ReviewFuture oncology (London, England)2025
Genomic tests to guide management of breast cancer in Europe: regulation, reimbursement, adoption, and challenges.
Review in Future oncology (London, England), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of genomic tests such as the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® test, into routine clinical practice represents a significant advance in personalized breast cancer care. By supporting more tailored therapeutic decisions, these diagnostics can improve patient outcomes, while reducing risks of undertreatment, overtreatment, and associated side effects. Cost-effectiveness has already been demonstrated in numerous publications. However, for widespread adoption across Europe, four principal challenges must be overcome: regulation, technology assessment, reimbursement, and gaps in real-world evidence. Since May 2022, the European Union In Vitro Diagnostics Regulation (IVDR) has updated requirements for demonstrating clinical utility and analytical and scientific validity, creating new barriers for manufacturers regarding primary evidence generation. Variability in health technology assessment (HTA) frameworks and reimbursement mechanisms across countries further complicates adoption. Demonstrating real-world benefits of these technologies requires robust, representative data collections, yet current clinical trial evidence often underrepresents certain patient populations, raising equity concerns. Whilst the IVDR will help standardize regulatory requirements, challenges remain in harmonizing evidence standards for HTA and reimbursement. This review explores these barriers using the Oncotype DX® test as an exemplar. Evidence was drawn from targeted literature searches and reviews of regulatory, reimbursement, and gray literature relevant to European healthcare systems.
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.