ReviewJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2017
Personalized and precision medicine: integrating genomics into treatment decisions in gastrointestinal malignancies.
Review in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Growth Modulation Index (GMI) as an Efficacy Outcome in Cancer Clinical Trials: A Scoping Review with Suggested Reporting Guidelines.Current oncology reports · 2025Article
- Current trends and future prospects of drug repositioning in gastrointestinal oncology.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
- Precision medicine journey through omics approach.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2022Review
- Perception of personalized medicine, pharmacogenomics, and genetic testing among undergraduates in Hong Kong.Human genomics · 2021Article
- Adenocarcinoma arising from a foregut cyst of the diaphragm: importance of multimodality treatment: a case report.BMC surgery · 2020Article
- Usefulness of a novel device to divide core needle biopsy specimens in a spatially matched fashion.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Neoplastic cell percentage estimation in tissue samples for molecular oncology: recommendations from a modified Delphi study.Histopathology · 2019Article
- Design and virtual implementation of a biomedical registry framework for the enhancement of clinical trials: colorectal cancer example.BMJ health & care informatics · 2019Article
- Feasibility of personalized treatment concepts in gastrointestinal malignancies: Sub-group results of prospective clinical phase II trial EXACT.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2018Article
- Data-Driven Methods for Advancing Precision Oncology.Current pharmacology reports · 2018Article
- Comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided core biopsies of solid pancreatic and extrapancreatic lesions: a large single-operator experience with a new fine-needle biopsy needle.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advent of next generation sequencing (NGS) technologies has advanced our understanding of the intrinsic biology of different gastrointestinal (GI) tumor types. The use of novel, more efficient sequencing platforms has improved turnaround times of sequencing results. This is providing real time opportunities to put precision medicine to the test. A number of early phase clinical trials are testing targeted therapies in unique molecularly characterized subsets of patients (baskets). While basket studies are gaining momentum, treatment failures serve to remind us that shifting from a histology-driven to a histology-agnostic approach is unlikely to be a failure-free strategy for a number of tumor types as recently learnt from vemurafenib failure in
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.