Cited by 450Cancer Genomics and DiagnosticsGenomics and Rare DiseasesBRCA gene mutations in cancer

Institutional implementation of clinical tumor profiling on an unselected cancer population

Open access
Sholl, Lynette M., Do, Khanh, Shivdasani, Priyanka, Cerami, Ethan, Dubuc, Adrian M., Kuo, Frank C., Garcia, Elizabeth P., Jia, Yonghui +32 more·2016·JCI Insight

Abstract

BACKGROUND. Comprehensive genomic profiling of a patient’s cancer can be used to diagnose, monitor, and recommend treatment. Clinical implementation of tumor profiling in an enterprise-wide, unselected cancer patient population has yet to be reported. METHODS. We deployed a hybrid-capture and massively parallel sequencing assay (OncoPanel) for all adult and pediatric patients at our combined cancer centers. Results were categorized by pathologists based on actionability. We report the results for the first 3,727 patients tested. RESULTS. Our cohort consists of cancer patients unrestricted by disease site or stage. Across all consented patients, half had sufficient and available (>20% tumor) material for profiling; once specimens were received in the laboratory for pathology review, 73% were scored as adequate for genomic testing. When sufficient DNA was obtained, OncoPanel yielded a result in 96% of cases. 73% of patients harbored an actionable or informative alteration; only 19% of these represented a current standard of care for therapeutic stratification. The findings recapitulate those of previous studies of common cancers but also identify alterations, including in AXL and EGFR , associated with response to targeted therapies. In rare cancers, potentially actionable alterations suggest the utility of a “cancer-agnostic” approach in genomic profiling. Retrospective analyses uncovered contextual genomic features that may inform therapeutic response and examples where diagnoses revised by genomic profiling markedly changed clinical management. CONCLUSIONS. Broad sequencing-based testing deployed across an unselected cancer cohort is feasible. Genomic results may alter management in diverse scenarios; however, additional barriers must be overcome to enable precision cancer medicine on a large scale. FUNDING. This work was supported by DFCI, BWH, and the National Cancer Institute (5R33CA155554 and 5K23CA157631).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1172/jci.insight.87062

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Only a small proportion of patients, approximately 10-20%, have an actionable alteration that can be coupled to a specific intervention.

    “However, as shown in several clinical trials161–165, only a small proportion of patients (approx. 10–20%) have an actionable alteration that can be coupled to a specific intervention161.”

    From Organoids (2022) · cites this paper as [163]

    The pan-cancer results report that 19% of alterations could inform standard-of-care therapeutic decisions, consistent with the claim’s approximate range for that narrower category. But they also report that 73% of the cohort had a clinically actionable or informative alteration, including alterations that could guide trial enrollment. The claim does not make that distinction and understates the broader proportion. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sholl, L. M., Do, K., Shivdasani, P., Cerami, E., Dubuc, A. M., Kuo, F. C., Garcia, E. P., Jia, Y., Davineni, P., Abo, R. P., Pugh, T. J., van Hummelen, P., Thorner, A. R., Ducar, M., Berger, A. H., Nishino, M., Janeway, K. A., Church, A., Harris, M., Ritterhouse, L. L., Campbell, J. D., Rojas-Rudilla, V., Ligon, A. H., Ramkissoon, S., Cleary, J. M., Matulonis, U., Oxnard, G. R., Chao, R., Tassell, V., Christensen, J., Hahn, W. C., Kantoff, P. W., Kwiatkowski, D. J., Johnson, B. E., Meyerson, M., Garraway, L. A., Shapiro, G. I., Rollins, B. J., Lindeman, N. I., & MacConaill, L. E.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, and
  • University Health Network (CA)
  • Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center (US)
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center (US)
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
  • Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Mirati Therapeutics (United States) (US)
  • Lank Center for Genitourinary Oncology and
Corresponding author
MacConaill, Laura E.
Venue
JCI Insight
Published
2016-11-17
Volume
1
Issue
19
Pages
e87062-e87062
ISSN
2379-3708 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2551013093
Cited by
450
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 63 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 56 · 2017: 29
FWCI
19.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JCI Insight (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • American Association for Cancer Research
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
  • National Institutes of Health (5k23ca157631-02)
  • National Cancer Institute (K23-CA157631, R33CA155554, 5K23CA157631, P30CA008748)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › BRCA gene mutations in cancer
Keywords
comprehensive genomic profiling, clinical implementation, actionable alterations, hybrid capture sequencing, OncoPanel, precision oncology, AXL, EGFR, rare tumor, treatment stratification, diagnostic revision, targeted therapy response
MeSH terms
DNA Mutational Analysis, Humans, Mutation, Neoplasms, Retrospective Studies, Genomics, Precision Medicine, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review