ArticleTranslational oncology2026
Evaluation of the 1021-HRD assay compared to established HRD testing platforms in ovarian cancer.
Article in Translational oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PARP inhibitors have revolutionized ovarian cancer treatment, with benefits strongly linked to the presence of Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD). Although HRD testing was originally conducted on centralized platforms, there is growing demand for scalable, accessible, and robust solutions capable of supporting expanded clinical utilization. In the present study, a decentralized NGS-based assay was compared for its ability to effectively identify HRD positive patients when compared to the reference assay as well as other testing platforms. Eighty-two cases of ovarian cancer patients previously tested using the reference HRD assay (Myriad MyChoice® CDx assay) were evaluated by an NGS based HRD assay, the 1021-HRD assay (GenePlus), that provides genomic instability (GI) analysis along with tumor molecular profiling. HRD status, GI status (referred to as HRD-score), and even BRCA1/2 mutation detection were assessed for concordance with the reference test and the analytical accuracy of the assay was calculated. Additionally, GI alignment across alternative HRD testing platforms was examined. Finally, the association between key tumor alterations and the HRD status was evaluated. The 1021-HRD assay demonstrated an overall HRD classification agreement of approximately 92.68 % (κ = 0.841) in comparison to the reference method, as evidenced by the results, with 81.25 % specificity and 100 % sensitivity. These features generally suggest consistent performance, with only minor discrepancies observed. The BRCA1/2 alterations detected were 97.56 % in agreement with the approved assay. The Pearson r value of 0.878 indicates a strong correlation between the GI values obtained. The assay's capacity to detect non-BRCA1/2 HRD phenotypes was verified by the observation that 55.56 % of BRCA-wildtype malignancies were HRD-positive. Of particular interest, combining molecular profiling with GI analysis, the assay identified additional actionable alterations in 65 % of the cases, revealing clinically relevant biomarkers beyond the homologous recombination pathway. This wide-ranging approach may provide more diagnostic and therapeutic insight than HRD testing alone. In conclusion, the 1021-HRD assay is a dependable, decentralized alternative for HRD testing. It can provide a more comprehensive genomic characterization and exhibits remarkable analytical concordance with current standards. Its combined format and accessibility render it well-suited for real-world use in personalized ovarian cancer care. Its additional capacity to reveal more extensive tumor genomic alterations improves clinical decision-making and underscores the importance of integrating HRD scoring with comprehensive molecular profiling in personalized oncology.
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.