Progression after a narrow panel
64progressing metastatic non-squamous NSCLCprior panel covered EGFR and ALK only
What was tested, or how fast can we retest?
40%
The testing gap
60%
Tempo and specimen logistics
What matters now
A negative liquid biopsy does not exclude a target detectable in tissue. About 30% of negative plasma results may still be positive on tissue testing.
64progressing metastatic non-squamous NSCLCprior panel covered EGFR and ALK only
What was tested, or how fast can we retest?
40%
The testing gap
60%
Tempo and specimen logistics
Metastatic non-squamous NSCLC after systemic therapyconfirmed HER2 activating mutation, untreated
The evidence, or this patient's situation?
35%
The evidence in this setting
65%
This patient's circumstances
Metastatic HER2-mutant NSCLCprogression after real disease control on HER2-directed therapy
The evidence, or the patient's history?
40%
The evidence in this setting
60%
This patient's history and fit
Metastatic non-squamous NSCLC, progressingNGS flags a HER2 alterationnext line is due
Interpretation first, or integration first?
50%
Interpretation of the finding
50%
Integration with the case
Metastatic HER2-mutant NSCLCcough and mild dyspnea days into HER2-directed therapy
Severity now, or how sure you are?
41%
Symptom severity
59%
Suspicion and context
What matters now
A negative liquid biopsy does not exclude a target detectable in tissue. About 30% of negative plasma results may still be positive on tissue testing.
5 Real World Scenarios
64progressing metastatic non-squamous NSCLCprior panel covered EGFR and ALK only
What was tested, or how fast can we retest?
Where does the evidence land?
40%
The testing gap
60%
Tempo and specimen logistics
Metastatic non-squamous NSCLC after systemic therapyconfirmed HER2 activating mutation, untreated
The evidence, or this patient's situation?
Where does the evidence land?
35%
The evidence in this setting
65%
This patient's circumstances
Metastatic HER2-mutant NSCLCprogression after real disease control on HER2-directed therapy
The evidence, or the patient's history?
Where does the evidence land?
40%
The evidence in this setting
60%
This patient's history and fit
Metastatic non-squamous NSCLC, progressingNGS flags a HER2 alterationnext line is due
Interpretation first, or integration first?
Where does the evidence land?
50%
Interpretation of the finding
50%
Integration with the case
Metastatic HER2-mutant NSCLCcough and mild dyspnea days into HER2-directed therapy
Severity now, or how sure you are?
Where does the evidence land?
41%
Symptom severity
59%
Suspicion and context