Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29246024›Full record

ReviewOncotarget2017

Comparison of cross-platform technologies for EGFR T790M testing in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Xuefei Li, Caicun Zhou

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Detection ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Xuefei LiDepartment of Lung Cancer and Immunology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Pulmonary Cancer institute, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Caicun ZhouDepartment of Medical Oncology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Tongji University, Tongji University Medical School Cancer Institute, Shanghai, P. R. China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Somatic mutations in the gene encoding epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) play an important role in determining targeted treatment modalities in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The EGFR T790M mutation emerges in approximately 50% of cases who acquire resistance to tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Detecting EGFR T790M mutation in tumor tissue is challenging due to heterogeneity of the tumor, low abundance of the mutation and difficulty for re-biopsy in patients with advanced disease. Alternatively, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has been proposed as a non-invasive method for mutational analysis. The presence of EGFR mutations in ctDNA predicts response to the EGFR TKIs in the first-line setting. Molecular testing is now considered a standard care for NSCLC. The advent of standard commercially available kits and targeted mutational analysis has revolutionized the accuracy of mutation detection platforms for detection of EGFR mutations. Our review provides an overview of various commonly used platforms for detecting EGFR T790M mutation in tumor tissue and plasma.

Indexed as

circulating tumor DNAcompanion diagnosticsEGFR mutationsNSCLCTKI resistance

Identifiers

PMID29246024
PMCPMC5725066

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.