Next-generation Sequencing (NGS) of cancer tissues is increasingly being carried out to identify somatic genomic alterations that may guide physicians to make therapeutic decisions. However, a single tissue biopsy may not reflect complete genomic architecture due to the heterogeneous nature of tumors. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis is a robust noninvasive method to detect and monitor genomic alterations in blood in real time. We analyzed 28 matched tissue NGS and ctDNA from gastrointestinal and lung cancers for concordance of somatic genomic alterations, driver, and actionable alterations. Six patients (21%) had at least one concordant mutation between tissue and ctDNA sequencing. At the gene level, among all the mutations ( = 104) detected by tissue and blood sequencing, 7.7% ( = 8) of mutations were concordant. Tissue and ctDNA sequencing identified driver mutations in 60% and 64% of the tested samples, respectively. We found high discordance between tissue and ctDNA testing, especially with respect to the driver and actionable alterations. Both tissue and ctDNA NGS detected actionable alterations in 25% of patients. When somatic alterations identified by each test were combined, the total number of patients with actionable mutations increased to 32%. Our data show significant discordance between tissue NGS and ctDNA analysis. These results suggest tissue NGS and ctDNA NGS are complementary approaches rather than exclusive of each other. When performed in isolation, tissue and ctDNA NGS can each potentially miss driver and targetable alterations, suggesting that both approaches should be incorporated to enhance mutation detection rates. Larger prospective studies are needed to better clarify this emerging precision oncology landscape. .
Introduction
Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are commonly used for thromboembolic risk reduction and treatment of pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis. However, data regarding their efficacy and safety in comparison to warfarin for left atrial appendage thrombus is limited.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search in PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Review from inception to 30 October 2019 was performed. Studies reporting clinical outcomes comparing warfarin vs NOACs were included. Two investigators independently extracted the data and individual quality assessment was performed. A meta‐analysis was performed using random‐effects model to calculate risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3.
Results
Four studies met inclusion criteria and a total of 322 patients were included of whom 141 were in the NOAC arm and 181 were in the warfarin arm. There was no significant difference in thrombus resolution between the two groups (RR, 1.00; 95% CI [0.77‐1.29; P = .98]). There was no significant difference in major bleeding (RR, 1.30; 95% CI [0.14‐12.21; P = .82]) or stroke (RR, 0.42; 95% CI [0.09‐2.06; P = .29]) between the two groups.
Conclusion
The results of our meta‐analysis show that NOACs are as efficacious and safe as warfarin in the treatment of left atrial appendage thrombus in patients with non‐valvular atrial fibrillation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.