ArticleJCO precision oncology2025
Costs and Benefits of Whole-Exome, Whole-Transcriptome Sequencing in Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.
Article in JCO precision oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical harm from failure to deploy personalized medicine for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of molecular reflex testing-based targeted therapy in non-small cell lung cancer from a German healthcare payer perspective using a decision tree model.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWith an increase in approved targeted therapies for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), tumor profiling that maximizes identification of patients eligible for these treatments is essential. In this study, we compare testing approaches for newly diagnosed advanced or metastatic NSCLC.
methodsAn economic model was developed to estimate the annual costs and clinical outcomes associated with testing alternatives. Patients were assigned alterations on the basis of rates observed in published literature. Treatment approaches included no genomic testing; sequential single-gene testing; or a whole-exome, whole-transcriptome (WES/WTS) comprehensive genomic profiling to inform use of targeted therapies. The budget impact and survival implications of WES/WTS were compared head to head with the other testing approaches, and uncertainty was assessed in sensitivity analyses. In scenario analyses, tests that incorporate both DNA and RNA were compared with tests using DNA sequencing alone when assuming the prevalence of fusions that can only be identified by RNA ranged from 2.5% to 14%.
resultsCompared with no testing, WES/WTS reduced costs by $8,809 in US dollars (USD) per patient tested while increasing median overall survival by an average of 3.9 months. When compared with sequential single-gene testing, use of WES/WTS decreased costs by $14,602 (USD) per patient and had a minimal survival benefit. A test that included both RNA and DNA sequencing reduced costs by $400-$1,724 (USD) and increased identification of actionable alterations by 2.3%-13.0% across the range of fusion prevalence.
conclusionUse of WES/WTS improved clinical outcomes while reducing costs. These findings should be considered when choosing between tumor profiling approaches.
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.