ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Clinical management of molecular alterations identified by high throughput sequencing in patients with advanced solid tumors in treatment failure: Real-world data from a French hospital.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Molecular Tumor Boards clinical impact on patient care and structural features: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Integrating artificial intelligence and multi-omics data for precision oncology in endometrial cancer: a narrative review.Functional & integrative genomics · 2026Review
- Predicting therapeutic responses in metastatic colorectal cancer through personalized functional profiling of patient-derived spheroids.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- Liquid biopsy in gynecological cancers: a translational framework from molecular insights to precision oncology and clinical practice.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2025Review
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of molecular tumor board data on clinical effectiveness and evaluation gaps.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- Exploring the interaction between immune cells in the prostate cancer microenvironment combining weighted correlation gene network analysis and single-cell sequencing: An integrated bioinformatics analysis.Discover oncology · 2024Article
- Paired comparison of the analytical performance between the Oncomine™ Comprehensive Assay v3 and whole-exome sequencing of ovarian cancer tissue.Molecular biology reports · 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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In the context of personalized medicine, screening patients to identify targetable molecular alterations is essential for therapeutic decisions such as inclusion in clinical trials, early access to therapies, or compassionate treatment. The objective of this study was to determine the real-world impact of routine incorporation of FoundationOne analysis in cancers with a poor prognosis and limited treatment options, or in those progressing after at least one course of standard therapy. Methods: A FoundationOneCDx panel for solid tumor or liquid biopsy samples was offered to 204 eligible patients. Results: Samples from 150 patients were processed for genomic testing, with a data acquisition success rate of 93%. The analysis identified 2419 gene alterations, with a median of 11 alterations per tumor (range, 0-86). The most common or likely pathogenic variants were on Conclusions: This study highlights that an organized center with a Multidisciplinary Molecular Tumor Board and an NGS screening system can obtain satisfactory results comparable with those of large centers for including patients in clinical trials.
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.