ArticlePloS one2026
Quantifying the diagnostic time gap in precision oncology: A retrospective analysis of potential time savings from same-day cartridge-based molecular testing versus next-generation sequencing in cytology specimens.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNext-generation sequencing (NGS) turnaround times (TAT) exceed two weeks and can delay the initiation of targeted therapy. Rapid cartridge-based platforms such as Idylla deliver single-gene or fusion results from minimal cytology material within hours, but time savings have not been systematically quantified.
methodsForty-two cases of non-small cell lung carcinoma, thyroid carcinoma, melanoma, and mammary analogue secretory carcinoma of the salivary gland that underwent both Idylla testing (KRAS, EGFR, BRAF, and GeneFusion assays) and orthogonal NGS at a single academic center were reviewed. NGS TAT was calculated from specimen collection to report release, and Idylla results were modeled as available one day after collection. The primary outcome was per-case time savings (NGS TAT minus one day); treatment timelines were reconstructed from the medical record. Analyses were descriptive; no inferential testing was performed. A sensitivity analysis varied the modeled Idylla TAT from 1 to 3 days, and an adjusted estimate assigned no time saving to the two cartridge results that were not actionable on the day of collection.
resultsThe median NGS TAT across all 42 cases was 20.0 days (IQR, 17.0-23.8; range, 8-51). Against the modeled 1-day Idylla TAT, the median time savings was 19.0 days per case (IQR, 16.0-22.8; range, 7-50), totaling 858 patient-days. Assigning no time saving to those two cases gave a median of 18.0 days and 817 patient-days. No patient received therapy that was subsequently contradicted by the sequencing result. In thirteen patients, the sequencing interval alone exceeded three weeks, and in seven, no systemic therapy was underway while the result was awaited.
conclusionsSame-day cartridge-based testing from cytology and small biopsy specimens could provide actionable results a median of 19 days earlier than standard NGS. Whether this translates into earlier treatment initiation was not assessed and requires prospective evaluation.
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.