ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Comparison of PANAMutyper and PNAClamp for Detecting KRAS Mutations from Patients With Malignant Pleural Effusion.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of TwoCancers · 2020Article
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/
aimKRAS is one of the frequently mutated genes in human cancers and often relates with drug resistance and poor prognosis. PANAMutyper™ is a novel technology that integrates PNAClamp™ and PANA S-Melting™. In the present study, PANAMutyper™ and PNAClamp™ were compared for the detection of KRAS mutations using different samples of patients with malignant pleural effusion. PATIENTS AND
methodsA total of 103 patients (including 56 lung adenocarcinoma, 10 lung squamous carcinoma, 17 small cell lung cancer, 3 large cell lung cancer, 3 stomach cancer, 2 ovarian cancer, and others) with malignant pleural effusion were investigated using matched tumor tissue, cell block, and pleural effusion samples. The diagnostic performance of these two methods was compared.
resultsKRAS mutations were detected in 18 (17.5%) of 103 patients using tissue, cell block, and pleural effusion samples. All 18 patients with KRAS mutations were detected by PANAMutyper™ using any sample type, however, only 7 cases were detected by PNAClamp™. Among the subtypes of KRAS mutations, substitution in codon 12, 35G>T was the most frequent, followed by substitution in codon 12, 35G>A and codon 12, 34G>A. In pleural effusion specimens, PANAMutyper™ showed a better diagnostic performance compared to PNAClamp™.
conclusionPANAMutyper™ had a diagnostic superiority for the detection of KRAS mutations in patients with malignant pleural effusion compared to PNAClamp™, although there was a concordance between PANAMutyper™ and PNAClamp™ results. Therefore, PANAMutyper™ can be used for a more sensitive and accurate detection of KRAS mutations.
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.