ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Combination of
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhanced Detection of BRCA Copy Number Alterations Within a Commercial HRD Assay: Implications for Precision Oncology in Ovarian Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Tumor Genomic and Transcriptomic Analysis Integrated With Liquid Biopsy ctDNA Monitoring: Analytical Validation and Clinical Insights.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Circulating Tumor DNA in Prostate Cancer: A Dual Perspective on Early Detection and Advanced Disease Management.Cancers · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Backgrounds: Assessing homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) has been recommended by clinical guidelines for patients with ovarian cancer (OC) as it predicts sensitivity to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi). However, HRD testing is complex and either inaccessible or unaffordable for majority of OC patients in developing countries. Consequently, the prevalence of HRD in OC remains unknown. Methods: We examined HRD status of 77 Vietnamese patients with OC using a new laboratory-developed test (HRD Insight, Gene Solutions). Tumor DNA was extracted from FFPE samples, followed by next-generation sequencing to detect deleterious or suspected deleterious variants in Results: The assay was first benchmarked against commercial HRD kits including TruSight Oncology 500 HRD (Illumina), SOPHiA DDM HRD Solutions (Sophia Genetics) and HRD Focus Panel (AmoyDx), and showed an overall percent agreement of 90.0%, 96.3%, and 96.4% respectively. The successful rate of sequencing was 94.8% (73/77) and the prevalence of HRD in OC patients was 54.8% (40/73). Conclusions: HRD Insight assay could accurately and robustly determine the HRD status of ovarian tissue samples, including those with low quality.
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.