ArticleScientific reports2026
RNA-based next-generation sequencing strategy for screening MDM2-amplified sarcomas.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The accurate diagnosis of soft tissue sarcomas and bone tumors poses persistent challenges in pathological practice. While targeted RNA-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) has enhanced diagnostic precision through fusion gene detection, its clinical utility remains limited for dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS) due to the inability to identify MDM2 copy number variations - a critical diagnostic feature. This limitation is particularly clinically relevant as morphologically atypical DDLPS cases may undergo targeted RNA NGS testing. Through retrospective analysis of 150 patients undergoing RNA NGS and validation with TCGA-SARC data, we developed a novel screening algorithm for DDLPS using RNA NGS data, specifically the number of fusion events within the 12q13-15 chromosomal region and MDM2 transcript levels. Both metrics were significantly elevated in DDLPS compared to non-DDLPS cases in our institutional cohort (p < 0.001). ROC analysis established optimal diagnostic thresholds: ≥3 fusions in 12q13-15 region achieved 100% sensitivity (95% CI: [73.53%-100%]; 12/12) and 95.65% specificity (95% CI: [90.78%-98.39%]; 132/138). Similarly, MDM2 RNA expression ≥ 100 TPM showed 100% sensitivity (95% CI: [63.1%-100%]; 8/8) and 97.37% specificity (95% CI: [90.8%-99.7%]; 74/76). The algorithm also performed robustly in the TCGA-SARC data, although with a slightly different optimal cutoff, likely due to differences in gene panels, depth of sequencing, gene coverage, and bioinformatics pipelines. This study presents an effective strategy for screening DDLPS and potentially other MDM2-amplified sarcomas.
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.