Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40712993›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD2025

Microcosting Study of Genomic Profiling for Precision Cancer Medicine: Application from the National Infrastructure for Precision Diagnostics in Norway.

Pia S Henkel, Eline Aas, Hege G Russnes, Ingrid Dyvik, G Live Fagereng, Åslaug Helland, Hanna Røgenes, Tonje G Lien, Kine Pedersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

9 authors.

Pia S HenkelInstitute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. Electronic address: p.s.henkel@medisin.uio.no.
Eline AasInstitute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Hege G RussnesDepartment of Pathology, Division of Laboratory Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Ingrid DyvikInstitute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
G Live FagerengInstitute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Åslaug HellandInstitute for Cancer Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Hanna RøgenesDepartment of Pathology, Division of Laboratory Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Tonje G LienDepartment of Pathology, Division of Laboratory Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Kine PedersenInstitute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Detailed cost analyses of genomic profiling for precision cancer medicine can inform strategic planning and cost-effectiveness analysis. A flexible costing framework was developed in this study to conduct microcosting of genomic profiling in precision cancer medicine using the broad gene panel TruSight Oncology 500 and accounting for its integration into the molecular tumor board within the national Infrastructure for Precision Diagnostics in Norway. The framework enables calculation of costs per sample, by workflow steps and cost categories. Site visits and discussions with staff at Oslo University Hospital informed the diagnostic workflow, validation of the framework, and resource use inputs. Sensitivity analysis addressed alternative resource use estimates, higher batch sizes, and investment costs for automation of the library preparation step. Total costs per sample were $2944 USD, ranging from $2366 to $4307 when considering uncertainties in estimates. Consumables and personnel were the most resource-intensive cost categories across analyses. Automating the resource-intensive library preparation step enabled a higher weekly batch size with slightly lower costs per sample ($2881) despite the additional equipment costs. The dynamic costing framework highlights how the choice of equipment and batch sizes affects sample costs and personnel needs for genomic profiling. Consumables and personnel offer the largest potential for costs savings, but potential personnel bottlenecks need to be considered when further upscaling capacity.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingGenomicsNeoplasmsPrecision MedicineCost-Benefit AnalysisCosts and Cost AnalysisHumansNorway

Identifiers

PMID40712993
PMCPMC12597535

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.