Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35312750›Full record

ArticleClinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research2022

Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Serial Analysis of Clinical Cancer Genomics Data Identifies Changing Treatment Recommendations and Therapeutic Targets.

Catherine G Fischer, Aparna Pallavajjala, LiQun Jiang, Valsamo Anagnostou, Jessica Tao, Emily Adams, James R Eshleman, Christopher D Gocke, Ming-Tseh Lin, Elizabeth A Platz and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 52% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Catherine G FischerCancer Prevention Fellowship Program, Division of Cancer Prevention, NCI, Bethesda, Maryland.
Aparna PallavajjalaDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
LiQun JiangDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Valsamo AnagnostouDepartment of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland.
Jessica TaoDepartment of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland.
Emily AdamsDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
James R EshlemanDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Christopher D GockeDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.ORCID 0000-0002-9541-2192
Ming-Tseh LinDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Elizabeth A PlatzDepartment of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland.ORCID 0000-0003-3676-8954
Rena R XianDepartment of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.ORCID 0000-0001-5532-6524
Johns Hopkins University · USJohns Hopkins Medicine · USNational Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Translational Research Central ServicesP30CA006973 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Rosalie Wollett · 1985 to 2026
$208.6M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006973
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeGiven the pace of predictive biomarker and targeted therapy development, it is unknown whether repeat annotation of the same next-generation sequencing data can identify additional clinically actionable targets that could be therapeutically leveraged. In this study, we sought to determine the predictive yield of serial reanalysis of clinical tumor sequencing data. EXPERIMENTAL

designUsing artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted variant annotation, we retrospectively reanalyzed sequencing data from 2,219 patients with cancer from a single academic medical center at 3-month intervals totaling 9 months in 2020. The yield of serial reanalysis was assessed by the proportion of patients with improved strength of therapeutic recommendations.

resultsA total of 1,775 patients (80%) had ≥1 potentially clinically actionable mutation at baseline, including 243 (11%) patients who had an alteration targeted by an FDA-approved drug for their cancer type. By month 9, the latter increased to 458 (21%) patients mainly due to a single pan-cancer agent directed against tumors with high tumor mutation burden. Within this timeframe, 67 new therapies became available and 45 were no longer available. Variant pathogenicity classifications also changed leading to changes in treatment recommendations for 124 patients (6%).

conclusionsSerial reannotation of tumor sequencing data improved the strength of treatment recommendations (based on level of evidence) in a mixed cancer cohort and showed substantial changes in available therapies and variant classifications. These results suggest a role for repeat analysis of tumor sequencing data in clinical practice, which can be streamlined with AI support.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceNeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorGenomicsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMutationRetrospective StudiesBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID35312750
PMCPMC9167716
OpenAlexW4220908840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.