ArticleAmerican journal of clinical pathology2020
Comparison of Tissue Molecular Biomarker Testing Turnaround Times and Concordance Between Standard of Care and the Biocartis Idylla Platform in Patients With Colorectal Cancer.
Article in American journal of clinical pathology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison and Validation of Rapid Molecular Testing Methods for Theranostic Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Alterations in Lung Cancer: Idylla versus Digital Droplet PCR.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Article
- Comparison between Three Different Techniques for the Detection of EGFR Mutations in Liquid Biopsies of Patients with Advanced Stage Lung Adenocarcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Article
- A graphical, interactive and GPU-enabled workflow to process long-read sequencing data.BMC genomics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
39 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesManagement of colorectal cancer warrants mutational analysis of KRAS/NRAS when considering anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy and BRAF testing for prognostic stratification. In this multicenter study, we compared a fully integrated, cartridge-based system to standard-of-care assays used by participating laboratories.
methodsTwenty laboratories enrolled 874 colorectal cancer cases between November 2017 and December 2018. Testing was performed on the Idylla automated system (Biocartis) using the KRAS and NRAS-BRAF cartridges (research use only) and results compared with in-house standard-of-care testing methods.
resultsThere were sufficient data on 780 cases to measure turnaround time compared with standard assays. In-house polymerase chain reaction (PCR) had an average testing turnaround time of 5.6 days, send-out PCR of 22.5 days, in-house Sanger sequencing of 14.7 days, send-out Sanger of 17.8 days, in-house next-generation sequencing (NGS) of 12.5 days, and send-out NGS of 20.0 days. Standard testing had an average turnaround time of 11 days. Idylla average time to results was 4.9 days with a range of 0.4 to 13.5 days.
conclusionsThe described cartridge-based system offers rapid and reliable testing of clinically actionable mutation in colorectal cancer specimens directly from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue sections. Its simplicity and ease of use compared with other molecular techniques make it suitable for routine clinical laboratory testing.
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.