Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38874628›Full record

ReviewActa neurochirurgica2024

Whole genome sequencing in (recurrent) glioblastoma: challenges related to informed consent procedures and data sharing.

Mira C Hasner, Mark P van Opijnen, Filip Y F de Vos, Edwin Cuppen, Marike L D Broekman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Acta neurochirurgica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

5 authors.

Mira C Hasner *Department of Neurosurgery, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Mark P van Opijnen *Department of Neurosurgery, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, The Netherlands. m.p.van_opijnen@lumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-2400-4626
Filip Y F de VosDepartment of Medical Oncology, Utrecht University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9082-5991
Edwin CuppenHartwig Medical Foundation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0400-9542
Marike L D BroekmanDepartment of Neurosurgery, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0226-0119

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increased use of whole genome sequencing (WGS) in neuro-oncology for diagnostics and research purposes necessitates a renewed conversation about informed consent procedures and governance structures for sharing personal health data. There is currently no consensus on how to obtain informed consent for WGS in this population. In this narrative review, we analyze the formats and contents of frameworks suggested in literature for WGS in oncology and assess their benefits and limitations. We discuss applicability, specific challenges, and legal context for patients with (recurrent) glioblastoma. This population is characterized by the rarity of the disease, extremely limited prognosis, and the correlation of the stage of the disease with cognitive abilities. Since this has implications for the informed consent procedure for WGS, we suggest that the content of informed consent should be tailor-made for (recurrent) glioblastoma patients.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsGlioblastomaInformation DisseminationInformed ConsentWhole Genome SequencingHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalCognitive impairmentData sharingInformed consentRecurrent glioblastomaWhole genome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID38874628
PMCPMC11178618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.