ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2024
Development of a Novel Protocol for Germline Testing in Pancreatic Cancer.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Results of a multigene panel testing approach targeting patients with suspected genetic predisposition to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Increasing Use of Germline Genetic Testing in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma and Relationship to Clinical Outcome: A Single-Institution Study.JCO precision oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGuidelines now recommend universal germline genetic testing (GGT) for all pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. Testing provides information on actionable pathogenic variants and guides management of patients and family. Since traditional genetic counseling (GC) models are time-intensive and GC resources are sparse, new approaches are needed to comply with guidelines without overwhelming available resources.
methodsA novel protocol was developed for physician-led GGT. Completed test kits were delivered to the GC team, who maintained a prospective database and mailed all orders. If results revealed pathogenic variants for PDAC, patients were offered comprehensive GC, whereas negative and variant of uncertain significance (VUS) test results were reported to patients via brief calls.
resultsDuring protocol implementation between January 2020 and December 2022, 310 (81.5%) patients underwent GGT, with a physician compliance rate of 82.6% and patient compliance rate of 98.7%. Of 310 patients tested, 44 (14.2%) patients had detection of pathogenic variants, while 83 (26.8%) patients had VUS. Pathogenic variants included BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 (n = 18, 5.8%), ATM (n = 9, 2.9%), CFTR (n = 4, 1.3%), EPCAM/MLH1/MSH2/MSH6/PMS2 (n = 3, 1.0%), and CDKN2A (n = 2, 0.7%). The GC team successfully contacted all patients with pathogenic variants to discuss results and offer comprehensive GC.
conclusionOur novel protocol facilitated GGT with excellent compliance despite limited GC resources. This framework for GGT allocates GC resources to those patients who would benefit most from GC. As we continue to expand the program, we seek to implement methods to ensure compliance with cascade testing of high-risk family members.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39133448What 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.