Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35267442›Full record

ArticleCancers2022

Evaluation of the Clinical Utility of Genomic Profiling to Inform Selection of Clinical Trial Therapy in Salivary Gland Cancer.

Samuel Rack, Laura Feeney, Brindley Hapuarachi, Helen Adderley, Laura Woodhouse, Guy Betts, George J Burghel, Kevin J Harrington, Robert Metcalf

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Contemporary Management of Malignancies of the Parotid Gland: A State-of-the-Art Review.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The evolving landscape of salivary gland tumors.CA: a cancer journal for clinicians
    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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Samuel RackDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Christie Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M20 4BX, UK.
Laura FeeneyThe Northern Ireland Cancer Centre, Belfast City Hospital, Lisburn Road, Belfast BT9 7AB, UK.
Brindley HapuarachiSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Glossop Road, Broomhall, Sheffield S10 2JF, UK.
Helen AdderleyDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Christie Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M20 4BX, UK.
Laura WoodhouseDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Christie Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M20 4BX, UK.
Guy BettsDepartment of Adult Histopathology, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9WL, UK.
George J BurghelNorth West Genomic Laboratory Hub, Manchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford Road Rd, Manchester M13 9WL, UK.
Kevin J HarringtonThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Fulham Rd., London SW3 6JJ, UK.
Robert MetcalfDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Christie Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester M20 4BX, UK.
The Christie Hospital · GBManchester University NHS Foundation Trust · GBRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GBSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Ulster · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For most patients with salivary gland cancer, there are no effective standard systemic therapies. Although clinical trials of biomarker-led drug therapies have delivered significant recent advances, there remains a need to understand the clinical utility of genomic profiling of cancer as a means to match patients with recurrent or metastatic salivary gland cancer to clinical trial therapies. In total, 209 patients with salivary gland cancers were profiled with 24 gene (n = 209)) and >325 gene (n = 32) DNA-based next-generation sequencing panels. A retrospective systematic evaluation was performed to identify the frequency of available matched drug therapies within clinical trials based on the results. The matches were then stratified based upon the level of evidence supporting the drug−biomarker combination being investigated using the ESMO Scale for Clinical Actionability of Molecular Targets (ESCAT) to determine the strength of the clinical rationale for each gene−drug match identified. DNA-based next generation sequencing (NGS) analysis was successful in 175/209 (84%) patients with salivary gland cancer. Using the 24-gene NGS panel, actionable alterations were identified in 27% (48/175) patients. Alterations were most frequent in salivary duct carcinoma (88%) characterized by TP53 and/or PIK3CA mutations, with matched trials available for 63% (10/16). In ACC, biomarker-matched trials were available for 7% (8/115), and no genomic alterations were found in 96/115 (83%) of ACC patients. TP53 was the most frequently altered gene across all subtypes; however, there were no trials recruiting based on TP53 status. In 32 ACC patients with no genomic alterations using the 24-gene panel, a broader (>325 gene) panel identified alterations in 87% (27/32) of cases with biomarker-matched trials available in 40% (13/32) cases. This study identified that genomic profiling using focused (24-gene) NGS panels has potential utility in matching to trial therapies for most patients with non-ACC salivary gland cancer. For patients with ACC, broader genomic profiling has demonstrated added clinical utility. We describe the application of an approach to classification of levels of evidence which may be helpful to inform the clinician and patient decision making around the selection of clinical trial therapies.

Indexed as

adenoid cystic carcinomabiomarkerclinical trialsmolecular profilingsalivary duct carcinomasalivary gland cancer

Identifiers

PMID35267442
PMCPMC8909363
OpenAlexW4213249989

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.