ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2020
Adopting solutions for annotation and reporting of next generation sequencing in clinical practice.
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Merits of Available Mortality Data Sources for Clinical Research.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With advancements in the understanding of human cancers (carcinomas, sarcomas, and hematopoietic malignancies), molecular profiling, especially by Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), is playing an increasingly important role in the diagnosis, prognostication, and therapeutic management of cancer patients. The final and critical step in NGS is the annotation of detected variants and reporting of their clinical significance. Automated bioinformatics tools are available to assist with annotation, but the final responsibility for interpretation and validation of the annotation rests with the pathologist who may be constrained by the pressures of clinical sign-out and limited training in NGS. In this manuscript, we detail our experience in outsourcing variant annotation to a high-quality vendor to improve quality, standardize reporting, and decrease turn-around time of NGS reporting in clinical practice. We describe the composition of the evaluation team, steps that should be taken to evaluate potential annotation vendors, and detailed parameters that should be addressed before contracting with a vendor to guarantee the clinical reliability of the reported annotations.
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.