ArticleCancer research and treatment2022
Comparison of the Data of a Next-Generation Sequencing Panel from K-MASTER Project with That of Orthogonal Methods for Detecting Targetable Genetic Alterations.
Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immunohistochemistry (IHC) Versus Genomic Profiling in Cancer: Roles in Precision Medicine.Cureus · 2026Review
- Article
- Genomic analysis of plasma circulating tumor DNA in patients with heavily pretreated HER2 + metastatic breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Supporting Biomarker-Driven Therapies in Oncology: A Genomic Testing Cost Calculator.The oncologist · 2023Article
- Recommendations for the Use of Next-Generation Sequencing and the Molecular Tumor Board for Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Report from KSMO and KCSG Precision Medicine Networking Group.Cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- Renal metastasis of adenocarcinoma of the gastrointestinal tract with unknown primary site: a case report and review of the literature.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors at 11 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeK-MASTER project is a Korean national precision medicine platform that screened actionable mutations by analyzing next-generation sequencing (NGS) of solid tumor patients. We compared gene analyses between NGS panel from the K-MASTER project and orthogonal methods. MATERIALS AND
methodsColorectal, breast, non-small cell lung, and gastric cancer patients were included. We compared NGS results from K-MASTER projects with those of non-NGS orthogonal methods (KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations in colorectal cancer [CRC]; epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR], anaplastic lymphoma kinase [ALK] fusion, and reactive oxygen species 1 [ROS1] fusion in non-small cell lung cancer [NSCLC], and Erb-B2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (ERBB2) positivity in breast and gastric cancers).
resultsIn the CRC cohort (n=225), the sensitivity and specificity of NGS were 87.4% and 79.3% (KRAS); 88.9% and 98.9% (NRAS); and 77.8% and 100.0% (BRAF), respectively. In the NSCLC cohort (n=109), the sensitivity and specificity of NGS for EGFR were 86.2% and 97.5%, respectively. The concordance rate for ALK fusion was 100%, but ROS1 fusion was positive in only one of three cases that were positive in orthogonal tests. In the breast cancer cohort (n=260), ERBB2 amplification was detected in 45 by NGS. Compared with orthogonal methods that integrated immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization, sensitivity and specificity were 53.7% and 99.4%, respectively. In the gastric cancer cohort (n=64), ERBB2 amplification was detected in six by NGS. Compared with orthogonal methods, sensitivity and specificity were 62.5% and 98.2%, respectively.
conclusionThe results of the K-MASTER NGS panel and orthogonal methods showed a different degree of agreement for each genetic alteration, but generally showed a high agreement rate.
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.