Observational studyThe oncologist2025
Next-generation sequencing-based evaluation of the actionable landscape of genomic alterations in solid tumors: the "MOZART" prospective observational study.
Observational study in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Genomically matched therapy in advanced solid tumors: the randomized phase 2 ROME trial.Nature medicine · 2025Trial
- Complete response in disseminatedTranslational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Determination of Drug Sensitivity in Patient Derived Models of Breast Cancer by Multiparametric QPI.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe identification of the most appropriate targeted therapies for advanced cancers is challenging. We performed a molecular profiling of metastatic solid tumors utilizing a comprehensive next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay to determine genomic alterations' type, frequency, actionability, and potential correlations with PD-L1 expression.
methodsA total of 304 adult patients with heavily pretreated metastatic cancers treated between January 2019 and March 2021 were recruited. The CLIA-/UKAS-accredit Oncofocus assay targeting 505 genes was used on newly obtained or archived biopsies. Chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used where appropriate. Results were significant for P < .05.
resultsA total of 237 tumors (78%) harbored potentially actionable genomic alterations. Tumors were positive for PD-L1 in 68.9% of cases. The median number of mutant genes/tumor was 2.0 (IQR: 1.0-3.0). Only 34.5% were actionable ESCAT Tier I-II with different prevalence according to cancer type. The DNA damage repair (14%), the PI3K/AKT/mTOR (14%), and the RAS/RAF/MAPK (12%) pathways were the most frequently altered. No association was found among PD-L1, ESCAT, age, sex, and tumor mutational status. Overall, 62 patients underwent targeted treatment, with 37.1% obtaining objective responses. The same molecular-driven treatment for different cancer types could be associated with opposite clinical outcomes.
conclusionsWe highlight the clinical value of molecular profiling in metastatic solid tumors using comprehensive NGS-based panels to improve treatment algorithms in situations of uncertainty and facilitate clinical trial recruitment. However, interpreting genomic alterations in a tumor type-specific manner is critical.
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.