Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35837788›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2023

Sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with receipt of biomarker testing in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Sarah C Markt, Benjamin D Booker, Wyatt Bensken, Nicholas K Schiltz, Fredrick R Schumacher, Johnie Rose, Greg Cooper, J Eva Selfridge, Siran M Koroukian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors.

Sarah C MarktDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2873-0358
Benjamin D BookerDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Wyatt BenskenDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Nicholas K SchiltzDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Fredrick R SchumacherDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Johnie RoseDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Greg CooperDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
J Eva SelfridgeCase Comprehensive Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Siran M KoroukianDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

Funding

TUMOR METABOLISM PROGRAMP30CA043703 · NCI · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI MARK R CHANCE · 1987 to 2026
$142.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA043703
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStandard clinical practice and national guidelines dictate somatic testing of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) tumors to guide appropriate therapy; however, previous studies suggest that not all patients are tested. The objective of this study was to investigate potential differences in testing for mCRC by demographic and clinical factors.

methodsWe performed a retrospective review of de-identified patient data derived from electronic health records (EHRs) of 25,469 patients diagnosed with mCRC between the years 2013 and 2020. Our outcome was a receipt of the following tests: (a) biomarker testing (BRAF, KRAS, NRAS, MMR/MSI) and (b) next-generation sequencing (NGS). We interrogated our data using the machine-learning algorithm Classification and Regression Tree (CART), a unique approach to identifying combinations of, rather than individual demographic and clinical characteristics associated with receipt of testing.

resultsA total of 25,469 patients were identified with mCRC. Of these, 21,133 (83%) received either biomarker testing only (n = 12,485) or any testing (biomarker + NGS) (n = 8648). The proportion of patients who received any testing increased over calendar time for all age, race, and sex categories. Receipt of any testing was highest (90%) among younger and patients with better performance status, and there was no difference in receipt of any testing by race. The highest percentage of NGS testing was among those with better performance status, <70 years old, commercial or other governmental program payers, and low comorbidity burden; however, those who were Black or Hispanic had a lower prevalence of NGS testing than those who were White. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Considerable variations exist in somatic biomarker testing across subgroups of the population. Identification of genomic alterations can aid in determining targeted treatment and improving clinical outcomes; therefore, equitable use of these testing strategies, particularly NGS, is necessary.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsRectal NeoplasmsAgedBiomarkersHumansMutationProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafBiomarkersProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafbiomarkerdisparitiesmetastatic colorectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID35837788
PMCPMC9883565

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.