ArticleCureus2023
Role of Tumor Molecular Profiling With FoundationOne®CDx in Advanced Solid Tumors: A Single-Centre Experience From Romania.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond the Scan: Adapting Multimodal Lung Cancer Screening for Central and Eastern Europe-Overcoming Systemic Barriers and Epidemiological Confounders.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Advances in personalized medicine: translating genomic insights into targeted therapies for cancer treatment.Annals of translational medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background In the field of precision oncology, comprehensive genomic profiling tests play a very important role by providing a complex understanding of the molecular characteristics of malignant tumors. Therefore, next-generation sequencing (NGS) has become a valuable tool in various aspects of cancer care from diagnosis and monitoring to treatment selection and personalized cancer treatment. Our aim was to evaluate the role of tumor molecular profiling in tailored treatment selection. Methods In our study, we conducted a retrospective analysis to assess the practicality of utilizing NGS testing in patients with metastatic solid tumors. The genomic testing was performed on blood or tissue samples from a fresh biopsy, less than six months old, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1 was evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Results A total of 75 tests were performed on 66 patients between 2019 and 2022, with a success rate of 80%. The most common pathologies were gastro-intestinal tract cancer (26%), breast cancer (14%), non-small cell lung cancer (11%), and pancreatic cancer (11%). There were 9% liquid biopsies and 91% tissue biopsies. From all 66 patients tested, 55 had at least one genetic alteration. The most frequent genetic alteration found was TP53 (n=32) followed by KRAS (n=15) and BRCA1/2 (n=12) mutations. There were nine patients tested (14%) that presented a high tumor mutational burden, and only one patient presented high microsatellite instability. There were 37 patients (56%) with actionable alterations found from which 14 received matched therapy and four patients were enrolled in clinical trials. The NGS testing played a significant role in determining the next therapeutic strategy in 20 out of 66 patients (30.3%). Conclusion From all the patients included in our analysis, 83% had at least one mutation that is known to be of pathogenic significance but only 23% received treatment selected by the analysis of the tumor's genome, and only 6% were included in a clinical trial. This moderate success of personalized medicine using NGS testing highlights the importance of evaluating the factors that could lead to further improvement.
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.