ArticleCureus2026
Clinical Utility of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling in a Community Hospital Outside the Cancer Genomic Core Hospital Network: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) has become increasingly integrated into precision oncology; however, its real-world clinical utility in community hospitals outside the national cancer genomic core hospital network in Japan remains less studied. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation, feasibility, and clinical impact of CGP in a community-based hospital. Methods We retrospectively reviewed patients with unresectable or recurrent solid tumors who had not received systemic chemotherapy at our hospital between April 2021 and December 2025. Clinical outcomes, including the detection rate of druggable genomic alterations, the proportion of patients who received genomically matched therapy, and overall survival (OS), were compared between patients who underwent CGP and those who did not. Results Among 253 patients, 60 (24%) underwent CGP testing. Druggable genomic alterations were identified in 45 patients (75%), and seven patients (12%) received genomically matched therapy. Of these, 5% were treated within clinical trials, and 7% received approved targeted agents. Among patients who received matched therapy, the best overall response was complete response (CR) in two, partial response (PR) in two, stable disease (SD) in one, and progressive disease (PD) in two. Tumor-type-stratified analyses showed variability in actionable/druggable profiles and matched-therapy delivery across tumor types. No significant difference in OS was observed between the CGP and non-CGP groups (median OS: 22.9 vs. 23.0 months, P = 0.78). Within major tumor types, including colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, and biliary tract cancers, OS did not significantly differ according to CGP testing status. Among CGP patients, OS tended to be longer in those who received matched therapy, although the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions Despite being conducted in a community hospital outside the cancer genomic core network, CGP testing was feasible and enabled a clinically meaningful proportion of patients to access genome-matched therapy at rates comparable to those reported from tertiary centers. Although CGP did not directly translate into improved OS, it provided valuable treatment opportunities and facilitated precision oncology in a regional care setting. Further expansion of accessible genome-guided therapies may enhance the clinical impact of CGP in community hospitals.
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.