Learnings From Precision Clinical Trial Matching for Oncology Patients Who Received NGS Testing
Plain-language summary
Tumor sequencing reports often suggest clinical trials for patients based on their diagnosis and genetic profile, but those automated lists include many poor matches that physicians must weed out by hand. The authors compared automatically generated trial recommendations against the same lists after manual prescreening and found that trial-specific details, especially whether individual trial arms were still recruiting, were the largest source of false-positive matches. They conclude that building such trial-specific criteria into automated matching, and making trial recruiting status publicly available at the arm level, could substantially reduce false positives and ease the burden on physicians selecting trials for their patients.
Read the full paper (DOI: 10.1200/CCI.20.00142).
This is a plain-language summary written for discoverability; the authoritative version is the published paper. Part of Travis Osterman's peer-reviewed publications.