ArticleJCO precision oncology2019
Prospective Decision Analysis Study of Clinical Genomic Testing in Metastatic Breast Cancer: Impact on Outcomes and Patient Perceptions.
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 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers and facilitators to next-generation sequencing use in United States oncology settings: a systematic review.Future oncology (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Application of a concise video to improve patient understanding of tumor genomic testing in community and academic practice settings.PloS one · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Article
- Knowledge and Awareness of Cancer Genome Profiling Tests among Japanese Patients with Cancer.Clinics and practice · 2024Article
- A video intervention to improve patient understanding of tumor genomic testing in patients with cancer.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Decision Impact Analysis to Measure the Influence of Molecular Signature Response Classifier Testing on Treatment Selection in Rheumatoid Arthritis.Rheumatology and therapy · 2024Article
- Comprehensive Review on the Clinical Impact of Next-Generation Sequencing Tests for the Management of Advanced Cancer.JCO precision oncology · 2023Review
- Patient Understanding of Tumor Genomic Testing: A Quality Improvement Effort.JCO oncology practice · 2023Review
- Expert Discussion: Predictive Markers.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Multi-Gene Testing Overview with a Clinical Perspective in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Triple-negative breast cancer: promising prognostic biomarkers currently in development.Expert review of anticancer therapy · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the impact of targeted DNA sequencing on selection of cancer therapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND
methodsIn this prospective, single-center, single-arm trial, patients with MBC were enrolled within 10 weeks of starting a new therapy. At enrollment, tumor samples underwent next-generation sequencing for any of 315 cancer-related genes to high depth (> 500×) using FoundationOne CDx. Sequencing results were released to providers at the time of disease progression, and physician treatment recommendations were assessed via questionnaire. We evaluated three prespecified questions to assess patients' perceptions of genomic testing.
resultsIn all, 100 patients underwent genomic testing, with a median of five mutations (range, 0 to 13 mutations) detected per patient. Genomic testing revealed one or more potential therapies in 98% of patients (98 of 100), and 60% of patients (60 of 100) had one or more recommended treatments with level I/II evidence for actionability. Among the 94 genomic text reports that were released, there was physician questionnaire data for 87 patients (response rate, 92.6%) and 31.0% of patients (27 of 87) had treatment change recommended by their physician. Of these, 37.0% (10 of 27) received the treatment supported by genomic testing. We did not detect a statistically significant difference in time-to-treatment failure (log-rank
conclusionIn this prospective study, genomic profiling of tumors in patients with MBC frequently identified potential treatments and resulted in treatment change in a minority of patients. Patients whose therapy was not changed on the basis of genomic testing seemed to have a decrease in confidence of treatment success.
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.