ArticleJTO clinical and research reports2022
Clinical and Economic Impact of Upfront Next-Generation Sequencing for Metastatic NSCLC in East Asia.
Article in JTO clinical and research reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative analysis of ctDNA monitoring strategies in advanced NSCLC with MET exon 14 skipping mutations treated with ensartinib.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- Expert recommendations for biomarker evaluation of advanced non-small cell lung cancer in Thailand.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Review
- Overcoming barriers to advanced biomolecular technologies that inform treatment of solid tumors: a roadmap to access.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Review
- Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Amplification May Lead to Invalid Cobas EGFR Mutation Test v2 Results.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Prospective Upfront Next-Generation Sequencing for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Real-World Outcomes from the Ion Chiricuță Oncology Institute.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Cost Effectiveness of Exclusionary EGFR Testing for Taiwanese Patients Newly Diagnosed with Advanced Lung Adenocarcinoma.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- A cost-effectiveness analysis model of actionable genomic alteration testing strategies incorporating different modalities and sizes of next-generation sequencing panels in non-small-cell lung cancer.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Article
- Real-world biomarker testing patterns: clinical-pathological portrait of early and late non-small cell lung cancer in hub and spoke North Italian centers.Translational lung cancer research · 2024Article
- Article
- Clinical application of liquid biopsy genomic profiling in NSCLC: Asian perspectives.The journal of liquid biopsy · 2024Review
- Effectiveness of next-generation sequencing for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a population-based registry study.ESMO open · 2024Article
- Consensus Statements on Precision Oncology in the China Greater Bay Area.JCO precision oncology · 2023Article
- Article
- Cost Savings of Expedited Care with Upfront Next-Generation Sequencing Testing versus Single-Gene Testing among Patients with Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Based on Current Canadian Practices.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Testing for EGFR Variants in Pleural and Pericardial Effusion Cell-Free DNA in Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.JAMA oncology · 2023Article
- Fast In-House Next-Generation Sequencing in the Diagnosis of Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Hospital Budget Impact Analysis.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Upfront next-generation sequencing (NGS) in patients with metastatic NSCLC has been associated with cost savings and shorter time-to-test results in the United States. Nevertheless, this may not apply in jurisdictions where the prevalence of patients with actionable mutations, cost of health care, and reimbursement models differ. Methods: A decision analytical model was built to compare sequential, panel, exclusionary, and upfront NGS testing in patients with metastatic NSCLC in Hong Kong. In sequential and panel testing, patients were tested for genomic alterations (GAs) with treatment followed by sequential or NGS. In exclusionary testing, Results: Exclusionary testing required the shortest time-to-results (1.6 wk) and was most cost saving. In the scenario where all patients used exclusionary testing, a cost saving of $4.6 million was expected relative to current practice, with 90.7% of actionable and 46.5% of nonactionable GAs detected; when all patients used NGS, it would be $2.9 million more expensive with a 100% GA detection rate. Results were sensitive to testing costs and the proportion of patients that continued testing. Conclusions: Exclusionary testing is the best option in terms of cost and time-to-results in Hong Kong. This finding may be applicable for other Asian countries; however, exclusionary testing does not capture all possible GAs. As more GAs become actionable and the cost of NGS declines, NGS may become a cost-saving option.
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.