ArticleOncology reviews2025
Universal vs. ASCO guidelines-based germline genetic testing for newly diagnosed breast cancer patients in resource-restricted settings.
Article in Oncology reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-World Eligibility for Germline Multigene Panel Testing in Breast Cancer: An Evaluation of Current Testing Criteria.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Advancing Germline Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer in Resource-Restricted Settings: Evidence, Barriers, and a Practical Roadmap for Implementation.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2026Review
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
Background: A significant subset of breast cancer cases is attributable to inherited pathogenic genetic variants. Germline genetic testing (GGT), particularly for Methods: Consecutive newly diagnosed breast cancer patients eligible for GGT testing according to the latest American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines were enrolled. Results: During the study period, 1,570 patients were enrolled, median age 51 (22-96) years, majority (n = 1,352, 86.1%) were Jordanian. Based on age criteria, 1,346 (85.7%) patients were eligible for testing. Another 134 (8.5%) were found eligible for testing because of other indications including personal or family history of breast and other cancers (n = 121, 7.7%), triple-negative disease (n = 9, 0.57%) and male gender (n = 4, 0.25%). In total, 1,480 (94.3%) patients were eligible for GGT as per ASCO guidelines, leaving only 90 (5.7%) patients not candidates for testing. Pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants were identified in 23 (7.8%) patients. Conclusion: Applying universal GGT for all newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, regardless of their age or risk factors, would slightly increase the pool of eligible patients, the burden of which can be justified given its impact on improving referral rate.
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.