Catch-up on the series: FGFR3 testing in bladder cancer
Over the past few months, Diaceutics have delivered a series of digital activities focused on the clinical significance of FGFR3 testing in bladder cancer. These digital engagements emphasized key learnings that can be incorporated into routine diagnostics to ensure timely and accurate identification of patients with FGFR3 alterations.
As we conclude this series, catch-up on various activities to:
- Learn about the clinical significance of FGFR3 alterations in bladder cancer
- Listen to Key Opinion Leader, Dr. Michael Hubank discussing the clinical utility of FGFR3 alterations and technical challenges in the diagnostic journey of bladder cancer patients during the Lab Talk
- Download the FAQs and the slides from the Lab Talk for ease of reference
In the first Lab Alert, we highlighted that up to 20% of advanced urothelial carcinoma patients may have FGFR3 alterations, with FGFR3 mutations and fusions being predominant in bladder and upper tract urothelial tumors.1,2 Accurate testing of the FGFR3 gene is crucial to ensure that eligible patients receive targeted therapies tailored to FGFR3 alterations.
This was followed by a Lab Talk with Dr. Michael Hubank, Scientific Director, Clinical Genomics, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, which explored FGFR genomic alterations and their significance in bladder cancer. The session delved into FGFR3 clinical utility and the diagnostic journey for bladder cancer patients. Furthermore, Dr. Hubank emphasized the diagnostic pitfalls that labs should consider when testing for FGFR3 in bladder cancer. Click here to watch the recording and learn more.
Thank you for joining our series. The slides from the Lab Talk are available to download by clicking the link below.
Download the Lab Talk slides
Download the FGFR3 testing FAQs.
Approval code: EM-167967
If you have any questions on this series or would like to learn more about the DXRX Network, contact help@dxrx.io.
- Helsten T et al. Clin Cancer Res 2016;22(1):259–267
- Necchi A et al. Eur Urol Focus 2019;5(4):689–692