Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28500398›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2017

Comparative clinical utility of tumor genomic testing and cell-free DNA in metastatic breast cancer.

Kara N Maxwell, Danielle Soucier-Ernst, Emin Tahirovic, Andrea B Troxel, Candace Clark, Michael Feldman, Christopher Colameco, Bijal Kakrecha, Melissa Langer, David Lieberman and 8 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Breast cancer metastasis: Is it a matter of OMICS and proper ex-vivo models?Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Tumor Mutational Burden andClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2020
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. The Role of Circulating Tumor DNA in Renal Cell Carcinoma.Current treatment options in oncology · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kara N MaxwellDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Danielle Soucier-ErnstAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Emin TahirovicDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Andrea B TroxelDepartment of Population Health, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Candace ClarkAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Michael FeldmanDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Christopher ColamecoAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Bijal KakrechaDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Melissa LangerUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
David LiebermanDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Jennifer J D MorrissetteDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Matt R PaulDepartment of Cancer Biology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Tien-Chi PanDepartment of Cancer Biology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Stephanie YeeDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Natalie ShihDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Erica CarpenterDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Lewis A ChodoshAbramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Angela DeMicheleDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. angela.demichele@uphs.upenn.edu.
University of Pennsylvania · USNew York University · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

In Vivo Ras-induced Senescence and TumorigenesisR01CA098371 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI LEWIS A CHODOSH · 2003 to 2026
$7.4M
Secondary Prevention through Surveillance and InterventionR01CA208273 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI CHODOSH, LEWIS A, DEMICHELE, ANGELA · 2017 to 2021
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA098371NCI NIH HHS R01 CA208273
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBreast cancer metastases differ biologically from primary disease; therefore, metastatic biopsies may assist in treatment decision making. Commercial genomic testing of both tumor and circulating tumor DNA have become available clinically, but utility of these tests in breast cancer management remains unclear.

methodsPatients undergoing a clinically indicated metastatic tumor biopsy were consented to the ongoing METAMORPH registry. Tumor and blood were collected at the time of disease progression before subsequent therapy, and patients were followed for response on subsequent treatment. Tumor testing (n = 53) and concurrent cell-free DNA (n = 32) in a subset of patients was performed using CLIA-approved assays.

resultsThe proportion of patients with a genomic alteration was lower in tumor than in blood (69 vs. 91%; p = 0.06). After restricting analysis to alterations covered on both platforms, 83% of tumor alterations were detected in blood, while 90% of blood alterations were detected in tumor. Mutational load specific for the panel genes was calculated for both tumor and blood. Time to progression on subsequent treatment was significantly shorter for patients whose tumors had high panel-specific mutational load (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.12-0.78) or a TP53 mutation (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20-0.79), after adjusting for stage at presentation, hormone receptor status, prior treatment type, and number of lines of metastatic treatment.

conclusionsTreating oncologists must distinguish platform differences from true biological heterogeneity when comparing tumor and cfDNA genomic testing results. Tumor and concurrent cfDNA contribute unique genomic information in metastatic breast cancer patients, providing potentially useful biomarkers for aggressive metastatic disease.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsDisease ProgressionDNA, NeoplasmFemaleGenomicsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMiddle AgedMutationNeoplasm MetastasisPrognosisDNA, NeoplasmCell-free DNAGenomic testingLiquid biopsyMassively parallel sequencingMetastatic breast cancer

Identifiers

PMID28500398
PMCPMC5584374
OpenAlexW4247763983

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.