Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32162803›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2020

From Somatic Variants Toward Precision Oncology: An Investigation of Reporting Practice for Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Circulating Tumor DNA Analysis.

Rongxue Peng, Rui Zhang, Martin P Horan, Li Zhou, Sze Yee Chai, Nalishia Pillay, Kwang Hong Tay, Tony Badrick, Jinming Li

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 47% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. CTC, ctDNA, and Exosome in Thyroid Cancers: A Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Technical and Methodological Aspects of Cell-Free Nucleic Acids Analyzes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  9. Completing the Translation.The oncologist · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Rongxue Peng *National Center for Clinical Laboratories, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Rui Zhang *National Center for Clinical Laboratories, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Martin P Horan *Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Programs, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.
Li ZhouNational Center for Clinical Laboratories, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Sze Yee ChaiRoyal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Programs, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.
Nalishia PillayRoyal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Programs, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.
Kwang Hong TayRoyal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Programs, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.
Tony BadrickRoyal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Programs, St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia.
Jinming LiNational Center for Clinical Laboratories, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Beijing, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-1476-3397
Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia · AUBeijing Hospital · CNNational Center for Clinical Laboratories · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith the accelerated development of next-generation sequencing (NGS), identified variants, and targeted therapies, clinicians who confront the complicated and multifarious genetic information may not effectively incorporate NGS-based circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis into routine patient care. Consequently, standardized ctDNA testing reports are of vital importance. In an effort to guarantee high-quality reporting performance, we conducted an investigation of the current detection and reporting practices for NGS-based ctDNA analysis. MATERIALS AND

methodsA set of simulated ctDNA samples with known variants at known allelic frequencies and a corresponding case scenario were distributed to 66 genetic testing laboratories for ctDNA analysis. Written reports were collected to evaluate the detection accuracy, reporting integrity, and information sufficiency using 21 predefined criteria.

resultsCurrent reporting practices for NGS-based ctDNA analysis were found to be far from satisfactory, especially regarding testing interpretation and methodological details. Only 42.4% of laboratories reported the results in complete concordance with the expected results. Moreover, 74.2% of reports only listed aberrations with direct and well-known treatment consequences for the tumor type in question. Genetic aberrations for which experimental agents and/or drug access programs are available may thus be overlooked. Furthermore, methodological details for the interpretation of results were missing from the majority of reports (87.9%).

conclusionThis proof-of-principle study suggests that the capacity for accurate identification of variants, rational interpretation of genotypes, comprehensive recommendation of potential medications, and detailed description of methodologies need to be further improved before ctDNA analysis can be formally implemented in the clinic. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Accurate, comprehensive, and standardized clinical sequencing reports can help to translate complex genetic information into patient-centered clinical decisions, thereby shepherding precision oncology into daily practice. However, standards, guidelines, and quality requirements for clinical reports of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis are currently absent. By using a set of simulated clinical ctDNA samples and a corresponding case scenario, current practices were evaluated to identify deficiencies in clinical sequencing reports of ctDNA analysis. The recommendations provided here may serve as a roadmap for the improved implementation of NGS-based ctDNA analysis in the clinic.

Indexed as

Circulating Tumor DNANeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMutationPrecision MedicineBiomarkers, TumorCirculating Tumor DNACirculating tumor DNAClinical reportsNext-generation sequencingQuality controlStandardization

Identifiers

PMID32162803
PMCPMC7066684
OpenAlexW2970094550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.