ArticleClinical Medicine Insights. Oncology2026
National Patterns of Biomarker Testing in Colorectal, Lung, and Prostate Cancers: Insights From the NIH
Article in Clinical Medicine Insights. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Biomarker testing is central to precision oncology, yet real-world implementation across cancer types and populations remains inconsistent. Social determinants of health (SDoH) may influence testing uptake and exacerbate disparities in access to targeted therapies. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Version 7 of the NIH Results: Among 11 415 eligible participants, only 2.4% (n = 277) had documented biomarker testing, with 71.1% receiving panel-based assays. In the combined model, unemployment was significantly associated with higher odds of testing (odds ratio [OR] = 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.06-2.66), while college education showed a marginal association (OR = 1.48; 95% CI = 0.95-2.30). In cancer-specific models, NSCLC testing was predicted by education alone (OR = 1.70), while CRC testing was associated with unemployment (OR = 2.44), higher income (OR = 1.90), and smoking history. No significant predictors were found for prostate cancer. Conclusion: Despite national guidelines, biomarker testing remains underutilized and unevenly distributed across sociodemographic groups. These findings should be interpreted as exploratory, reflecting the fidelity of structured electronic health record (EHR) documentation rather than definitive utilization. Leveraging the scale and diversity of
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.