ArticleJournal of clinical pathways : the foundation of value-based care2019
Use of biomarker testing in lung cancer among Puerto Rico and Florida Physicians: Results of a comparative study.
Article in Journal of clinical pathways : the foundation of value-based care, 2019. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Physician preferences of biomarker testing strategies in newly diagnosed stage IV non-small cell lung cancer patients.Future oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Physicians Regarding Targeted Drug Therapy for Lung Cancer.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
- Prognostic Factors and Markers in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Recent Progress and Future Challenges.Genes · 2023Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer biomarker-driven therapies are the gold standard of treatment and recent studies suggest a higher prevalence of specific targetable biomarkers among Hispanic/Latinos (H/L) than Non-Hispanic Whites (NHW). The study aimed (1) to identify Florida (FL) and Puerto Rico (PR) physicians' knowledge and perceived value of newer genomic data regarding race/ethnicity in relation to optimal lung cancer treatment and survival; and (2) to identify modifiable practice barriers both across and within each location regarding biomarker testing in lung cancer.
methodsA 25-item survey was administered to a stratified random sample of physicians in FL and PR (medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, pulmonologists, and pathologists). Questions targeted domains of biomarker knowledge, attitudes toward testing, barriers, and practice behaviors regarding lung cancer biomarker testing.
resultsThe response rate was 45%. Participants identified guiding treatment decisions (82%) and personalizing treatments for patients (78%) as key benefits to mutation testing. PR physicians were more likely (p=0.022) to believe H/L had an elevated incidence of targetable epidermal growth factor receptor (
conclusionsPractice behaviors differed by specialty and between locations, and differences were noted concerning physician's preferences for ordering mutation testing, indicating a clear need for education among physicians in both locations. IMPACT: Educating physicians regarding biomarker testing is imperative to improve patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31930172PMC6953751W3005187251What 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.