Cargando…

Learnings From Precision Clinical Trial Matching for Oncology Patients Who Received NGS Testing

Tumor next-generation sequencing reports typically generate trial recommendations for patients based on their diagnosis and genomic profile. However, these require additional refinement and prescreening, which can add to physician burden. We wanted to use human prescreening efforts to efficiently re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jain, Neha M., Culley, Alison, Micheel, Christine M., Osterman, Travis J., Levy, Mia A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8140789/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33625867
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/CCI.20.00142
_version_ 1783696244974026752
author Jain, Neha M.
Culley, Alison
Micheel, Christine M.
Osterman, Travis J.
Levy, Mia A.
author_facet Jain, Neha M.
Culley, Alison
Micheel, Christine M.
Osterman, Travis J.
Levy, Mia A.
author_sort Jain, Neha M.
collection PubMed
description Tumor next-generation sequencing reports typically generate trial recommendations for patients based on their diagnosis and genomic profile. However, these require additional refinement and prescreening, which can add to physician burden. We wanted to use human prescreening efforts to efficiently refine these trial options and also elucidate the high-value parameters that have a major impact on efficient trial matching. METHODS: Clinical trial recommendations were generated based on diagnosis and biomarker criteria using an informatics platform and were further refined by manual prescreening. The refined results were then compared with the initial trial recommendations and the reasons for false-positive matches were evaluated. RESULTS: Manual prescreening significantly reduced the number of false positives from the informatics generated trial recommendations, as expected. We found that trial-specific criteria, especially recruiting status for individual trial arms, were a high value parameter and led to the largest number of automated false-positive matches. CONCLUSION: Reflex clinical trial matching approaches that refine trial recommendations based on the clinical details as well as trial-specific criteria have the potential to help alleviate physician burden for selecting the most appropriate trial for their patient. Investing in publicly available resources that capture the recruiting status of a trial at the cohort or arm level would, therefore, allow us to make meaningful contributions to increase the clinical trial enrollments by eliminating false positives.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8140789
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81407892022-02-24 Learnings From Precision Clinical Trial Matching for Oncology Patients Who Received NGS Testing Jain, Neha M. Culley, Alison Micheel, Christine M. Osterman, Travis J. Levy, Mia A. JCO Clin Cancer Inform ORIGINAL REPORTS Tumor next-generation sequencing reports typically generate trial recommendations for patients based on their diagnosis and genomic profile. However, these require additional refinement and prescreening, which can add to physician burden. We wanted to use human prescreening efforts to efficiently refine these trial options and also elucidate the high-value parameters that have a major impact on efficient trial matching. METHODS: Clinical trial recommendations were generated based on diagnosis and biomarker criteria using an informatics platform and were further refined by manual prescreening. The refined results were then compared with the initial trial recommendations and the reasons for false-positive matches were evaluated. RESULTS: Manual prescreening significantly reduced the number of false positives from the informatics generated trial recommendations, as expected. We found that trial-specific criteria, especially recruiting status for individual trial arms, were a high value parameter and led to the largest number of automated false-positive matches. CONCLUSION: Reflex clinical trial matching approaches that refine trial recommendations based on the clinical details as well as trial-specific criteria have the potential to help alleviate physician burden for selecting the most appropriate trial for their patient. Investing in publicly available resources that capture the recruiting status of a trial at the cohort or arm level would, therefore, allow us to make meaningful contributions to increase the clinical trial enrollments by eliminating false positives. Wolters Kluwer Health 2021-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8140789/ /pubmed/33625867 http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/CCI.20.00142 Text en © 2021 by American Society of Clinical Oncology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
spellingShingle ORIGINAL REPORTS
Jain, Neha M.
Culley, Alison
Micheel, Christine M.
Osterman, Travis J.
Levy, Mia A.
Learnings From Precision Clinical Trial Matching for Oncology Patients Who Received NGS Testing
title Learnings From Precision Clinical Trial Matching for Oncology Patients Who Received NGS Testing
title_full Learnings From Precision Clinical Trial Matching for Oncology Patients Who Received NGS Testing
title_fullStr Learnings From Precision Clinical Trial Matching for Oncology Patients Who Received NGS Testing
title_full_unstemmed Learnings From Precision Clinical Trial Matching for Oncology Patients Who Received NGS Testing
title_short Learnings From Precision Clinical Trial Matching for Oncology Patients Who Received NGS Testing
title_sort learnings from precision clinical trial matching for oncology patients who received ngs testing
topic ORIGINAL REPORTS
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8140789/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33625867
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/CCI.20.00142
work_keys_str_mv AT jainneham learningsfromprecisionclinicaltrialmatchingforoncologypatientswhoreceivedngstesting
AT culleyalison learningsfromprecisionclinicaltrialmatchingforoncologypatientswhoreceivedngstesting
AT micheelchristinem learningsfromprecisionclinicaltrialmatchingforoncologypatientswhoreceivedngstesting
AT ostermantravisj learningsfromprecisionclinicaltrialmatchingforoncologypatientswhoreceivedngstesting
AT levymiaa learningsfromprecisionclinicaltrialmatchingforoncologypatientswhoreceivedngstesting