Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39590164›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2024

Expansion of an Academic Molecular Tumor Board to Enhance Access to Biomarker-Driven Trials and Therapies in the Rural Southeastern United States.

Anivarya Kumar, Jennifer R Owen, Nicholette T Sloat, Elizabeth Maynard, Vanessa M Hill, Christopher B Hubbard, Matthew S McKinney, Linda M Sutton, Shannon J McCall, Michael B Datto and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 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. Article
  2. Article
  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

14 authors.

Anivarya KumarDuke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Jennifer R OwenDuke Cancer Network, Durham, NC 27707, USA.
Nicholette T SloatDuke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Elizabeth MaynardDuke Cancer Network, Durham, NC 27707, USA.
Vanessa M HillDuke Cancer Network, Durham, NC 27707, USA.
Christopher B HubbardDepartment of Pathology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Matthew S McKinneyDuke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Linda M SuttonDuke Cancer Network, Durham, NC 27707, USA.
Shannon J McCallDepartment of Pathology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27710, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3957-061X
Michael B DattoDepartment of Pathology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Ashley N MoyerDepartment of Pathology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27710, USA.ORCID 0009-0008-8424-4614
Bennett A CaugheyDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
John H StricklerDuke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC 27710, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7579-1175
Ryne C RamakerDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA.

Funding

National Comprehensive Cancer Network N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Targeting tumor-specific molecular alterations has shown significant clinical benefit. Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) connect cancer patients with personalized treatments and clinical trials. However, rural cancer centers often have limited access to MTB expertise. We established an academic-community partnership expanding our academic MTB to affiliated rural community cancer centers. We developed a centralized molecular registry of tumors (MRT) to aggregate the comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) results and facilitate multidisciplinary MTB review. Of the 151 patients included, 87 (58%) had actionable genomic biomarkers, 42 (28%) were eligible for a targeted off-label therapy, and 27 (18%) were matched to a clinical trial. Of those with a clinical trial match, only 1 of 27 (3%) was enrolled in the identified trial. One year into implementation, community oncology providers were anonymously surveyed on persistent barriers to precision treatment utilization. The primary barriers to clinical trial enrollment were the distance to the trial center (70%), lack of transportation (55%), and lack of local trials (50%). This study offers a framework to improve access to molecular expertise, but significant barriers to the equitable use of CGP and trial enrollment persist.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorClinical Trials as TopicNeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrecision MedicineRural PopulationSoutheastern United StatesBiomarkers, Tumorcancer disparitiescomprehensive genomic profilingmolecular profilingtargeted therapy

Identifiers

PMID39590164
PMCPMC11593073

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.