ArticleJCO global oncology2022
Impact of Molecular Tumor Board on the Clinical Management of Patients With Cancer.
Article in JCO global oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Criteria and indicators to evaluate quality of care in genitourinary tumour boards.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024Pooled it
- Optimizing Precision Oncology: Structural Frameworks for Local MTB Integration and Outcome Assessment.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Utility of Germline, Somatic and ctDNA Testing in Adults With Cancer.Cancer medicine · 2025Review
- Bridging the Divide: A Review on the Implementation of Personalized Cancer Medicine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Article
- Incidental pathogenic germline alterations detected through liquid biopsy in patients with solid tumors: prevalence, clinical utility and implications.British journal of cancer · 2024Review
- Discordance in Recommendation Between Next-Generation Sequencing Test Reports and Molecular Tumor Boards in India.JCO global oncology · 2024Article
- Challenges and opportunities for sarcoma care and research in Latin America: a position paper from the LACOG sarcoma group.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2024Review
- Molecular Tumor Board Improves Outcomes for Hispanic Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors.JCO global oncology · 2024Article
- The molecular tumor board as a step in cancer patient management: a southern Italian experience.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Implementation of Precision Oncology in the National Healthcare System: A Statement Proposal Endorsed by Italian Scientific Societies.JCO precision oncology · 2023Article
- Integration of Multi-omic Data in a Molecular Tumor Board Reveals EGFR-Associated ALK-Inhibitor Resistance in a Patient With Inflammatory Myofibroblastic Cancer.The oncologist · 2023Article
- Single-center study on clinicopathological and typical molecular pathologic features of metastatic brain tumor.Journal of pathology and translational medicine · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMultidisciplinary molecular tumor boards (MTBs) help in interpreting complex genomic data generated by molecular tumor profiling and improve patients' access to targeted therapies. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of our institution's MTB on the clinical management of patients with cancer.
methodsThis study was conducted at a tertiary cancer center in India. Cases to be discussed in the MTB were identified by molecular pathologists, scientists, or oncologists. On the basis of the clinical data and molecular test reports, a course of clinical management was recommended and made available to the treating oncologist. We determined the proportion of patients who were recommended a change in the clinical management. We also assessed compliance of the treating oncologists with MTB recommendations.
resultsThere were 339 discussions for 328 unique patients. The median age of the cohort was 54 years (range 17-87), and the majority of the patients were men (65.1%). Of 339 cases, 133 (39.2%) were recommended continuation of ongoing therapy while the remaining 206 (60.7%) were recommended a change in clinical management. Compliance with MTB recommendations for a change in clinical management was 58.5% (79 of 138 evaluable cases). Compliance and implementation for MTB's recommendation to start a new therapy in 104 evaluable cases were 60.5% and 44.2%, respectively. A total of 248 biopsies had at least one actionable mutation. A total of 646 mutations were identified in the cohort, with
conclusionMTBs help in interpreting results of molecular tests, understanding the significance of molecular abnormalities, and assessing the benefits of available targeted therapies and clinical trials in the management of patients with targetable genetic alterations.
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.