ArticleScientific reports2025
Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling versus Oncomine Dx target test in pathological stage II-III non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based Oncomine Dx Target Test (ODxTT) is the standard tool for guiding postoperative adjuvant therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Japan. To advance precision oncology, we evaluated the clinical utility of an in-house comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) assay, Rapid-Neo, as a complementary approach to ODxTT in surgically resected NSCLC. Patients with pathological stage II-III NSCLC who underwent anatomical surgical resection between December 2019 and May 2024 were included. Resected specimens underwent genomic analysis using both ODxTT and Rapid-Neo CGP. We evaluated the mutational concordance and the frequency of additional actionable alterations identified by CGP. Among 68 eligible patients, driver mutation results were concordant in 64 (94.1%) cases. Crucially, CGP rescued one patient for targeted therapy by detecting an EGFR mutation where ODxTT failed due to insufficient DNA. CGP also identified rare EGFR variants not covered by ODxTT in two cases, although it failed to detect a RET fusion in one patient. Furthermore, CGP revealed additional actionable alterations, such as tumor suppressor gene mutations, in 57 patients (83.8%). Our in-house CGP shows high concordance with ODxTT and serves as a powerful complementary tool. These findings support a strategic testing algorithm where CGP is incorporated for patients with negative or inconclusive ODxTT results, or at the time of recurrence, to maximize opportunities for individualized therapy in resected NSCLC.
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.