Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34170386›Full record

ReviewDer Pathologe2021

[Molecular tumor boards - insights and perspectives].

Silke Laßmann, Michael Hummel

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Pathologe, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Silke LaßmannInstitut für Klinische Pathologie, Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Breisacher Str. 115A, 79106, Freiburg, Deutschland. silke.lassmann@uniklinik-freiburg.de.
Michael HummelInstitut für Pathologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid development of molecular technologies and targeted therapies has fostered the implementation of specialized tumor conferences, known as molecular tumor boards (MTBs). MTBs become particularly important when treatment recommendations are needed based on molecular alterations beyond the approved targeted therapies. While an MTB's goals are based on individualized diagnostics and therapies of tumor patients using innovative technologies and biomarkers, the procedures of MTBs are still quite heterogeneous. This applies to the primary inclusion criteria for tumor patients, the composition of MTBs, the applied diagnostic tests and their assessment and reporting, the evaluation of their clinical value and implementation in a therapeutic strategy, and the associated quality assurance measurements as well as knowledge-gaining, economical, legal, and ethical aspects.This article provides an overview of the spectrum of MTBs, their challenges, and the potential for individualized cancer medicine.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsPrecision MedicineBiomarkers, TumorHumansBiomarkers, TumorBiomarkersMalignant tumorsMolecular pathologyPrecicion medicineRoutine diagnostics

Identifiers

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.