ArticleJCO global oncology2024
Molecular Tumor Board Improves Outcomes for Hispanic Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors.
Article in JCO global oncology, 2024. 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.
- Making sense of commercial genomic reports in oncology: a structured approach from clinical practice.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Comprehensive genomic profiling reveals a unique genomic landscape in solid tumors in an Indian cancer cohort of 1000 patients: a single institutional experience.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Real-world characteristics and outcomes of ERBB2-mutant NSCLC in Latin American patients (CLICaP).The oncologist · 2025Article
- Cancer genomics and bioinformatics in Latin American countries: applications, challenges, and perspectives.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMultidisciplinary molecular tumor boards (MTBs) decode complex genomic data into clinical recommendations. Although MTBs are well-established in the oncology practice in developed countries, this strategy needs to be better explored in developing countries. Herein, we describe the possible benefits and limitations of the first MTB established in Colombia.
methodsDemographic, clinical, and genomic information was collected between August 2020 and November 2021. By mid-2020, an MTB strategy was created to discuss clinical cases with one or more genomic alterations identified by next-generation sequencing using an open-access virtual platform. We characterized the patient population as benefiting from the recommended treatment option. We assessed the benefits and access to available targeted therapies that have the potential to change clinical management by making recommendations to treating oncologists on the basis of genomic profiling. However, we did not assess the treatment oncologists' compliance with MTB recommendations because they were not intended to replace clinical judgment/standard of care.
resultsA total of 146 patients were included in the discussions of the MTB. The median age was 59 years, and 59.6% were women. Genomic results prompting a change in therapeutic decisions were obtained in 53.1% of patients (95% CI, 44.9 to 61.3). The most prevalent malignancy was non-small-cell lung cancer (51%). Other malignancies represented 60%, 50%, and 30% of patients with soft-tissue sarcomas, brain tumors, and breast cancer, respectively.
conclusionUsing an open-access virtual platform, MTBs were feasible in low- and middle-income countries on the basis of the capability to provide the benefits and access to available targeted therapies that are not standard of care. Furthermore, MTB recommendations were made available to the treating oncologist in different locations across Colombia, providing the option to modify clinical management in most of these patients.
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.