ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Genomic landscape of lung cancer in the young.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Roadmap to Transform Lung Cancer Outcomes: Priorities in Biology, Therapeutic Innovation, Early Detection, Prevention, and Interception.Cancer discovery · 2026Review
- Phenotypic age acceleration and early-onset lung cancer: a case-control and prognostic cohort study involving multiple clinical centres with validation in the UK Biobank.EBioMedicine · 2026Article
- Multi-omics profiling revealsTranslational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Presenting Features and Causes of Diagnostic Delays: A Report From the NUT Carcinoma Registry.JCO precision oncology · 2025Article
- Dual inhibition of BRAF for cancer treatment: advances and therapeutic potential.Future medicinal chemistry · 2025Review
- The Clinical Characteristics, Treatment, and Prognosis of Lung Cancer in Young Patients in the New Era of Cancer Treatment: A Retrospective and Comprehensive Analysis.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Real-world comprehensive genomic and immune profiling reveals distinct age- and sex-based genomic and immune landscapes in tumors of patients with non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lung cancer in the young is a rare entity of great interest due to the high frequency of targetable mutations. In this study, we explored the genomic landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in young patients and compared it with genetic alterations in older patients. Methods: Comparative study of the genomic profile of NSCLC young (≤40 years old) vs older patients (>40 years old) from Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas (INEN) in Lima, Peru. Archival paraffin-embedded tumor samples were profiled with FoundationOne CDx assay to identify short variants alterations (insertions and deletions), copy number variations (CNV), tumor mutational burden and microsatellite instability in 324 driver genes and rearrangements in 28 commonly rearranged genes. A targetable alteration was defined as any alteration in a driver oncogene for which an FDA approved therapy existed at the time of study enrollment. Results: Overall, 62 tumors were profiled, 32 from young and 30 from older patients. All clinicopathological features (smoking status, clinical stage, and histology) were similar between groups, except for gender (65.6% of females in the younger group vs 40% in the older group, P=0.043). At least one actionable mutation was present in 84.4% and 83.3% in younger and older patients, respectively. Alteration rates in the main genes were: BRAF, 3.1%(n=1) vs 0%; EGFR, 46.9% (n=15) vs 43.3% (n=13); ERBB2, 12.5% (n=4) vs 16.7% (n=5); KRAS, 15.6% (n=5) vs 16.7% (n=5); ALK, 6.3% (n=2) vs 3.3% (n=1); RET, 0.0% vs 3.3% (n=1); ROS1, 3.1% (n=1) vs 3.3% (n=1); NTRK1, 0.0% vs 3.3% (n=1) and MET, 3.1% (n=1) vs 13.3% (n=4). Mean TMB was 4.04 Mut/Mb (SD ± 3.98) for young vs 8.06 Mut/Mb (SD ± 9.84) for older patients (P=0.016). There were not significant differences in CNV, frequency of gene rearrangements, or microsatellites instability. Conclusion: NSCLC in the young in our cohort was characterized by a high frequency of actionable genetic aberrations and a low TMB, which was also true for our older patients. The enrichment of actionable mutations in young patients described in other reports might be attributed to differences in the etiology and clinicopathological characteristics between younger and older patients and therefore not be applicable to all populations.
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.