ReviewInternational journal of clinical oncology2025
Establishment of a comprehensive set of fact sheets for cancer predisposition genes for medical oncologists practicing cancer genome profiling.
Review in International journal of clinical oncology, 2025. 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.
- Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling test for colorectal cancer: a single institution prospective observational study.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) is widely performed worldwide, increasing opportunities for medical oncologists to explain cancer predisposition at the time of informed consent and return of results. How medical oncologists communicate about (suspected) cancer predisposition genes is a key factor in referring patients for consultation with genetic services. In this study, we developed a set of fact sheets on cancer predisposition genes to support medical oncologists in their practice under the nationwide cancer genome screening project MONSTAR-SCREEN-2 study in Japan.
methodsThe Genetic Specialist Committee, comprising clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, bioinformaticians, and medical oncologists, drafted the fact sheet and external Genetic Experts reviewed its elements and contents. A fact sheet evaluation survey was conducted one year after the fact sheet was completed and distributed to medical oncologists at the National Cancer Center Hospital East.
resultsThe content of the fact sheet included an overview of diseases, inheritance, family impact, lifetime risk, and surveillance. In the evaluation survey, 83.3% of respondents rated it as "useful." Notably, the sections "What is genetic counseling" (100%) and "Lifetime risk" (94.4%) received high ratings.
conclusionOur study suggests that a fact sheet developed by the Genetic Specialist Committee may help medical oncologists explain CGP results and connect patients to genetic services. It also functions as an educational resource that requires periodic updates and is in line with revisions to the guidelines.
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.