ArticleScientific reports2025
Real-world data analysis for factors influencing the quality check status in FoundationOne CDx cancer genomic profiling tests.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Molecular Classification Based on FGFR3, KRAS, HRAS, and TP53 Mutation With TNM Staging Modestly Improves Prediction of Prognosis of Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma After Surgery.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2026Article
- Article
- Predictive molecular alterations of prostate cancer brain metastases based on a companion diagnostic assay.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Evaluation of a 1021-Gene Panel in FFPE and Liquid Biopsy for Analytical and Clinical Use.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) testing is used worldwide for personalized cancer treatment. Unstained slides from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) blocks are required for tissue-based CGP testing. However, the use of low quality FFPE specimens can result in testing failure or invalid results. Although several previous studies have indicated that the quality of genomic testing is affected by various factors, the factor(s) that has the greatest influence on CGP testing has not been well studied in real-world data. Thus, we conducted a large-scale multi-institutional study in Hiroshima, Japan to investigate the factors associated with quality check status in FoundationOne CDx CGP testing using real-world data from 1,204 participants from an area with a population of approximately 2.7 million. This study revealed low percentage of tumor nuclei in FFPE specimen, long-term storage of FFPE block, and pancreatic cancer as independent risk factors for qualified status. Of the three factors, percentage of tumor nuclei had the largest effect on quality check status, while the magnitudes of the effects of storage time of FFPE or pancreatic cancer were minor. Collectively, our real-world data indicate that tumor purity is the most important factor for successful CGP, and we would suggest greater than 35% as an ideal percentage of tumor nuclei for CGP submission.
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.