Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28653203›Full record

ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2017

RAS screening in colorectal cancer: a comprehensive analysis of the results from the UK NEQAS colorectal cancer external quality assurance schemes (2009-2016).

Susan D Richman, Jennifer Fairley, Rachel Butler, Zandra C Deans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Update of the recommendations for the determination of biomarkers in colorectal carcinoma: National Consensus of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology and the Spanish Society of Pathology.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Manchester International Consensus Group recommendations for the management of gynecological cancers in Lynch syndrome.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
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

4 authors.

Susan D RichmanDepartment of Pathology and Tumour Biology, Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, St James University Hospital, Leeds, England, LS9 7TF, UK. s.d.richman@leeds.ac.uk.
Jennifer FairleyUK NEQAS for Molecular Genetics, Department of Laboratory Medicine, The Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh, Scotland, EH16 4SA, UK.
Rachel ButlerCardiff and Vale UHB-Medical Genetics University Hospital of Wales, Heath Park, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Zandra C DeansUK NEQAS for Molecular Genetics, Department of Laboratory Medicine, The Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh, Scotland, EH16 4SA, UK. Sandi.Deans@ed.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence strongly indicates that extended RAS testing should be undertaken in mCRC patients, prior to prescribing anti-EGFR therapies. With more laboratories implementing testing, the requirement for External Quality Assurance schemes increases, thus ensuring high standards of molecular analysis. Data was analysed from 15 United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Service (UK NEQAS) for Molecular Genetics Colorectal cancer external quality assurance (EQA) schemes, delivered between 2009 and 2016. Laboratories were provided annually with nine colorectal tumour samples for genotyping. Information on methodology and extent of testing coverage was requested, and scores given for genotyping, interpretation and clerical accuracy. There has been a sixfold increase in laboratory participation (18 in 2009 to 108 in 2016). For RAS genotyping, fewer laboratories now use Roche cobas®, pyrosequencing and Sanger sequencing, with more moving to next generation sequencing (NGS). NGS is the most commonly employed technology for BRAF and PIK3CA mutation screening. KRAS genotyping errors were seen in ≤10% laboratories, until the 2014-2015 scheme, when there was an increase to 16.7%, corresponding to a large increase in scheme participants. NRAS genotyping errors peaked at 25.6% in the first 2015-2016 scheme but subsequently dropped to below 5%. Interpretation and clerical accuracy scores have been consistently good throughout. Within this EQA scheme, we have observed that the quality of molecular analysis for colorectal cancer has continued to improve, despite changes in the required targets, the volume of testing and the technologies employed. It is reassuring to know that laboratories clearly recognise the importance of participating in EQA schemes.

Indexed as

Quality Assurance, Health CareColorectal NeoplasmsGenotyping TechniquesHumansLaboratoriesMolecular BiologyMolecular Targeted Therapyras ProteinsUnited Kingdomras ProteinsCancerColorectalExternal quality assurance

Identifiers

PMID28653203
PMCPMC5711992

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.