Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33380872›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2020

Comprehensive genomic profiling for non-small-cell lung cancer: health and budget impact.

K M Johnston, B S Sheffield, S Yip, P Lakzadeh, C Qian, J Nam

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Cholangiocarcinoma: The era of liquid biopsy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

K M JohnstonBroadstreet Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Vancouver, BC.
B S SheffieldWilliam Osler Health System, Brampton ON.
S YipDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC.
P LakzadehBroadstreet Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Vancouver, BC.
C QianBroadstreet Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Vancouver, BC.
J NamMarket Access and Pricing, Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Mississauga, ON.
Vancouver Coastal Health · CARoche (Canada) · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CAWilliam Osler Health System · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Single-gene tests and hotspot panels targeting specific subsets of biomarkers constitute the Canadian genomic testing landscape for non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc). However, newer testing options such as comprehensive genomic profiling (cgp) offer improved detection rates and identification of multiple classes of genomic alterations in a single assay, minimizing tissue requirements and turnaround time. The objective of the present analysis was to assess the health and budget impacts of adopting cgp testing for nsclc in Canada. Methods: This study assessed the impact of funding the cgp tests FoundationOne CDx and FoundationOne Liquid (Foundation Medicine, Cambridge, MA, U.S.A.) over a 3-year time horizon using a Canadian societal perspective for Ontario. Conventional testing strategies were summarized into two reference scenarios: a series of single-gene tests only, and reflex single-gene testing followed by a hotspot panel for negative results. Four adoption scenarios for cgp testing were considered: replacing all single-gene and hotspot panel testing, replacing hotspot panel testing only, use after negative single-gene and hotspot testing, and use of FoundationOne Liquid in individuals with insufficient tissue for conventional testing. Results: When cgp testing was assumed to replace all conventional testing with 50% uptake, the budget impact per person per year ranged from $0.71 to $0.87, depending on the reference scenario, with a 3-year gain of 680.9 life-years and 3831 working days over the full cohort. Conclusions: Given the present testing landscape for patients with nsclc in Canada, listing cgp testing could optimize the selection of appropriately targeted treatments, and thus add life-years and productivity for this population, with a minimal budget impact.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsGenetic TestingGenomicsHumansOntarioCanadian private payersFoundation Medicinegenomic profilinghealth and budget impact analyseshotspot panelsnext-generation sequencingnon-small-cell lung cancersingle-gene tests

Identifiers

PMID33380872
PMCPMC7755443
OpenAlexW3113469765

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.