ArticleBritish journal of cancer2018
Accreditation, setting and experience as indicators to assure quality in oncology biomarker testing laboratories.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Biomarker testing in oncology - Requirements for organizing external quality assessment programs to improve the performance of laboratory testing: revision of an expert opinion paper on behalf of IQNPath ABSL.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2021Guideline
- Assessing clinical decision support system tools in precision oncology: piloting ring testing.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- The need to strengthen laboratory leadership, systems, and networks to enhance outbreak detection and resilience in Africa: proceedings of a regional workshop.BMC proceedings · 2026Article
- Behind the scenes of EQA–characteristics, capabilities, benefits and assets of external quality assessment (EQA): Part IV – Benefits for participant laboratoriesClinical chemistry and laboratory medicine · 2025Review
- Real-world EGFR testing practices for non-small-cell lung cancer by thoracic pathology laboratories across Europe.ESMO open · 2023Article
- External Quality Assessment 2.0: The Importance of a Standardized Implementation of TILs for Daily and Trial Practices.Cancers · 2022Article
- The Significance of External Quality Assessment Schemes for Molecular Testing in Clinical Laboratories.Cancers · 2022Review
- Results of a worldwide external quality assessment of cfDNA testing in lung Cancer.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- PD-L1 immunohistochemistry in non-small-cell lung cancer: unraveling differences in staining concordance and interpretation.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2021Article
- Causes behind error rates for predictive biomarker testing: the utility of sending post-EQA surveys.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2021Article
- Managing Deviating EQA Results: A Survey to Assess the Corrective and Preventive Actions of Medical Laboratories Testing for Oncological Biomarkers.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Outsourcing predictive biomarker testing in non-small cell carcinoma: a personal view of pathologists.Translational lung cancer research · 2020Article
- Sensitive detection methods are key to identify secondary EGFR c.2369C>T p.(Thr790Met) in non-small cell lung cancer tissue samples.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- How to Set Up a Molecular Pathology Lab: A Guide for Pathologists.Turk patoloji dergisi · 2020Article
- European follow-up of incorrect biomarker results for colorectal cancer demonstrates the importance of quality improvement projects.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2019Article
- Implementation of Novel Molecular Biomarkers for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in the Netherlands: How to Deal With Increasing Complexity.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPredictive biomarkers allow clinicians to optimise cancer treatment decisions. Therefore, molecular biomarker test results need to be accurate and swiftly available. To ensure quality of oncology biomarker testing, external quality assessments (EQA) for somatic variant analyses were organised. This study hypothesised whether laboratory characteristics influence the performance of laboratories and whether these can be imposed before authorisation of biomarker testing.
methodsLongitudinal EQA data from the European Society of Pathology were available over six (metastatic colorectal cancer) and four years (non-small cell lung cancer), including the percentage of analysis errors and technical failures, and information on laboratory characteristics (accreditation status, laboratory setting, number of samples analysed and detection method). Statistical models for repeated measurements were used to analyse the association between the EQA results and the laboratory characteristics.
resultsLaboratory accreditation was associated with fewer analysis errors in early stages of biomarker introduction into the laboratory. Analysing more samples, or university and research laboratories showed better performance. Changing the detection method did not have an effect.
conclusionThe indicators support the clinicians in choosing molecular pathology laboratories by improving quality assurance and guaranteeing patient safety. Accreditation of laboratories, centralisation of biomarker testing or a university and research setting should be stimulated.
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.