Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37274253›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023

Analytical validation of the 7-gene biosignature for prediction of recurrence risk and radiation therapy benefit for breast ductal carcinoma

David Dabbs, Karuna Mittal, Scott Heineman, Pat Whitworth, Chirag Shah, Jess Savala, Steven C Shivers, Troy Bremer

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03448926 (A Prospective Registry Study to Evaluate the Effect of the DCISionRT Test on Treatment Decisions in Patients With DCIS Following Breast Conserving Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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.

NCT03448926 recruitingnot on this map

A Prospective Registry Study to Evaluate the Effect of the DCISionRT Test on Treatment Decisions in Patients With DCIS Following Breast Conserving Therapy

TypeobservationalSponsorPreludeDxRan2018 to 2036Enrolled3,000ConditionsDCIS, Stage 0 Breast Cancer, Ductal Breast Carcinoma In SituArmsTreatment recommendation surveys, 7-gene biosignature
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

David DabbsPreludeDx, Laguna Hills, CA, United States.
Karuna MittalPreludeDx, Laguna Hills, CA, United States.
Scott HeinemanPreludeDx, Laguna Hills, CA, United States.
Pat WhitworthUniversity of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, United States.
Chirag ShahDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Jess SavalaPreludeDx, Laguna Hills, CA, United States.
Steven C ShiversPreludeDx, Laguna Hills, CA, United States.
Troy BremerPreludeDx, Laguna Hills, CA, United States.
PreludeDx (United States) · USCleveland Clinic · USUniversity of Tennessee at Knoxville · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Ductal carcinoma Methods: The analytical validation of each molecular assay was performed based on the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines Quality Assurance for Design Control and Implementation of Immunohistochemistry Assays and the College of American Pathologists/American Society of Clinical Oncology (CAP/ASCO) recommendations for analytic validation of immunohistochemical assays. Results: The analytic validation showed that the molecular assays that are part of DCISionRT test have high sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy/reproducibility (≥95%). The analytic precision of the molecular assays under controlled non-standard conditions had a total standard deviation of 6.6 (100-point scale), where the analytic variables (Lot, Machine, Run) each contributed <1% of the total variance. Additionally, the precision in the DCISionRT test result (DS) had a 95%CI ≤0.4 DS units under controlled non-standard conditions (Day, Lot, and Machine) for molecular assays over a wide range of clinicopathologic factor values. Clinical validation showed that the test identified 37% of patients in a low-risk group with a 10-year invasive IBR rate of ~3% and an absolute risk reduction (ARR) from RT of 1% (number needed to treat, NNT=100), while remaining patients with higher DS scores (elevated-risk) had an ARR for RT of 9% (NNT=11) and 96% clinical sensitivity for RT benefit. Conclusion: The analytical performance of the PreludeDx DCISionRT molecular assays was high in representative formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded breast tumor specimens. The DCISionRT test has been analytically validated and has been clinically validated in multiple peer-reviewed published studies.

Indexed as

analytical validationDCIS biomarkers and morphogenetic mechanismsDCIS - breast ductal carcinoma in situDCISionRTimmunohistochemistryradiation therapyradiogenomics

Identifiers

PMID37274253
PMCPMC10236475
OpenAlexW4377096483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.