ArticleInternational journal of medical informatics2020
Rate of change in investigational treatment options: An analysis of reports from a large precision oncology decision support effort.
Article in International journal of medical informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- The Safety and Suitability of DNA Sequencing of Tissue Biopsies Performed on Patients Referred to a Phase I Unit.Cancers · 2024Article
- Overview of the TREC 2020 Precision Medicine Track.The ... text REtrieval conference : TREC. Text REtrieval Conference · 2020Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeGenomic analysis of individual patients is now affordable, and therapies targeting specific molecular aberrations are being tested in clinical trials. Genomically-informed therapy is relevant to many clinical domains, but is particularly applicable to cancer treatment. However, even specialized clinicians need help to interpret genomic data, to navigate the complicated space of clinical trials, and to keep up with the rapidly expanding biomedical literature. To quantitate the cognitive load on treating clinicians, we attempt to quantitate the rate of change in potential treatment options for patients considering genomically-relevant and genomically-selected therapy for cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsTo this end, we analyzed patient-specific reports generated by a precision oncology decision support team (PODS) at a large academic cancer center. Two types of potential treatment options were analyzed: FDA-approved genomically-relevant and genomically-selected therapies and therapies available via clinical trials. We focused on two clinically-actionable alterations: ERBB2 (Her2/neu; amplified vs. non-amplified) and BRAF mutation (V600 vs. non-V600). To determine changes in available treatment options, we grouped patients into similar groups by disease site (ERBB2: breast, gastric and "other"; BRAF: melanoma, non-melanoma).
resultsA total of 2927 reports for 2366 unique patients were generated 8/2016-12/2018. Reports included 9902 gene variants and 150 disease classifications. BRAF mutation and ERBB2 amplification were annotated with therapeutic options in 270 reports (225 unique patients). The median survival time of a therapeutic option was nine months.
conclusionWhen compared to "traditional" clinical practice guideline recommendations, treatment options for personalized cancer therapy change seven times more rapidly; partly due to change in knowledge and partly due to logistics such as clinical trial availability.
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.