| Title |
Microsatellite instability in prostate cancer by PCR or next-generation sequencing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40425-018-0341-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer A. Hempelmann, Christina M. Lockwood, Eric Q. Konnick, Michael T. Schweizer, Emmanuel S. Antonarakis, Tamara L. Lotan, Bruce Montgomery, Peter S. Nelson, Nola Klemfuss, Stephen J. Salipante, Colin C. Pritchard |
| Abstract |
Microsatellite instability (MSI) is now being used as a sole biomarker to guide immunotherapy treatment for men with advanced prostate cancer. Yet current molecular diagnostic tests for MSI have not been evaluated for use in prostate cancer. We evaluated two next-generation sequencing (NGS) MSI-detection methods, MSIplus (18 markers) and MSI by Large Panel NGS (> 60 markers), and compared the performance of each NGS method to the most widely used 5-marker MSI-PCR detection system. All methods were evaluated by comparison to targeted whole gene sequencing of DNA mismatch-repair genes, and immunohistochemistry for mismatch repair genes, where available. In a set of 91 prostate tumors with known mismatch repair status (29-deficient and 62-intact mismatch-repair) MSIplus had a sensitivity of 96.6% (28/29) and a specificity of 100% (62/62), MSI by Large Panel NGS had a sensitivity of 93.1% (27/29) and a specificity of 98.4% (61/62), and MSI-PCR had a sensitivity of 72.4% (21/29) and a specificity of 100% (62/62). We found that the widely used 5-marker MSI-PCR panel has inferior sensitivity when applied to prostate cancer and that NGS testing with an expanded panel of markers performs well. In addition, NGS methods offer advantages over MSI-PCR, including no requirement for matched non-tumor tissue and an automated analysis pipeline with quantitative interpretation of MSI-status. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 58 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 26 | 45% |
| Spain | 3 | 5% |
| Brazil | 3 | 5% |
| Canada | 2 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Argentina | 1 | 2% |
| Russia | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 31 | 53% |
| Scientists | 13 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 12 | 21% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 103 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 20 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 17% |
| Unknown | 33 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 20 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 40 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,031,639
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#237
of 3,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,716
of 340,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer
#4
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,436 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.