ArticleFamilial cancer2018
Next generation sequencing is informing phenotype: a TP53 example.
Article in Familial cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- From regulation to deregulation of p53 in hematologic malignancies: implications for diagnosis, prognosis and therapy.Biomarker research · 2024Review
- Genotype-phenotype associations among panel-based TP53+ subjects.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2019Article
- TP53 germline mutation testing in early-onset breast cancer: findings from a nationwide cohort.Familial cancer · 2019Article
- Increased access to TP53 analysis through breast cancer multi-gene panels: clinical considerations.Familial cancer · 2018Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Chemosensitivity in Germline TP53 Pathogenic Variant Cases Identified by Cancer Genomic Testing.Cancer genomics & proteomicsArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increased availability of next generation sequencing (NGS) and multi gene panel testing has resulted in more frequent TP53 testing of families that do not meet classic testing criteria. We investigated testing criteria, family history and result outcome in a cohort of Irish probands undergoing TP53 full sequencing. All TP53 test requests processed through the national genetic testing laboratory between 2012 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Personal and family cancer histories were collected, including tumour type and age at diagnosis, from two adult cancer genetic services in Ireland. Association between Li Fraumeni syndrome (LFS) or Li Fraumeni like syndrome (LFL) criteria and test result was examined. One hundred and 35 TP53 test requests were identified. Family history data and test results were available on 123 of the TP53 test requests (118 female; 5 male). 59/123 (48%) did not meet classic LFS or LFL criteria. Two individuals from this group harboured pathogenic TP53 mutations, giving a 3% mutation detection rate in those not meeting testing criteria. Both were female and had a personal history of early onset bilateral breast cancer with no reported LFS cancers in the family. 64/123 (52%) met LFS or LFL criteria and were all TP53 negative. 37/64 (57.8%) met Chompret criteria, 19/64 (29.7%) met Eeles and 7/64 (10.9%) met Eeles and Chompret and 1/64 (1.6%) met Classic LFS criteria. Stringent testing criteria miss germline mutations in TP53. Broadening the criteria for TP53 testing may improve our understanding of the phenotype and penetrance in the association syndrome.
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.