ArticleBritish journal of cancer2026
Implementing whole genome and transcriptome sequencing for cancer patients in routine healthcare: a comprehensive guide to costing.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMolecular characterisation of solid tumours contributes to a precise diagnosis and can uncover a range of drug targets and biomarkers, improving patient management. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) combined with whole transcriptome sequencing (WTS) is the most comprehensive approach in molecular cancer diagnostics and is therefore becoming increasingly integrated in clinical care. A critical challenge in implementing WGS/WTS as a clinical-grade test is its high cost compared to targeted sequencing approaches, prohibiting wider use and access.
methodsTo dissect this limitation, we performed a micro-costing analysis of an established WGS/WTS workflow based on short-read sequencing technology. We categorised the costs as follows: consumables, equipment and maintenance, personnel, and data processing/storage. We considered various scenarios, including sample volumes, personnel and equipment redundancy, inflation and mean coverage.
resultsWe have developed a multidimensional costing model that identified consumable costs, particularly flow cells, as the main cost drivers. While personnel and equipment costs decreased with larger case volumes processed (scaling effects), consumable and data processing/storage costs did not change significantly.
conclusionsThus, falling prices of consumables would facilitate the broad implementation of WGS/WTS as a clinical-grade test.
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.