ArticleJournal of translational medicine2020
Factors influencing cancer genetic somatic mutation test ordering by cancer physician.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- New horizons at the interface of artificial intelligence and translational cancer research.Cancer cell · 2025Review
- Primary care provider practices, attitudes, and confidence with hereditary cancer risk assessment and testing: A mixed methods study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
- A video intervention to improve patient understanding of tumor genomic testing in patients with cancer.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Preparing for the unexpected: Recommendations for returning secondary findings in late-stage cancer care.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2024Article
- Attitudes about pharmacogenomic testing vary by healthcare specialty.Pharmacogenomics · 2023Article
- Patient Understanding of Tumor Genomic Testing: A Quality Improvement Effort.JCO oncology practice · 2023Review
- Epistemic Beliefs: Relationship to Future Expectancies and Quality of Life in Cancer Patients.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2022Article
- Attitudes of Australian dermatologists on the use of genetic testing: A cross-sectional survey with a focus on melanoma.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Incomplete Penetrance of Population-Based Genetic Screening Results in Electronic Health Record.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Queensland Genomics: an adaptive approach for integrating genomics into a public healthcare system.NPJ genomic medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical whole exome sequencing was introduced in an Australian centre in 2017, as an alternative to Sanger sequencing. We aimed to identify predictors of cancer physicians' somatic mutation test ordering behaviour.
methodsA validated instrument assessed somatic mutation test ordering, genomic confidence, perceived utility of tumour molecular profiling, and percent of patients eligible for targeted therapy. A cash incentive was included in 189/244 questionnaires which were mailed to all Queensland cancer specialists in November 2018.
results110 participated (response rate 45%); 54.7% oncologists, and the remainder were surgeons, haematologists and pulmonologists. Oncologists were more likely to respond (p = 0.008), and cash incentive improved the response rate (p < 0.001). 67/102 (65.7%) of physicians ordered ≥ 5 somatic mutation tests annually. Oncologists saw 86.75 unique patients monthly and ordered 2.33 somatic mutation tests (2.2%). An average of 51/110 (46.1%) reported having little/no genomic confidence. Logistic regression identified two significant predictors of somatic mutation test ordering: being an oncologist (OR 3.557, CI 1.338-9.456; p = 0.011) and having greater confidence in interpreting somatic results (OR 5.926, CI 2.230-15.74; p < 0.0001).
conclusionsConsistent with previous studies, the majority of cancer physicians ordered somatic mutation tests. However, the percentage of patients on whom tests were ordered was low. Almost half respondents reported low genomic confidence. Somatic mutation test ordering was higher amongst oncologists and those with increased confidence in interpreting somatic variants. It is unclear whether genomically confident individuals ordered more tests or whether ordering more tests increased genomic confidence. Educational interventions could improve confidence and enhance test ordering behaviour.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.