Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34819573›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Incorporation of next-generation sequencing in clinical practice using solid and liquid biopsy for patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Mariana Bastos-Oreiro, Julia Suárez-González, Cristina Andrés-Zayas, Natalia Carolina Carrión, Solsiré Moreno, Diego Carbonell, María Chicano, Paula Muñiz, Laura Sanz, Francisco Javier Diaz-Crespo and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mariana Bastos-Oreiro *Department of Hematology, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, C/ Doctor Esquerdo 46, 28007, Madrid, Spain. marianabeatriz.bastos@salud.madrid.org.
Julia Suárez-González *Gregorio Marañón Health Research Institute (IiSGM), Madrid, Spain.
Cristina Andrés-ZayasGregorio Marañón Health Research Institute (IiSGM), Madrid, Spain.
Natalia Carolina CarriónGenomics Unit, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, Gregorio Marañón Health Research Institute (IiSGM), Madrid, Spain.
Solsiré MorenoDeparment of Pathology, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Diego CarbonellDepartment of Hematology, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, C/ Doctor Esquerdo 46, 28007, Madrid, Spain.
María ChicanoDepartment of Hematology, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, C/ Doctor Esquerdo 46, 28007, Madrid, Spain.
Paula MuñizDepartment of Hematology, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, C/ Doctor Esquerdo 46, 28007, Madrid, Spain.
Laura SanzDepartment of Hematology, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, C/ Doctor Esquerdo 46, 28007, Madrid, Spain.
Francisco Javier Diaz-CrespoDeparment of Pathology, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Javier MenarguezGregorio Marañón Health Research Institute (IiSGM), Madrid, Spain.
José Luis Diez-MartínDepartment of Hematology, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, C/ Doctor Esquerdo 46, 28007, Madrid, Spain.
Ismael Buño *Department of Hematology, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, C/ Doctor Esquerdo 46, 28007, Madrid, Spain.
Carolina Martínez-Laperche *Department of Hematology, Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital, C/ Doctor Esquerdo 46, 28007, Madrid, Spain.
Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón · ESUniversidad Complutense de Madrid · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although next-generation sequencing (NGS) data on lymphomas require further validation before being implemented in daily practice, the clinical application of NGS can be considered right around the corner. The aim of our study was to validate an NGS lymphoid panel for tissue and liquid biopsy with the most common types of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma [follicular lymphoma (FL) and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL)]. In this series, 372 somatic alterations were detected in 93.6% (44/47) of the patients through tissue biopsy. In FL, we identified 93 somatic alterations, with a median of 7.4 mutations per sample. In DLBCL, we detected 279 somatic variants with a median of 8.6 mutations (range 0-35). In 92% (24/26) of the cases, we were able to detect some variant in the circulating tumor DNA. We detected a total of 386 variants; 63.7% were detected in both types of samples, 13.2% were detected only in the circulating tumor DNA, and 23% were detected only in the tissue biopsy. We found a correlation between the number of circulating tumor DNA mutations, advanced stage, and bulky disease. The genetic alterations detected in this panel were consistent with those previously described at diagnosis. The liquid biopsy sample is therefore a complementary tool that can provide new genetic information, even in cases where a solid biopsy cannot be performed or an insufficient sample was obtained. In summary, we describe and analyze in this study the findings and difficulties encountered when incorporating liquid biopsy into clinical practice in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma at diagnosis.

Indexed as

DNA Mutational AnalysisHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMutationBiomarkers, TumorHumansLiquid BiopsyLymphoma, FollicularLymphoma, Large B-Cell, DiffusePredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID34819573
PMCPMC8613247
OpenAlexW3216940466

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.