ArticleCancer science2023
Clinical predominance of whole-exome sequencing to evaluate microsatellite instability status.
Article in Cancer science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Next-generation sequencing outperforms Proactive Molecular Risk Classifier for Endometrial Cancer (ProMisE) in endometrial cancer molecular classification.BJC reports · 2025Article
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Gastrointestinal Cancers: Current Evidence and Future Directions.Oncology research · 2025Review
- Validation and Implementation of a Somatic-Only Tumor Exome for Routine Clinical Application.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2024Article
- Clinical predominance of whole-exome sequencing to evaluate microsatellite instability status.Cancer science · 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
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The microsatellite instability (MSI)/mismatch repair (MMR) status is one of the critical genomic biomarkers for predicting patient response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). In this study, we aimed to investigate the concordance among the MSIsensor score obtained from whole-exome sequencing (WES), which could be a futuristic clinical cancer sequencing method, using only tumor tissues, MSI-PCR results, and immunohistochemistry (IHC) results to analyze various solid cancer types. We first endeavored to set the cut-off value of MSIsensor to determine functional deficient mismatch repair (f-dMMR) status. The MSI status of 1054 patients analyzed using WES was evaluated using MSIsensor. In addition, 87 of these patients were further analyzed using MSI-PCR and MMR IHC to calculate the sensitivity and specificity of the MSIsensor cut-off score. Our results showed that score 12.5 was an adequate cut-off score equivalent to PCR-confirmed MSS/MSI-low and MSI-high statuses, with sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve values of 95.2%, 100%, and 0.998, respectively. Moreover, we identified false-positive cases of tumors with high mutational burden with an MSIsensor score <12.5, and optional IHC examination could rescue these cases. In conclusion, the MSIsensor score obtained using WES with tumor tissue showed a high clinical validity, with a cut-off value of 12.5 for f-dMMR detection, in combination with optional IHC analysis for MMR. Our novel algorithm will provide insights into the development of ICIs for cancer treatment, particularly when WES becomes a more common cancer genomic test in the near future.
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.