Observational studyThe oncologist2025
Utility and real-world clinical outcomes of next-generation sequencing in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in the South Indian population.
Observational study in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNext-generation sequencing (NGS) is an advanced sequencing technology that enables rapid sequencing of numerous DNA strands and performs simultaneous analysis of various genes and diverse genomic characteristics. While there is a lack of substantial evidence available, the extent to which NGS may improve clinical outcomes among cancer patients in a real-world scenario remains uncertain.
objectiveTo investigate the clinical utility of NGS in patients treated with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and its impact on real-world clinical outcomes, treated with targetable or non-targetable agents. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a prospective observational study conducted in 322 participants distributed over 2 broad categories- NGS and non-NGS. The NGS category consisted of patients who underwent genetic mutation screening by the NGS method. This group was further categorized into 2 subgroups-NGS-targetable and NGS-non-targetable. The non-NGS category consisted of patients who did not undergo mutation testing by the NGS method.
resultsThere was a significant difference in overall survival between NGS and non-NGS groups (P = .0038). There was a significant difference between NGS targetable and non-targetable groups in terms of progression-free survival (PFS; P = .0016) and overall survival (OS; P < .0001). There was a significant difference between NGS-matched and non-matched groups in terms of PFS (P < .00011) as well as OS (P < .0001).
conclusionsNGS significantly improved survival in advanced NSCLC. Patients who received treatments matched to their NGS results experienced significantly longer survival compared to those with non-matched treatments.
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.