ArticleCancers2024
The Impact of Next-Generation Sequencing Workflows on Outcomes in Advanced Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis at One Academic Health System.
Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Who Gets Left Out of Precision Oncology? Real-World Driver Mutation Expression Patterns and Therapeutic Eligibility in a Diverse Single-Center Early-Stage Lung Adenocarcinoma Cohort.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeBroad-based molecular testing with next-generation sequencing (NGS) is now the standard of care in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Two approaches to molecular testing are (1) reflexive testing at pathologic NSCLC confirmation, often using an in-house molecular panel, and (2) send-out testing to private vendors, ordered by a clinician. This study explored the outcomes with reflex versus send-out testing.
methodsA retrospective chart review was conducted of patients diagnosed with de novo stage IV NSCLC in 2019 and 2020 at three hospitals in the same system, one academic hospital (Northwestern Memorial Hospital, or NMH) utilizing reflex, in-house NGS, and two community-based hospitals (Central DuPage Hospital, or CDH, and Delnor, or D) sending out tissue samples for testing. The outcomes assessed were the time from biopsy to results, biopsy to treatment, the incidence of first-line targetable mutations and the use of first-line targeted therapies, and overall survival.
resultsIn total, 191 patients met the inclusion criteria, 85 at NMH, 106 at CDH + D, and in total, 131 in 2019 and 60 in 2020. The time to results was significantly shorter with reflexive NGS when compared with send-out testing; the time to treatment was also shorter but not statistically significant. At CDH + D, the time to results was significantly shorter with a limited panel than with comprehensive testing, but the time to treatment was similar. NGS testing rates were 95% at NMH and 84.5% at CDH + D (
conclusionReflexive NGS testing is associated with a shorter time to actionable results and higher rates of first-line targetable mutations than send-out testing. In practices with send-out testing, limited panels had slightly faster turnaround times but no difference in time to treatment. If resources allow, reflexive NGS should be considered in healthcare systems for patients with NSCLC.
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.