Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35547096›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2022

Comprehensive genome profiling by next generation sequencing of circulating tumor DNA in solid tumors: a single academic institution experience.

Vincenza Caputo, Vincenzo De Falco, Anna Ventriglia, Vincenzo Famiglietti, Erika Martinelli, Floriana Morgillo, Giulia Martini, Carminia Maria Della Corte, Davide Ciardiello, Luca Poliero and 11 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

21 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Vincenza CaputoMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8750-4492
Vincenzo De FalcoMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Anna VentrigliaMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Vincenzo FamigliettiMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Erika MartinelliMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Floriana MorgilloMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Giulia MartiniMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Carminia Maria Della CorteMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Davide CiardielloMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Luca PolieroMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Ferdinando De VitaMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Michele OrdituraMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Morena FasanoMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Renato FrancoPathology Unit, Department of Mental and Physical Health and Preventive Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Michele CaragliaDepartment of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2408-6091
Arianna AvitabileRoche S.p.A., Monza, Italy.
Roberto ScalamognaRoche S.p.A., Monza, Italy.
Beatrice MarchiRoche S.p.A., Monza, Italy.
Fortunato CiardielloMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Napoli, Italy.
Teresa TroianiFull Professor, Medical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Via S. Pansini 5, Napoli 80131, Italy.
Stefania NapolitanoMedical Oncology, Department of Precision Medicine, Università degli Studi della Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli', Via S. Pansini 5, Napoli 80131, Italy.
University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITRoche (Italy) · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Recently, new evidence of the next-generation sequencing (NGS) liquid biopsy utility in clinical practice has been developed. This assay is emerging as a new promising tool to use as a noninvasive biomarker for cancer mutation profiling. Additional data supporting the clinical validity of cell free DNA (cfDNA) based testing is necessary to inform optimal use of these assays in the clinic. Materials and methods: A total of 398 cancer patients were analyzed by FoundationOne Liquid Analysis (F1LA), a genomic profiling assay and by standard NGS diagnostic ThermoFisher platform. The association between diagnostic technique was evaluated using a Poisson regression model. FoundationOne Liquid (F1L) and FoundationOne Liquid CDx (F1LCDx) detect 70 and 324 cancer-related genes alterations, respectively, including genomic signatures tumor fraction, blood tumor mutational burden (only for the 324 genes version), and microsatellite instability high status. Both assays used a single DNA extraction method to obtain cfDNA. The real-life clinical impact and feasibility of F1L and F1LCDx were evaluated across different solid tumors in our department. Results: Between 1 January 2019 and 28 February 2021, 398 samples of different tumor types from 398 patients were analyzed (overall success rate: 92%, in FoundationOne Liquid CDx Analysis success rate: 97%). Most frequent molecular alterations were Conclusions: Although additional studies are needed to better select patients and setting, NGS F1LA is a useful, noninvasive, and repeatable assay to guide therapeutic choice in oncology. It provides a snapshot of cancer heterogeneity profile that could be incorporated in routinely clinical practice.

Indexed as

cfDNAclinical trialsliquid biopsymCRCprecision medicine

Identifiers

PMID35547096
PMCPMC9082754
OpenAlexW4285249625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.