↓ Skip to main content

From somatic variants towards precision oncology: Evidence-driven reporting of treatment options in molecular tumor boards

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
38 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
From somatic variants towards precision oncology: Evidence-driven reporting of treatment options in molecular tumor boards
Published in
Genome Medicine, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13073-018-0529-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Júlia Perera-Bel, Barbara Hutter, Christoph Heining, Annalen Bleckmann, Martina Fröhlich, Stefan Fröhling, Hanno Glimm, Benedikt Brors, Tim Beißbarth

Abstract

A comprehensive understanding of cancer has been furthered with technological improvements and decreasing costs of next-generation sequencing (NGS). However, the complexity of interpreting genomic data is hindering the implementation of high-throughput technologies in the clinical context: increasing evidence on gene-drug interactions complicates the task of assigning clinical significance to genomic variants. Here we present a method that automatically matches patient-specific genomic alterations to treatment options. The method relies entirely on public knowledge of somatic variants with predictive evidence on drug response. The output report is aimed at supporting clinicians in the task of finding the clinical meaning of genomic variants. We applied the method to 1) The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange (GENIE) cohorts and 2) 11 patients from the NCT MASTER trial whose treatment discussions included information on their genomic profiles. Our reporting strategy showed a substantial number of patients with actionable variants in the analyses of TCGA and GENIE samples. Notably, it was able to reproduce experts' treatment suggestions in a retrospective study of 11 patients from the NCT MASTER trial. Our results establish a proof of concept for comprehensive, evidence-based reports as a supporting tool for discussing treatment options in tumor boards. We believe that a standardized method to report actionable somatic variants will smooth the incorporation of NGS in the clinical context. We anticipate that tools like the one we present here will become essential in summarizing for clinicians the growing evidence in the field of precision medicine. The R code of the presented method is provided in Additional file 6 and available at https://github.com/jperera-bel/MTB-Report .

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 24%
Other 11 13%
Student > Master 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 24 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 10%
Computer Science 6 7%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 26 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 May 2018.
All research outputs
#1,117,810
of 17,467,242 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#248
of 1,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,178
of 286,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,467,242 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 286,140 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them