ArticleCancer science2025
Clinical Application of In-House Comprehensive Genomic Profiling for Thoracic Cancer: Insights From a Japanese Hospital.
Article in Cancer science, 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.
- Analysis of Somatic Mutations and Immunotherapy Biomarkers in Chinese Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer During 2019-2024: A Retrospective Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Establishment of a Large-Scale PDX Library of Head and Neck Cancers for Functional Precision Oncology.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Acquired MTAP Loss Following Entrectinib Resistance in ROS1-Rearranged NSCLC With CD74 Exon 3-ROS1 Exon 34 Fusion.Thoracic cancer · 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
26 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) is useful for optimizing targeted therapy and immunotherapy strategies for thoracic malignancies. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical utility and diagnostic complementarity of the in-house sequencing platform Rapid-Neo. We retrospectively analyzed 110 patients with thoracic malignancies who underwent Rapid-Neo testing. The baseline characteristics, sequencing results, concordance with companion diagnostics (CDx), and clinical outcomes were assessed. Of 110 patients, 100 (90.9%) had primary lung cancer. Rapid-Neo identified at least one genomic alteration in 99.1% of cases and well-established driver alterations in 66.0% of lung cancer cases. TMB-high and MSI-high statuses were observed in 9.0% and 2.0% of cases, respectively. Among the 90 cases with prior CDx, Rapid-Neo identified driver alterations in 10.0% of the cases, including EGFR, KRAS, MET, RET, and ERBB2, suggesting its potential to overcome the limitations of conventional CDx tests. High concordance (96.8%) was observed between the Rapid-Neo and CDx results, finally. In EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma, high tumor mutation burden (TMB) was associated with a significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) after EGFR-TKI therapy (HR = 2.58, p = 0.018) and remained an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis. Furthermore, among patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), favorable genomic markers such as TMB-high or MSI-high were associated with prolonged PFS. Rapid-Neo demonstrated high sensitivity and concordance with CDx, while also identifying actionable driver alterations missed by the initial CDx. Moreover, the genomic markers identified by Rapid-Neo may provide predictive values for both targeted therapy and immunotherapy responses, supporting their integration into routine clinical decision-making.
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.