ArticleOncotarget2018
Simultaneous identification of clinically relevant single nucleotide variants, copy number alterations and gene fusions in solid tumors by targeted next-generation sequencing.
Article in Oncotarget, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Clinical and molecular characterization of thyroid cancer when seen as a second malignant neoplasm.Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2021Article
- Article
- A comprehensive pan-cancer study of fibroblast growth factor receptor aberrations in Chinese cancer patients.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
- Integrating clinical, molecular, proteomic and histopathological data within the tissue context: tissunomics.Histopathology · 2019Review
- An Integrated Next-Generation Sequencing System for Analyzing DNA Mutations, Gene Fusions, and RNA Expression in Lung Cancer.Translational oncology · 2019Article
- Oncogenic driver FGFR3-TACC3 is dependent on membrane trafficking and ERK signaling.Oncotarget · 2018Article
- ALK (D5F3) CDx: an immunohistochemistry assay to identify ALK-positive NSCLC patients.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we have set-up a routine pipeline to evaluate the clinical application of Oncomine™ Focus Assay, a panel that allows the simultaneous detection of single nucleotide hotspot mutations in 35 genes, copy number alterations (CNAs) in 19 genes and gene fusions involving 23 genes in cancer samples. For this study we retrospectively selected 106 patients that were submitted to surgical resection for lung, gastric, colon or rectal cancer. We found that 56 patients out of 106 showed at least one alteration (53%), with 47 patients carrying at least one relevant nucleotide variant, 10 patients carrying at least one CNA and 3 patients carrying one gene fusion. On the basis of the mutational profiles obtained, we have identified 22 patients (20.7%) that were potentially eligible for targeted therapy. The most frequently mutated genes across all tumor types included KRAS (30 patients), PIK3CA (16 patients), BRAF (6 patients), EGFR (5 patients), NRAS (4 patients) and ERBB2 (3 patients) whereas CCND1, ERBB2, EGFR and MYC were the genes most frequently subjected to copy number gain. Finally, gene fusions were identified only in lung cancer patients and involved MET [MET(13)-MET(15) fusion] and FGFR3 [FGFR3(chr 17)-TACC3(chr 11)]. In conclusion, we demonstrate that the analysis with a multi-biomarker panel of cancer patients after surgery, may present several potential advantages in clinical daily practice, including the simultaneous detection of different potentially druggable alterations, reasonable costs, short time of testing and automated interpretation of results.
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.