ArticleJCO precision oncology2024
Real-World Biomarker Test Ordering Practices in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Interphysician Variation and Association With Clinical Outcomes.
Article in JCO precision oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomarker testing patterns among patients newly diagnosed with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, prostate cancer, and bladder cancer.The oncologist · 2026Article
- A pragmatic workflow for advanced NSCLC diagnosis in routine practice: Integrating histopathology, PD-L1 scoring, and EGFR testing.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society · 2026Article
- The critical role of accurate neoplastic cell percentage (NCP) assessment: investigating targeted training strategies for pulmonary biopsy and cytology specimens.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Molecular testing, first-line treatment patterns, and survival in metastatic Colombian non-small cell lung cancer: the RECAPC multicenter registry.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Molecular Biomarker Testing Patterns and Turnaround Time in US Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2025Article
- Differences in biomarker testing in non-small cell lung cancer: real-world outcomes within an integrated healthcare system.Frontiers in surgery · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePatients with metastatic or advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) need biomarker testing, including, in most cases, anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), and PD-L1, to identify options for targeted therapies and to optimally incorporate immune checkpoint inhibitors into therapeutic regimens. We sought to examine real-world patterns of biomarker testing, quantify interphysician practice variation, and correlate testing with clinical outcomes.
methodsWe extracted real-world data from a nationwide electronic health record-derived deidentified database from 17,165 patients diagnosed with advanced NSCLC between 2018 and 2021 and receiving care in the community setting. We analyzed data using descriptive analyses, fixed- and mixed-effects logistic regression models, and proportional hazard models.
resultsOnly 67% of all 17,165 patients and 77% of patients with nonsquamous, metastatic NSCLC had ALK, EGFR, and PD-L1 testing within 90 days of diagnosis. Later diagnosis year (2019-2021 compared with 2018) was associated with higher rates of ALK, EGFR, and PD-L1 testing; stage IIIB/C disease (compared with stage IV), squamous histology, and Black or African American race were associated with lower rates. Interphysician variation was substantial with a median odds ratio between physicians (adjusted for patient factors) of 1.78 for ALK, EGFR, and PD-L1 testing. Patients with nonsquamous, metastatic NSCLC had significantly prolonged survival if tested with all three biomarkers (median, 364 days for all three
conclusionRates of biomarker testing appear suboptimal with substantial interphysician variation. Testing correlates with improved survival, although causality cannot be proven from this study. Additional work is needed to address the underlying causes of suboptimal test ordering.
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.