ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2026
Development and Performance Validation of a Comprehensive Liquid Biopsy Genotyping Panel for Pan-cancer Analysis.
Article in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2026. 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.
- Necessity for Development and Validation of Comprehensive Circulating Tumor DNA Profiling Panels.Annals of laboratory medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Precision oncology is advancing, increasing the demand for comprehensive, non-invasive genomic profiling tools. Liquid biopsy using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) enables real-time molecular profiling, treatment monitoring, and early detection of resistance variants. We developed the PAN100 panel (Dxome), a hybridization capture panel targeting 101 genes, as a pan-cancer genotyping assay to detect clinically actionable variants across various cancer types. This study presents the first comprehensive validation of the PAN100 panel including both analytical and clinical performance across eight cancer types using reference materials and matched tissue samples. Methods: For analytical validation, we assessed accuracy, limit of detection (LoD), and precision using Seraseq ctDNA v2 Reference Materials (SeraCare, Milford, MA, USA). Clinical validation was performed using plasma samples from 27 patients with eight types of cancer and 17 matched tumor samples. Positive percent agreement (PPA) between ctDNA and tissue next-generation sequencing (NGS) results was assessed using TruSight Oncology 500 and TruSight Tumor 170 assays. The limit of blank (LoB) was evaluated in 34 healthy individuals. Results: The PAN100 panel demonstrated high precision and linearity (LoD, 0.3%; 95.0% confidence interval, 0.29-0.35) variant allele frequency. The PPA between ctDNA and tissue NGS was 73.1% for single-nucleotide variants, 80.0% for insertions/deletions, and 74.2% overall. The LoB was 0.00001%. Conclusions: The PAN100 panel is a robust tool for detecting clinically significant variants with high concordance with tissue NGS. Its sensitivity for low-frequency variants enables real-time treatment adaptation, supporting precision oncology. Its comprehensive design is particularly valuable for challenging diagnoses and clonal evolution monitoring.
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.