Real-World Actionability Analysis of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Versus Single/Small-Gene Panels
Paul Spin, Bela Bapat, Chad Moretz, Robert Dumanois, Adrienne M Gilligan, Mostafa Shokoohi, Emily Borgundvaag, John Fox, Carlo Bifulco, David Bartlett · 2026
Read Real-World Actionability Analysis of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Versus Single/Small-Gene Panels by Paul Spin, Bela Bapat, Chad Moretz, Robert Dumanois, Adrienne M Gilligan, Mostafa Shokoohi, Emily Borgundvaag, John Fox, Carlo Bifulco, David Bartlett (2026) in the Tower of Babel, a free online library of public-domain works preserved in clean, searchable text. No sign-up. The full text is served as a plain-text file at a predictable URL, where text is present: https://antarctic-labs.com/tower-of-babel/PMC13575034.txt.
Description
Paul Spin and nine colleagues compare broad gene testing with small gene panels in advanced cancer, in a 2026 real-world study. Broad profiling reads many genes at once and can flag patients who match targeted drugs. The question was how much more often the broad test finds changes that doctors can act on.
The study covered 406 patients with advanced solid tumours, about half with lung cancer. After weighting to balance the groups, broad testing found top-level actionable changes in 50.0 percent of patients, against 31.4 percent for small panels. Gains appeared at other action levels too. The authors argue wider coverage and payment for broad testing would open targeted care to more patients.
Catalog record
| CREATOR | Paul Spin, Bela Bapat, Chad Moretz, Robert Dumanois, Adrienne M Gilligan, Mostafa Shokoohi, Emily Borgundvaag, John Fox, Carlo Bifulco, David Bartlett |
|---|---|
| YEAR | 2026 |
| COLLECTION | PAPERS |
| FORMAT | TXT |
| FILE SIZE | 38160 |
| LICENSE | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
| RIGHTS | CC BY |
| SOURCE | Europe PMC |