ArticleJCO precision oncology2022
Programmatic Efforts Increase Adoption of Genomic Precision Medicine in Cancer Care in a Community Cancer Center.
Article in JCO precision oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Validation of histopathology-based deep learning algorithms for detection of actionable non-small cell lung cancer biomarkers.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
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
purposeThe adoption of precision medicine (PMed) depends on the critical curation of data and interpretation of genomic results. Herein, we sought to study the effect of a coordinated multidisciplinary program to assess results in a community cancer center clinic.
methodsIn a retrospective review from July 2018 to July 2021, we analyzed the implementation of a multidisciplinary PMed program in a tertiary referral community cancer center. Germline genetics test results have been reviewed since 2017.
resultsA total of 3,131 tumor samples were analyzed by large panel somatic genomic testing through commercial laboratories during the study period. The number of reviewed cases rose from 661 in the first year to 1,532 in year 3. Additional recommendations beyond what was reported by the commercial laboratory were made in 42.9% of cases. Referrals to the hereditary cancer program for germline testing increased by 32% from the 2017 baseline. Process improvement efforts reduced the rate of DNA quantity nonsufficient for testing to 3.3% compared with a national average of 4.89%. The average time from receipt of orders to issuing of a report of the somatic panel was 15.5 days, compared with 19.1 days for other institutions using the same laboratory. The PMed team has been critical in support of clinical research by assisting in trial procurement and feasibility assessment to the identification of patients for clinical trials.
conclusionThe use of somatic genomic testing is increasing at our cancer center. Education and in-depth analysis of the data are valued by cancer physicians. The development and implementation of a PMed program has demonstrated improved physicians' understanding of molecular testing, resulting in improved outcomes for patients.
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.