ArticleUrology practice2023
Positive Impact of Implementing a Comprehensive Genetic Testing Protocol for Prostate Cancer Patients in a Multi-disciplinary Uro-oncology Practice.
Article in Urology practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Germline testing for prostate cancer: current state and opportunities for enhanced access.EBioMedicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPrior to the 2017 Philadelphia Consensus Conference guidelines, genetic testing for prostate cancer was conducted based on personal and family history of malignancy pursuant to National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommendations. The updated 2019 guidelines addressed the subject of genetic testing by endorsing point-of-care genetic testing and referral to genetic counseling. However, limited literature is available regarding successful implementation of a streamlined method for genetic testing. This paper explores the benefits of implementing an on-site guideline-based genetic testing process for prostate cancer patients.
methodsData were retrospectively reviewed for 552 prostate cancer patients seen in a uro-oncology clinic since January 2017. Prior to September 2018 genetic testing was recommended based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, and swabs for testing were procured off-site 1 mile from the clinic (n = 78). After September 2018 genetic testing was recommended based on the Philadelphia Consensus Conference guidelines, and swabs for testing were procured at the clinic itself (n = 474).
resultsA statistically significant increase in testing compliance was observed after the implementation of on-site, guideline-based testing. Genetic testing compliance increased from 33.3% to 98.7%. The time to receive the genetic test results was also reduced from 38 days to 21 days.
conclusionsThe implementation of an on-site, guideline-based genetic testing model for prostate cancer patients significantly improved compliance with genetic testing to 98.7% and decreased the time to receive genetic test results by 17 days. Adopting a guideline-based model with on-site genetic testing can significantly improve the detection rate for pathogenic and actionable mutations and increase the utilization of targeted therapies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37103436What 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.