Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Introduction: Comprehensive molecular profiling (CMP) and molecularly matched therapy (MMT) have uncertain roles in advanced solid tumors. This study evaluates CMP's real-world application in Russia.
Methods: A retrospective, multicenter study analyzed CMP data from 448 patients with advanced non-hematologic malignancies (2018-2024). Genomic alterations (GA) were classified by ESMO Scale for Clinical Actionability of molecular Targets (ESCAT).
Results: ESCAT tiers included I (15.4 %), II (4.9 %), III (31.5 %), IV (19.6 %), and V/X (28.6 %). Therapy data were available for 374 patients. MMT was recommended for 56.9 % but implemented in only 23.2 % (MMT group, n = 87). MMT group showed better objective response rate (61.3 % vs. 37.1 %, p = 0.001), disease control rate (24.0 % vs. 9.2 %, p = 0.003), and progression-free survival ratio (PFS 2/1) ≥ 1.3 (45.0 % vs. 16.2 %, p < 0.01) compared to non-MMT group (n = 287). Median overall survival (OS) was borderline improved (12 vs. 8 months, HR 0.74, p = 0.06). Reasons for non-MMT management were low GA targetability (40 %), drug unavailability (30 %), clinical decline (23 %), and clinician preference (7 %). Patients with ≤3 prior therapies, ECOG performance status 0-1, and molecular tumor board discussion saw significant OS gains with MMT even for ESCAT III-V GA (5 vs. 18 months, HR 0.25, p < 0.01).
Conclusion: MMT following CMP offers clinical benefit for selected patients, even with ESCAT III-V GA, underscoring its potential in personalized oncology.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cancergen.2025.06.001 | DOI Listing |