ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Comprehensive Development and Implementation of Good Laboratory Practice for NGS Based Targeted Panel on Solid Tumor FFPE Tissues in Diagnostics.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Systematic performance evaluation and application validation of an end-to-end NGS workstation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- RNA-Seq Analysis in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: What Is the Best Sample from Clinical Practice?Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Pathology Laboratory Archives: Conservation Quality of Nucleic Acids and Proteins for NSCLC Molecular Testing.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Optimizing genomic DNA extraction from long-term preserved formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded lung cancer and lymph node tissues.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2024Article
- Performance Characteristics of Oncomine Focus Assay for Theranostic Analysis of Solid Tumors, A (21-Months) Real-Life Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Diagnostics and treatment of ovarian cancer in the era of precision medicine - opportunities and challenges.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- InterMEL: An international biorepository and clinical database to uncover predictors of survival in early-stage melanoma.PloS one · 2023Article
- Special Issue: Next-Generation Sequencing in Tumor Diagnosis and Treatment II.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The speed, accuracy, and increasing affordability of next-generation sequencing (NGS) have revolutionized the advent of precision medicine. To date, standardized validation criteria for diagnostic accreditation do not exist due to variability across the multitude of NGS platforms and within NGS processes. In molecular diagnostics, it is necessary to ensure that the primary material of the FFPE sample has good quality and optimum quantity for the analysis, otherwise the laborious and expensive NGS test may result in unreliable information. Therefore, stringent quality control of DNA and RNA before, during, and after library preparation is an essential parameter. Considering the various challenges with the FFPE samples, we aimed to set a benchmark in QC metrics that can be utilized by molecular diagnostic laboratories for successful library preparation and high-quality NGS data output. In total, 144 DNA and 103 RNA samples of various cancer types with a maximum storage of 2 years were processed for 52 gene focus panels. During the making of DNA and RNA libraries, extensive QC check parameters were imposed at different checkpoints. The decision tree approach can be set as a benchmark for FFPE samples and as a guide to establishing a good clinical laboratory practice for targeted NGS panels.
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.