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, Interpreting Results from Somatic Cancer Panel Testing, participants will learn how to find and use important information on somatic cancer testing panel reports. What are the key components of a test report? What do specific findings mean? Learn how to identify important test characteristics to compare and contrast offerings from different labs, find actionable information on the test report, and interpret results in the context of the individual patient 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: Interpreting Results from Somatic Cancer Panels (CNE)
Original Publication Date: June 6, 2017
Renewal Date: June 4, 2020
Expiration Date: September 21, 2020
Upon completion of this educational activity, the learner will be able to:
- Identify important test characteristics to compare and contrast offerings from different labs
- Find actionable information on the report
- Interpret results in the context of the individual patient
This activity is designed to meet the educational needs of practicing nurses and/or advanced practice nurses, physicians and physician assistants.
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, CGC, Project Manager, Clinical and Continuing Education, The Jackson Laboratory
- Kate Reed, MPH, ScM, CGC, Director, Clinical and Continuing Education, The Jackson Laboratory
- Therese Ingram Nissen, 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 Research, Graduate Medical Education (GME), Scripps Health
- 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.
Bardia A et al. Metastatic Breast Cancer With ESR1 Mutation: Clinical Management Considerations From the Molecular and Precision Medicine (MAP) Tumor Board at Massachusetts General Hospital . The Oncologist. 2016;21:1035–1040.
Dalton WB, Forde PM, Kang H, et al. Personalized Medicine in the Oncology Clinic: Implementation and Outcomes of the Johns Hopkins Molecular Tumor Board. JCO Precision Oncology. 2017: 1, 1-19.
Gray PN et al. Not All Next Generation Sequencing Diagnostics are Created Equal: Understanding the Nuances of Solid Tumor Assay Design for Somatic Mutation Detection. Cancers (Basel) . 2015. 7(3): 1313–1332.
Hegde M et al. Reporting incidental findings in genomic scale clinical sequencing: a clinical laboratory perspective: a report of the Association for Molecular Pathology. J Mol Diagn . 2015. 17: 107–117.
Hofstatter EW, Bale AE. The Promise and Pitfalls of Genomics-Driven Cancer Medicine . American Medical Association Journal of Ethics. 2013. 15(8): 681-686.
Jennings LJ, Arcila ME, Corless C, et al. Guidelines for Validation of Next-Generation Sequencing–Based Oncology Panels. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics. 2017; 19(3):341-365.
Jones S et al. Personalized genomic analyses for cancer mutation discovery and interpretation. Sci Transl Med . 2015. 7(283):283ra53.
Kalia SS et al. Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics . Genet Med. 2017. 19(2):249-255.
Knepper TC, Bell GC, Hicks JK, et al. Key Lessons Learned from Moffitt's Molecular Tumor Board: The Clinical Genomics Action Committee Experience. The Oncologist. 2017; 22(2):144-151.
Le Tourneau C et al. Treatment Algorithms Based on Tumor Molecular Profiling: The Essence of Precision Medicine Trials . JNCI. 2016. 108(4).
Li MM et al. Standards and Guidelines for the Interpretation and Reporting of Sequence Variants in Cancer . Journal of Molecular Diagnostics. 2017. 19(1):4-23.
Mandelker D, Zhang L. The emerging significance of secondary germline testing in cancer genomics. J. Pathol. 2018; 244(5):610-615.
National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines. Colon Cancer. Version 1.2020. 12/19/2019.
Raymond VM et al. Germline Findings in Tumor-Only Sequencing: Points to Consider for Clinicians and Laboratories. JNCI . 2016. 108 (4)
Richards S, Aziz N, Bale S, et al. Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics and the Association for Molecular Pathology. Genet Med. 2015; 17(5):405-423.
Schrader KA et al. Germline Variants in Targeted Tumor Sequencing Using Matched Normal DNA . JAMA Oncol. 2016 Jan;2(1):104-11.
Sholl LM et al. Institutional implementation of clinical tumor profiling on an unselected cancer population . JCI Insight. 2016. 1(19):e87062.
Tafe LJ et al. Implementation of a Molecular Tumor Board: The Impact on Treatment Decisions for 35 Patients Evaluated at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center . The Oncologist. 2015. 20:1011.
Williams MS. Early Lessons from the Implementation of Genomic Medicine Programs. Annu. Rev. Genom. Hum. Genet. 2019; 20(1):389-411.
You YN, Borras E, Chang K, et al. Detection of Pathogenic Germline Variants Among Patients With Advanced Colorectal Cancer Undergoing Tumor Genomic Profiling for Precision Medicine Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. 2019; 62(4):429-437.
Zeng J, Johnson A, Shufean MA, et al. Operationalization of Next-Generation Sequencing and Decision Support for Precision Oncology. JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics. 2019: 3, 1-12.
Audio speakers or headphones
Screen resolution of 800X600 or higher
Adobe Reader 5.0 or higher
For 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.