ArticleFrontiers in genetics2026
Yield of actionable variants from high-risk cancer gene panel testing in guideline-eligible and ineligible individuals.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Hereditary cancer testing can identify individuals with a significant risk of cancer, and provide an opportunity for early risk management, prevention, precision treatment strategies, and family cascade testing. Medical professional organizations have developed guidance on genetic testing criteria based on personal and family histories. However, many individuals with cancer-predisposing pathogenic germline variants remain unidentified. The objective of this study was to determine the utility of a multi-cancer, clinically actionable cancer syndrome gene panel in identifying pathogenic variants among individuals both meeting and not meeting national genetic testing criteria. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed 153,767 unrelated consecutive women and men, unselected for personal or family cancer history, who were referred for genetic testing across multiple sites from June 2020 to August 2023. Positivity rates were evaluated and compared according to testing guideline eligibility and cancer site-specific recommended gene sets. Results: In a multi-cancer panel of 29 clinically actionable genes, pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants were identified in 6.5% of individuals meeting hereditary testing criteria and 4.8% of those not meeting criteria. Overall, 22% of individuals with positive findings would have been missed had guideline-informed testing criteria been used, suggesting substantial missed diagnostic and therapeutic opportunities. Gene-level analyses revealed higher positivity rates for Discussion: These findings indicate that strict testing criteria may miss 22% of individuals with an actionable hereditary cancer gene variant. The use of comprehensive multi-cancer panels, alongside broader eligibility criteria, can identify individuals with hereditary cancer syndromes and improve opportunities for targeted screening, clinical management, and cascade testing for relatives.
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.