Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 1, 2025
Performing Data Mining And Integrative Analysis Of Biomarker in Breast Cancer Using Multiple Publicly Accessible Databases
Published on: May 17, 2019
Biomarker Inference and the Timing of Next-Generation Sequencing in a Multi-Institutional, Cross-Cancer
Kenneth L Kehl1, Jessica A Lavery2, Samantha Brown2
1Division of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Purpose:
Observational clinicogenomic data sets, consisting of tumor next-generation sequencing (NGS) data linked to clinical records, are commonly used for cancer research. However, in real-world practice, oncologists frequently request NGS in search of treatment options for progressive cancer. The extent and impact of this dynamic on analysis of clinicogenomic research data are not well understood.
Methods:
We analyzed clinicogenomic data for patients with non-small cell lung, colorectal, breast, prostate, pancreatic, or urothelial cancers in the American Association for Cancer Research Biopharmaceutical Consortium cohort. Associations between baseline and time-varying clinical characteristics and time from diagnosis to NGS were measured. To explore the impact of informative cohort entry on biomarker inference, statistical interactions between selected biomarkers and time to NGS with respect to overall survival were calculated.
Results:
Among 7,182 patients, time from diagnosis to NGS varied significantly by clinical factors, including cancer type, calendar year of sequencing, institution, and age and stage at diagnosis. NGS rates also varied significantly by dynamic clinical status variables; in an adjusted model, compared with patients with stable disease at any given time after diagnosis, patients with progressive disease by imaging or oncologist assessment had higher NGS rates (hazard ratio for NGS, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.45 to 1.78] and 2.32 [95% CI, 2.01 to 2.67], respectively). Statistical interactions between selected biomarkers and time to NGS with respect to survival, potentially indicating biased biomarker inference results, were explored.
Conclusion:
To evaluate the appropriateness of a data set for a particular research question, it is crucial to measure associations between dynamic cancer status and the timing of NGS, as well as to evaluate interactions involving biomarkers of interest and NGS timing with respect to survival outcomes.
More Related Videos
13:24Integration of Wet and Dry Bench Processes Optimizes Targeted Next-generation Sequencing of Low-quality and Low-quantity Tumor Biopsies
Published on: April 11, 2016
11:02Detecting Somatic Genetic Alterations in Tumor Specimens by Exon Capture and Massively Parallel Sequencing
Published on: October 18, 2013
