ArticleTargeted oncology2022
Comparing Survival Outcomes for Advanced Cancer Patients Who Received Complex Genomic Profiling Using a Synthetic Control Arm.
Article in Targeted oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Economic Evaluation of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling in an Advanced Solid Cancer Population.JAMA network open · 2025Observational
- The role of targetable biomarker alterations in overall survival for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a large integrated health system.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Comprehensive genomic profiling of Taiwanese triple-negative breast cancer samples with medium- and large-sized sequencing panels: A comparative study implicating treatment allocations.Biomedical reports · 2025Article
- Synthetic Data in Healthcare and Drug Development: Definitions, Regulatory Frameworks, Issues.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2025Review
- Article
- Examining external control arms in oncology: A scoping review of applications to date.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Real-World Impact of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling on Biomarker Detection, Receipt of Therapy, and Clinical Outcomes in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.JCO precision oncology · 2024Article
- Clinical Impact of Comprehensive Molecular Profiling in Adolescents and Young Adults with Sarcoma.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- First-Line Genomic Profiling in Previously Untreated Advanced Solid Tumors for Identification of Targeted Therapy Opportunities.JAMA network open · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComplex genomic profiling (CGP) has transformed cancer treatment decision making, yet there is a lack of robust and quantifiable evidence for how utilisation of CGP improves patient outcomes.
objectiveThis study evaluated cohort level clinical effectiveness of CGP to improve overall survival (OS) in real-world advanced cancer patients using a registry-based matched control population. PATIENTS AND
methodsTwo cohorts of advanced and refractory cancer patients were seen in consecutive series for early phase trial enrolment consideration. The first cohort (CGP group) accessed tumour profiling via a research study; while the second cohort that followed was not profiled. Overall survival between cohorts was compared using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models. Potential confounding was analysed and adjusted for using stabilised weights based on propensity scores.
resultsWithin the CGP group, 25 (17.6%) patients received treatment informed by CGP results and this subgroup had significantly improved survival compared with CGP patients in whom results did not impact their treatment (unadjusted HR = 0.44, (0.22-0.88), p = 0.02). However, when comparing the entire CGP cohort with the No CGP cohort, no significant survival benefit was evident with adjusted median OS for CGP of 13.5 months (9.2-17.0) compared with 11.0 (9.2-17.4) for No CGP (adjusted HR = 0.92, (0.65-1.30), p = 0.63).
conclusionsThis study utilised real-world data to simulate a control arm and quantify the clinical effectiveness of genomic testing. The magnitude of survival benefit for patients who had CGP result-led treatments was insufficient to drive an overall survival gain for the entire tested population. Translation of CGP into clinics requires strategies to ensure higher rates of tested patients obtain clinical benefit to deliver on the value proposition of CGP in an advanced cancer population.
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.