Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30848097›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2019

Impact of molecular testing in clinical practice in gynecologic cancers.

Marilyn Huang, Tegan Hunter, Brian Slomovitz, Matthew Schlumbrecht

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Cancer of the corpus uteri: 2021 update.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marilyn HuangDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.ORCID 0000-0002-4644-2483
Tegan HunterUniversity of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.ORCID 0000-0002-6695-2827
Brian SlomovitzDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.
Matthew SchlumbrechtDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.ORCID 0000-0002-0257-7327
University of Miami · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith the growing understanding of the molecular and genetic profiles of cancers, targeted treatments are increasingly utilized in personalized cancer care. The objective of this study was to determine how these advances have translated into practice by examining how often molecular profiling of gynecological tumors led to treatment changes.

methodsWe identified women with gynecological cancers at our institution who had molecular tumor testing performed from November 2014 to June 2017. Clinicopathologic data were extracted from medical records. We determined (a) if molecular profiling identified actionable targets for which therapy is available, and (b) whether the patient's treatment course changed as a result of molecular profiling. Chi-square, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and Fisher's exact tests were used with a P < 0.05 considered statistically significant.

resultsWe identified 152 patients with gynecologic cancers who underwent molecular profiling. Of the 152 patients, 116 (76.3%) had actionable mutations identified, with 41 (35.3%) patients having a treatment change. Stratified by cancer type, molecular profiling most frequently identified an actionable target in patients with endometrial cancer (73.6%). Changes in treatment occurred most frequently in patients with endometrial cancer, 22 (56.4%), and ovarian cancers, 16 (39%), as compared to patients with cervical and vulvar cancer (P = 0.02). Of those patients who received a change in treatment, 39 patients (95.1%) received an FDA-approved therapeutic agent, while two patients (4.8%) were enrolled in a clinical trial.

conclusionMolecular profiling in gynecologic cancers often identified at least one actionable mutation; however, only in a minority of these cases was the course of treatment changed. Further studies are needed to elucidate optimal timing for testing to best utilize actionable information.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGenital Neoplasms, FemaleHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMiddle AgedMutationYoung Adultcervical cancerendometrial cancergynecologic cancersNext generation sequenceovarian cancerpersonalized medicinevulvar cancer

Identifiers

PMID30848097
PMCPMC6536929
OpenAlexW2922498426

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.