ArticleThe oncologist2024
The value of virtual molecular tumor boards for informed clinical decision-making.
Article in The oncologist, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Precision oncology meets Generative AI: assessing large language models in multidisciplinary GIST tumor boards.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Bridging the distance in precision oncology: a nationwide survey on institutional perspectives toward telemedicine and decentralized trials in Japan.International journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- CancerStop.dev: an interactive web platform integrating prognostic data, clinical trials, and genomic resources for patient empowerment.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Real-world data on the clinical impact of molecular tumor boards in high- and low-grade serous ovarian cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic profiling and other new technologies have increased the volume and complexity of information available for guiding clinical decision-making in precision oncology. Consequently, there is a need for multidisciplinary expert teams, in the form of molecular tumor boards (MTBs), who can translate this information into a therapeutic plan, including matching patients to suitable clinical trials. Virtual MTBs (vMTBs) can help to overcome many of the challenges associated with in-person MTBs, such as limited time availability, access to appropriate experts or datasets, or interactions between institutions. However, real-world experience from vMTBs is lacking. Here, we describe oncologists' vMTB experiences and the value of working with multicenter and/or multinational vMTBs. We also address knowledge gaps and barriers that could affect the implementation of vMTBs in routine clinical practice. Case studies from Argentina, Turkey, and Portugal illustrate the value of informed clinical decision-making by vMTBs, including expansion of therapeutic options for patients, faster time to treatment, and the resulting improvement in patient outcomes or impact of vMTB discussions on patients. With the uptake of comprehensive genomic profiling and the evolution of some cancers now being conceptualized as a collection of rare diseases with small patient populations based on molecular profiling, the importance of MTBs has increased in modern cancer management. However, an adjustment in clinical decision-making by healthcare professionals is required and evidence of the added value of vMTBs is lacking. Existing vMTBs and recommendations from participating oncologists could point toward a structured evaluation and analysis of this new platform.
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.