ArticleThoracic cancer2022
Comparison of next-generation sequencing and cobas EGFR mutation test v2 in detecting EGFR mutations.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for identifying actionable mutations in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Pooled it
- Comparing Real-Time PCR and Amplicon-Based NGS for RoutineDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Clinical Utility of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Thoracic cancer · 2026Article
- Advances in cancer genomics and precision oncology.Genes & genomics · 2025Review
- Detection of Overlooked Rare EGFR Mutations in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Using Multigene Testing.Thoracic cancer · 2025Article
- Article
- The prevalence and clinical significance of EGFR mutations in non-small cell lung cancer patients in Egypt: a screening study.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
- The Current Achievements of Multi-Gene Panel Tests in Clinical Settings for Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Cancers · 2024Article
- Comparison between next-generation sequencing and multiplex polymerase chain reaction assays for nonsmall-cell lung cancer molecular diagnosis.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Clinical utility of the Oncomine Dx Target Test multi-CDx system and the possibility of utilizing those original sequence data.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Mutation profile and programmed death ligand 1 status of patients with non-small cell lung cancer diagnosed with "adenocarcinoma" and "non-small cell carcinoma favor adenocarcinoma".Thoracic cancer · 2024Article
- Long-term survival after stereotactic body radiotherapy combined with immunotherapy plus anti-angiogenesis therapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer andTranslational lung cancer research · 2023Article
- Clinical importance of the range of detectable variants between the Oncomine Dx target test and a conventional single-gene test for EGFR mutation.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
- FoundationOne CDx detected an uncovered variant ofRespiratory medicine case reports · 2023Article
- Comparison of next-generation sequencing and cobas EGFR mutation test v2 in detecting EGFR mutations.Thoracic cancer · 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs the number of genetic mutations that must be tested increases, the Oncomine Dx Target test (ODxTT), which can simultaneously detect multiple cancer-related genes is becoming the main test used in preference to single-molecule testing. In this study, we evaluated the performance of ODxTT and cobas EGFR mutation test v2 (cobas EGFR), one of the single-molecule tests, in detecting EGFR mutations.
methodsSamples from 211 patients diagnosed with NS-NSCLC were tested simultaneously or sequentially with the cobas EGFR mutation test and ODxTT. We compared the success and detection rates of both tests and evaluated their equivalence by determining the concordance rate and k-coefficient of both tests.
resultsThe success rate in detecting EGFR mutations was 95.7% for ODxTT and 100% for cobas EGFR. EGFR mutations were detected in 26.5% of samples with ODxTT and in 28.0% with cobas EGFR. For the 200 samples successfully analyzed with both tests, the concordance rate and k-coefficient were 97.5% and 0.938, respectively. ODxTT failed to detect two exon 19 deletion mutations (p.E746_P753delinsVS and p.E746_P753delinsLS), and cobas EGFR failed to detect three instances of an exon 19 deletion (p.L747_P753delinsS), L861R, and an exon 20 insertion. DISCUSSION: The success rate of ODxTT is slightly inferior to that of cobas EGFR. ODxTT shared a high concordance rate and k-coefficient with cobas EGFR in detecting EGFR mutations, but discordant results between the two tests were observed in a few cases, mainly due to the difference of detectable EGFR variants.
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.