Clinical Outcomes of Molecular Tumor Boards: A Systematic Review
Paper cited by one technology page, indexed on Europe PMC as PubMed record 34632252 and published in JCO Precision Oncology; the citing page links this DOI, which is how the record was matched.
Overview
We conducted this systematic review to evaluate the clinical outcomes associated with molecular tumor board (MTB) review in patients with cancer.
Methods: A systematic search of PubMed was performed to identify studies reporting clinical outcomes in patients with cancer who were reviewed by an MTB. To be included, studies had to report clinical outcomes, including clinical benefit, response, progression-free survival, or overall survival. Two reviewers independently selected studies and assessed quality with the Quality Assessment Tool for Before-After (Pre-Post) Studies with No Control Group or the Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies depending on the type of study being reviewed.
Results: Fourteen studies were included with a total of 3,328 patients with cancer. All studies included patients without standard-of-care treatment options and usually with multiple prior lines of therapy. In studies reporting response rates, patients receiving MTB-recommended therapy had overall response rates ranging from 0% to 67%. In the only trial powered on clinical outcome and including a control group, the group receiving MTB-recommended therapy had significantly improved rate of progression-free survival compared with those receiving conventional therapy.
Conclusion: Although data quality is limited by a lack of prospective randomized controlled trials, MTBs appear to improve clinical outcomes for patients with cancer. Future research should concentrate on prospective trials and standardization of approach and outcomes.
Indexed on Europe PMC as PubMed record 34632252 (DOI 10.1200/po.20.00495). Matched by DOI alone: one technology page cites this DOI among its external links (the pages are listed under Related), and this page was written so that the citation resolves inside OnCo. No figure has been checked by an editor.
One technology page on OnCo cites this paper by its DOI; this record gives the citation a page of its own so a reader can follow it without leaving OnCo. Read the abstract above alongside the citing page listed under Related; the record was created automatically from the Europe PMC entry and its figures have not been checked by hand.
- Matched to the citing OnCo records by DOI alone; the summary reproduces the Europe PMC abstract and no figure has been verified against the full paper.