Full course description
About this Course
Precision Medicine for Your Practice is a series of short (30 min), online modules covering specific topics in genomics and precision medicine. In this module, Exploring Somatic Cancer Panel Testing, participants will learn about large somatic cancer panels, which test for dozens or hundreds of variants that may be driving cancer growth and suggest therapeutics targeted to the variants that are identified. When should these panels be used? And which patients are good candidates? Learn about benefits, limitations, and challenges of using large somatic cancer panels using the five parts of this module: overview information via an animated video; practice cases to facilitate learning-by-doing; "dig deeper" for more in-depth topics; and logistics and additional resources for more detail.
Already enrolled? Access the course directly here.
Precision Medicine for Your Practice: Exploring Somatic Cancer Panel Testing-CNE
Original Publication Date: December 20, 2016
Renewal Date: December 19, 2019
Expiration Date: September 21, 2020
Upon completion of this educational activity, the learner will be able to:
- Identify the types of clinical information that can be gained from large somatic cancer panels.
- Determine how large somatic cancer panel results could be applied to patient care.
This activity is designed to meet the educational needs of practicing advanced practice nurses, physicians and physician assistants who provide oncology care.
CNE Approval Statement
The Jackson Laboratory is co-providing this continuing nursing education activity with the American Medical Association and Scripps Translational Science Institute. This continuing nursing education activity was approved by the Northeast Multi-State Division (NE-MSD), an accredited approver by the American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission on Accreditation.
Claiming Your Credit
In order to claim credit 1) answer the pre-assessment questions, 2) work through the module content in its entirety, 3) successfully complete the post-assessment answering 4 out of 5 questions correctly and 4) complete the evaluation. Nurses are eligible for a maximum of .50 contact hours upon the completion of this activity.
Planning Committee & Faculty
- Linda Steinmark, MS, LGC, Project Manager, The Jackson Laboratory
- Kate Reed, MPH, ScM, CGC, Director, Clinical and Continuing Education, The Jackson Laboratory
- Therese Ingram, MA, Senior Instructional Designer/Technologist, The Jackson Laboratory
- Emily Edelman, MS, CGC, Associate Director, Clinical and Continuing Education, The Jackson Laboratory
- Sean McConnell, PhD, Senior Policy Analyst, Science, Medicine & Public Health, CME Program Committee, American Medical Association
- Laura Nicholson, MD, PhD, Director of Education, Scripps Research Translational Institute
- Janet K. Williams, PhD, RN, FAAN, Professor of Nursing, Chair of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research, University of Iowa
Subject Matter Experts
- Christine M. Walko, PharmD, BCOP, FCCP, Personalized Medicine Expert, DeBartolo Family Personalized Medicine Institute, Moffitt Cancer Center
- Jens Rueter, MD, Medical Director, Maine Cancer Genomics Initiative, The Jackson Laboratory
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Unless otherwise noted, the program planners and faculty do not have a financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organizations that could be perceived as a real or apparent conflict of interest in the context of the subject of this course.
The following disclosures are reported that could be perceived as a real or apparent conflict of interest in the education program:
Janet K. Williams, PhD, RN, FAAN, stockholder of Pfizer
In her role as a planner, Dr. Williams recused herself from all deliberations relating to content related to the commercial entities with which she has a financial interest and is not responsible for reviewing for bias any related content. All educational material has been peer-reviewed by external reviewers to assess for bias.
Brusco LL, Wathoo C, Mills Shaw KR, et al. Physician interpretation of genomic test results and treatment selection. Cancer. 2018; 124(5):966-972.
Damodaran S, Berger MF, Roychowdhury S. Clinical tumor sequencing: opportunities and challenges for precision cancer medicine. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2015:e175-82.
Gingras I, Sonnenblick A, de Azambuja E, et al. The current use and attitudes towards tumor genome sequencing in breast cancer. Sci Rep. 2016. 6:22517
Gray SW, Hicks-Courant K, Cronin A, Rollins BJ, Weeks JC. Physicians' attitudes about multiplex tumor genomic testing. J Clin Oncol. 2014 May. 32(13):1317-23.
Gray SW, Park ER, Najita J, et al. Oncologists' and cancer patients' views on whole-exome sequencing and incidental findings: results from the CanSeq study. Genet Med. 2016. 18(10):1011-9.
Gray SW, Kim B, Sholl L, et al. Medical Oncologists’ Experiences in Using Genomic Testing for Lung and Colorectal Cancer Care. JOP. 2017; 13(3):e185-e196.
Le Tourneau C, Kamal M, Tsimberidou AM, et al. Treatment Algorithms Based on Tumor Molecular Profiling: The Essence of Precision Medicine Trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015. 108(4).
Levy MA, Lovly CM, Pao W. Translating genomic information into clinical medicine: lung cancer as a paradigm. Genome Res. 2012. 22(11):2101-8.
Li MM, Datto M, Duncavage EJ, et al. Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation and Reporting of Sequence Variants in Cancer. J Mol Diagn. 2017; 19(1):4-23.
Marrone M, Filipski KK, Gillanders EM, Schully SD, Freedman AN. Multi-marker Solid Tumor Panels Using Next-generation Sequencing to Direct Molecularly Targeted Therapies. PLoS Curr. 2014. 6.
National Comprehensive Cancer Center. Guidelines for Treatment of Cancer by Site. Accessed 12/18/2019
Pinheiro APM, Pocock RH, Switchenko JM, et al. Discussing molecular testing in oncology care: Comparing patient and physician information preferences. Cancer. 2017; 123(9):1610-1616.
Schram AM, Reales D, Galle J, et al. Oncologist use and perception of large panel next-generation tumor sequencing. Ann Oncol. 2017; 28(9):2298-2304.
Siegelin MD, Borczuk AC. Epidermal growth factor receptor mutations in lung adenocarcinoma. Lab Invest. 2014. 94(2):129-37.
Strom, SP. Current Practices and Guidelines for Clinical Next-Generation Sequencing Oncology Testing. Cancer Biol Med. 2016. Mar;13(1):3-11.
Subbiah V, Kurzrock R. Universal Genomic Testing Needed to Win the War Against Cancer: Genomics IS the Diagnosis. JAMA Oncol. 2016. 2(6):719-20.
Tannock IF, Hickman JA. Limits to Personalized Cancer Medicine. N Engl J Med. 2016. 375(13):1289-94.
West HJ. No Solid Evidence, Only Hollow Argument for Universal Tumor Sequencing: Show Me the Data. JAMA Oncol. 2016. ;2(6):717-8.
Williams MS. Early Lessons from the Implementation of Genomic Medicine Programs. Annu Rev Genom. Hum. Genet. 2019; 20(1):389-411.
Audio speakers or headphones
Screen resolution of 800X600 or higher
Adobe Reader 5.0 or higher
For the best performance in a mobile environment, please download the Canvas Mobile App for IOS and Android.
Should you have technical questions or questions regarding the content of the activity, please email Clinical and Continuing Education at the Jackson Laboratory.
All information in Precision Medicine for Your Practice is provided for educational purposes only. This information is not a substitute for clinical guidance or the consultation of a medical professional. Always seek the advice of a qualified health professional with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have read in Precision Medicine for Your Practice. Reliance on any information in Precision Medicine for Your Practice is solely at your own risk. The Jackson Laboratory does not endorse or recommend any specific procedures, tests, products, services, health professionals or other information that may be found in Precision Medicine for Your Practice.