ArticleExploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy2022
Targeted RNA-sequencing analysis for fusion transcripts detection in tumor diagnostics: assessment of bioinformatic tools reliability in FFPE samples.
Article in Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cancer-associated fusion transcripts: mechanisms, functional roles, and clinical implications.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026Review
- Characteristics of fusion genes in breast cancer.Cancer cell international · 2026Review
- Genomic innovations in cancer prevention, diagnosis, prognosis and precision therapeutics.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Review
- Optimizing bioinformatic workflows to extract clinically usable gene expression data from targeted tumor RNA sequencing panels: comparison with total RNA-seq in cancer samples.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Article
- Multi-Biofluid Approaches for cftDNA and cftRNA Biomarker Detection: Advances in Early Cancer Detection and Monitoring.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Review
- Detecting gene copy number alterations by Oncomine Comprehensive genomic profiling in a comparative study on FFPE tumor samples.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Metabolite profiling and transcriptomic analyses demonstrate the effects of biocontrol agents on alkaloid accumulation in Fritillaria thunbergii.BMC plant biology · 2023Article
- Pan-TRK immunohistochemistry as screening tool for NTRK fusions: A diagnostic workflow for the identification of positive patients in clinical practice.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Diagnostic laboratories are progressively introducing next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies in the routine workflow to meet the increasing clinical need for comprehensive molecular characterization in cancer patients for diagnosis and precision medicine, including fusion-transcripts detection. Nevertheless, the low quality of messenger RNA (mRNA) extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples may affect the transition from traditional single-gene testing approaches [like fluorescence Methods: Herein, NGS data from 190 soft tissue tumors (STTs) and carcinoma cases, discussed in the context of the institutional Molecular Tumor Board, are reported and analyzed by FusionPlex Results: The combination of FusionPlex Conclusions: Albeit ARR and SFU showed lower sensitivity, the use of additional fusion-detection tools can contribute to reinforcing or extending the output obtained by ADx, particularly in the case of low-quality input data. Overall, our results sustain the clinical use of NGS for the detection of fusion transcripts in FFPE material.
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.