ReviewJCO clinical cancer informatics2019
Operationalization of Next-Generation Sequencing and Decision Support for Precision Oncology.
Review in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognosis and treatment response stratification according to loss of proofreading (LOP)Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2025Article
- AI cancer driver mutation predictions are valid in real-world data.Nature communications · 2025Article
- PTEN pathogenic variants are associated with poor prognosis in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma.BJC reports · 2024Article
- Sex-dependent Prognosis of Patients with Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcoma.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2024Article
- Actionability classification of variants of unknown significance correlates with functional effect.NPJ precision oncology · 2023Article
- Understanding inequities in precision oncology diagnostics.Nature cancer · 2023Review
- Article
- Implementation and Clinical Adoption of Precision Oncology Workflows Across a Healthcare Network.The oncologist · 2022Article
- Challenges and opportunities associated with the MD Anderson IMPACT2 randomized study in precision oncology.NPJ precision oncology · 2022Article
- Review
- Molecular-based precision oncology clinical decision making augmented by artificial intelligence.Emerging topics in life sciences · 2021Review
- Novel SLC12A2-ROS1 Fusion in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with a Significant Response to Crizotinib: The Importance of Choosing the Appropriate Next-Generation Sequencing Assay.The oncologist · 2021Article
- Review
- Integrating Somatic and Germline Next-Generation Sequencing Into Routine Clinical Oncology Practice.JCO precision oncology · 2021Review
- Germline Testing Data Validate Inferences of Mutational Status for Variants Detected From Tumor-Only Sequencing.JCO precision oncology · 2021Article
- Impact of Precision Medicine on Clinical Outcomes: A Single-Institution Retrospective Study.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Microbial Genomics as a Catalyst for Targeted Antivirulence Therapeutics.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Direct comparison shows that mRNA-based diagnostics incorporate information which cannot be learned directly from genomic mutations.BMC bioinformatics · 2020Article
- A Review of Precision Oncology Knowledgebases for Determining the Clinical Actionability of Genetic Variants.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic testing has become a part of routine oncology care and plays critical roles in diagnosis, prognostic assessment, and treatment selection. Thus, in parallel, the variety of genomic testing providers and sequencing platforms has grown exponentially. Selection of the best-fit panel for each case can be daunting, with many factors to consider. Among them is whether alteration interpretation and therapy/clinical trial matching are included and/or sufficient. In this article, we review some common commercially available sequencing platforms for the genes and types of alterations tested, samples needed, and reporting content provided. We review publicly available resources for a do-it-yourself approach to alteration interpretation when it is not provided or when supplemental research is needed, along with resources to identify genomically matched treatment options that are approved and/or investigational. However, with both commercially provided interpretation and publicly available resources, there are still caveats and limitations that can stem from insufficient or ambiguous nomenclature as well as from the presentation of information. Use cases in which clinical decision making was affected are discussed. After treatment options are identified, it is important to assess the level of evidence for use within the patient's tumor type and molecular profile. However, numerous level-of-evidence scales have been published in recent years, so we provide a publicly available tool to facilitate interoperability. The level of evidence, along with other factors, such as allelic frequency and copy number, can be used to prioritize treatment options when multiple are identified.
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.