ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Comparison of PNA Clamping-assisted Fluorescence Melting Curve Analysis and PNA Clamping in Detecting
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical implications of PNA‑sequencing as a complementary test for EGFR mutation analysis in human lung cancer.Oncology letters · 2023Article
- Artificial genetic polymers against human pathologies.Biology direct · 2022Review
- Programmed death-ligand 1 expression level as a predictor of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor efficacy in lung adenocarcinoma.Translational lung cancer research · 2021Article
- Comparison of PANAMutyper and PNAClamp for Detecting KRAS Mutations from Patients With Malignant Pleural Effusion.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimThis study compared the efficacy of PANAMutyper™, a novel technology that integrates PNAClamp™ and PANA S-Melting™, and PNAClamp™ alone for the detection of EGFR mutations in lung cancer patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsPANAMutyper™ and PNAClamp™ were used to assess the EGFR mutation status in tissue, cell block, pleural effusion, and blood samples of 90 lung cancer patients with malignant pleural effusion.
resultsPANAMutyper™ detected more EGFR mutations than PNAClamp™, especially in body fluids (pleural effusion and serum). Patients with additional EGFR mutations detected using PANAMutyper™ had a favorable response to EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment.
conclusionThe diagnostic performance of PANAMutyper™ was superior to that of PNAClamp™ for the detection of EGFR mutations. It was also better at identifying lung cancer patients with malignant pleural effusion who were likely to benefit from EGFR-TKI treatment.
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.