Next-Generation Sequencing–Based Cancer Panel Data Conversion Using International Standards to Implement a Clinical Next-Generation Sequencing Research System: Single-Institution Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The analytical capacity and speed of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology have been improved. Many genetic variants associated with various diseases have been discovered using NGS. Therefore, applying NGS to clinical practice results in precision or personalized medicine. However, as clinical sequencing reports in electronic health records (EHRs) are not structured according to recommended standards, clinical decision support systems have not been fully utilized. In addition, integrating genomic data with clinical data for translational research remains a great challenge. OBJECTIVE: To apply international standards to clinical sequencing reports and to develop a clinical research information system to integrate standardized genomic data with clinical data. METHODS: We applied the recently published ISO/TS 20428 standard to 367 clinical sequencing reports generated by panel (91 genes) sequencing in EHRs and implemented a clinical NGS research system by extending the clinical data warehouse to integrate the necessary clinical data for each patient. We also developed a user interface with a clinical research portal and an NGS result viewer. RESULTS: A single clinical sequencing report with 28 items was restructured into four database tables and 49 entities. As a result, 367 patients' clinical sequencing data were connected with clinical data in EHRs, such as diagnosis, surgery, and death information. This system can support the development of cohort or case-control datasets as well. CONCLUSIONS: The standardized clinical sequencing data are not only for clinical practice and could be further applied to translational research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.060 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".