Trial reportLaboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology2021
An improved assay for detection of theranostic gene translocations and MET exon 14 skipping in thoracic oncology.
Trial report in Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the Cost of Genomic Testing for Biomarker-Driven Therapies in Oncology.Oncology and therapy · 2026Article
- Supporting Biomarker-Driven Therapies in Oncology: A Genomic Testing Cost Calculator.The oncologist · 2023Article
- Detection of sarcoma fusions by a next-generation sequencing based-ligation-dependent multiplex RT-PCR assay.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2022Article
- Targeted therapy of RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Theranostic translocations may be difficult to detect by routine techniques, especially when specimens are exiguous. We recently demonstrated in a series of translocated lung adenocarcinomas that LD-RT-PCR (ligation-dependent reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction) assay could identify ALK, ROS1 and RET rearrangements with 64% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Here, we report an upgraded version of this assay used in a routine prospective cohort of lung carcinomas. Newly diagnosed lung carcinomas referred to the Rouen molecular platform between 15/05/2018 and 15/05/2019 for ALK and ROS1 IHC, genotyping (SNaPshot© +/- high-throughput genotyping) and sometimes FISH (standard routine process) were tested prospectively in parallel with the LD-RT-PCR assay designed to detect at one go ALK, ROS1 and RET translocations and MET exon 14 skipping. 413 tumors from 396 patients were included. LD-RT-PCR had a global sensitivity of 91.43% (standard routine process: 80%), with a specificity of 100%. It detected 15/18 ALK and 4/4 ROS1 translocated tumors, but also 6/6 tumors with MET exon 14 skipping retrieved by genotyping. In addition, it retrieved 7 alterations missed by the routine process, then confirmed by other means: 5 MET exon 14 skipping and 2 RET translocated tumors. Finally, it allowed to deny an effect on MET exon 14 skipping for 8 mutations detected by routine genotyping. We successfully implemented LD-RT-PCR in routine analysis. This technique is cheap, fast, sensitive, specific, and easily upgradable (e.g., NTRK translocations), but still requires IHC to be performed in parallel. Owing to its advantages, we recommend considering it, in parallel with IHC and genotyping, as an excellent cost-effective alternative, for the systematic testing of lung adenocarcinoma, to FISH and to more expensive and complex assays such as RNA-seq.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33495574What 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.