Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28492226›Full record

Trial reportNature communications2017

Circulating tumour DNA sequence analysis as an alternative to multiple myeloma bone marrow aspirates.

Olena Kis, Rayan Kaedbey, Signy Chow, Arnavaz Danesh, Mark Dowar, Tiantian Li, Zhihua Li, Jessica Liu, Mark Mansour, Esther Masih-Khan and 6 more

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase II
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nature communications, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

16 authors.

Olena KisPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Rayan KaedbeyPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Signy ChowPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Arnavaz DaneshPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Mark DowarPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Tiantian LiPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Zhihua LiPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Jessica LiuPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Mark MansourPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Esther Masih-KhanPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Tong ZhangPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Scott V BratmanPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8610-4908
Amit M OzaPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Suzanne Kamel-ReidPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Suzanne TrudelPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Trevor J PughPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8073-5888

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The requirement for bone-marrow aspirates for genomic profiling of multiple myeloma poses an obstacle to enrolment and retention of patients in clinical trials. We evaluated whether circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis is comparable to molecular profiling of myeloma using bone-marrow tumour cells. We report here a hybrid-capture-based Liquid Biopsy Sequencing (LB-Seq) method used to sequence all protein-coding exons of KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, EGFR and PIK3CA in 64 cfDNA specimens from 53 myeloma patients to >20,000 × median coverage. This method includes a variant filtering algorithm that enables detection of tumour-derived fragments present in cfDNA at allele frequencies as low as 0.25% (median 3.2%, range 0.25-46%). Using LB-Seq analysis of 48 cfDNA specimens with matched bone-marrow data, we detect 49/51 likely somatic mutations, with subclonal hierarchies reflecting tumour profiling (96% concordance), and four additional mutations likely missed by bone-marrow testing (>98% specificity). Overall, LB-Seq is a high fidelity adjunct to genetic profiling of bone-marrow in multiple myeloma.

Indexed as

MutationAllelesBiomarkers, TumorBiopsyBone Marrow CellsCirculating Tumor DNAClass I Phosphatidylinositol 3-KinasesErbB ReceptorsGene FrequencyGTP PhosphohydrolasesHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMembrane ProteinsMultiple MyelomaProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)Biomarkers, TumorBRAF protein, humanCirculating Tumor DNAClass I Phosphatidylinositol 3-KinasesEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsGTP PhosphohydrolasesKRAS protein, humanMembrane ProteinsNRAS protein, humanPIK3CA protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)

Identifiers

PMID28492226
PMCPMC5437268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.