Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37099070›Full record

ArticleMolecular diagnosis & therapy2023

Validation of a Transcriptome-Based Assay for Classifying Cancers of Unknown Primary Origin.

Jackson Michuda, Alessandra Breschi, Joshuah Kapilivsky, Kabir Manghnani, Calvin McCarter, Adam J Hockenberry, Brittany Mineo, Catherine Igartua, Joel T Dudley, Martin C Stumpe and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular diagnosis & therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Shared PRAME epitopes are T-cell targets in NUT carcinoma.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Jackson MichudaTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Alessandra BreschiTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Joshuah KapilivskyTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Kabir ManghnaniTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Calvin McCarterTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Adam J HockenberryTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Brittany MineoTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Catherine IgartuaTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Joel T DudleyTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Martin C StumpeTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Nike BeaubierTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Maryam ShiraziTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Ryan JonesTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Elizabeth MorencyTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Kim BlackwellTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Justin GuinneyTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA.
Kyle A BeauchampTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA. kyle.beauchamp@tempus.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6095-8788
Timothy TaxterTempus Labs, Chicago, IL, 60654, USA. tim@tempus.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCancers assume a variety of distinct histologies, and may originate from a myriad of sites including solid organs, hematopoietic cells, and connective tissue. Clinical decision-making based on consensus guidelines such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) is often predicated on a specific histologic and anatomic diagnosis, supported by clinical features and pathologist interpretation of morphology and immunohistochemical (IHC) staining patterns. However, in patients with nonspecific morphologic and IHC findings-in addition to ambiguous clinical presentations such as recurrence versus new primary-a definitive diagnosis may not be possible, resulting in the patient being categorized as having a cancer of unknown primary (CUP). Therapeutic options and clinical outcomes are poor for patients with CUP, with a median survival of 8-11 months.

methodsHere, we describe and validate the Tempus Tumor Origin (Tempus TO) assay, an RNA-sequencing-based machine learning classifier capable of discriminating between 68 clinically relevant cancer subtypes. Model accuracy was assessed using primary and/or metastatic samples with known subtype.

resultsWe show that the Tempus TO model is 91% accurate when assessed on both a retrospectively held out cohort and a set of samples sequenced after model freeze that collectively contained 9210 total samples with known diagnoses. When evaluated on a cohort of CUPs, the model recapitulated established associations between genomic alterations and cancer subtype. DISCUSSION: Combining diagnostic prediction tests (e.g., Tempus TO) with sequencing-based variant reporting (e.g., Tempus xT) may expand therapeutic options for patients with cancers of unknown primary or uncertain histology.

Indexed as

Neoplasms, Unknown PrimaryTranscriptomeGene Expression ProfilingGenomicsHumansRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID37099070
PMCPMC10300170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.