Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32914008›Full record

ArticleJCO precision oncology2019

Use of a Targeted Exome Next-Generation Sequencing Panel Offers Therapeutic Opportunity and Clinical Benefit in a Subset of Patients With Advanced Cancers.

Scott Kopetz, Kenna R Mills Shaw, J Jack Lee, Jiexin Zhang, Beate Litzenburger, Vijaykumar Holla, Walter Kinyua, Emily Broaddus, Molly S Daniels, Funda Meric-Bernstam and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO precision oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Scott KopetzUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Kenna R Mills ShawUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
J Jack LeeUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Jiexin ZhangUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Beate LitzenburgerUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Vijaykumar HollaUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Walter KinyuaUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Emily BroaddusUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Molly S DanielsUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Funda Meric-BernstamUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Russell R BroaddusUniversity of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSmaller hotspot-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels have emerged to support standard of care therapy for patients with cancer. When standard treatments fail, it is unknown whether additional testing using an expanded panel of genes provides any benefit. The purpose of this study was to determine if larger sequencing panels that capture additional actionable genes, coupled with decision support, translates into treatment with matched therapy after frontline therapy has failed. PATIENTS AND

methodsA prospective protocol accrued 521 patients with a wide variety of refractory cancers. NGS testing using a 46- or 50-gene hotspot assay, then a 409-gene whole-exome assay, was sequentially performed in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified clinical laboratory. A decision-support team annotated somatic alterations in clinically actionable genes for function and facilitated therapeutic matching. Survival and the impact of matched therapy use were determined by Kaplan-Meier estimate, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards regression.

resultsThe larger NGS panel identified at least one alteration in an actionable gene not previously identified in the smaller sequencing panel in 214 (41%) of 521 of enrolled patients. After the application of decision support, 41% of the alterations in actionable genes were considered to affect the function of the gene and were deemed actionable. Forty patients (40 of 214 [19%]) were subsequently treated with matched therapy. Treatment with matched therapy was associated with significantly improved overall survival compared with treatment with nonmatched therapy (

conclusionCombining decision support with larger NGS panels that incorporate genes beyond those recommended in current treatment guidelines helped to identify patients who were eligible for matched therapy while improving overall treatment selection and survival. This survival benefit was restricted to a small subset of patients.

Identifiers

PMID32914008
PMCPMC7446317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.