06 · Reports, trials and sign-off
What the oncologist receives
One clear, structured report.
Evidence
Treating oncologist review & signature
[Signature block placeholder]
Five components
How a Twin report is organised
- 01
Executive molecular summary
Overview, key findings, clinical context.
Content discipline
Distinguish source data from interpretation.
- 02
Molecular findings
Genomic and biomarker findings, in context.
Content discipline
State coverage, evidence strength and uncertainty.
- 03
Treatment options
Evidence-informed options to evaluate.
Content discipline
Options to evaluate — never phrased as autonomous prescriptions.
- 04
Clinical-trial matches
Trials matched to patient and biomarkers.
Content discipline
A potential match is not eligibility or enrolment confirmation.
Informed by
- 05
Longitudinal view
Findings and change, over time.
Content discipline
Show only updates supported by actual inputs and cadence.
Computational vs reviewed
Which parts are computational, and which are reviewed
- 01Computational · AI-assisted analysis
- 02Structured findings
- 03Reviewed & signed by the treating oncologist
- 04KPCIRC Molecular Tumour Board
The analytical layers produce AI-assisted, structured findings. Clinical interpretation is provided by qualified clinicians; the treating oncologist reviews and signs every report, which is then taken to KPCIRC's internal Molecular Tumour Board.
- 1
Treating team
Pathway and data
The treating oncologist selects the testing pathway; clinical, molecular and imaging data are integrated.
- 2
OnKommon Twin
21-layer analysis
AI-assisted analysis across the applicable layers produces structured findings for clinician review.
- 3
OnKommon Twin
Structured report
Executive summary, molecular findings, treatment options to evaluate, trial matches and longitudinal view.
- 4
Treating oncologist
Review and signature
Every report is reviewed and signed by the treating oncologist.
- 5
KPCIRC
Molecular Tumour Board
The signed report is then taken to KPCIRC's internal Molecular Tumour Board (MTB).
- 6
Treating oncologist
Decision and continuity
Clinical authority stays with the oncologist. New evidence can prompt reassessment during the six-month journey.
The treating oncologist owns every decision. Every Twin report is reviewed and signed by the treating oncologist, then taken to KPCIRC's Molecular Tumour Board.
KPCIRC sign-off processSources and uncertainty
How sources and uncertainty are presented
- Each finding states its evidence source, strength and the date it was last checked.
- Supporting and conflicting evidence are shown side by side.
- Coverage, sample limitations and uncertainty are stated, not hidden.
- Treatment options are options to evaluate; trial matches are potential matches.
- Missing inputs are listed so their effect on interpretation is visible.
- Finding / biomarker
- GENE-X · example variant (fictional)
- Origin
- Somatic / germline / unresolved — as determined by SourceGuard and confirmation pathway
- Interpretation
- Plain statement of what the finding is understood to mean in this tumour type
- Evidence source
- [Source name · version · date]
- Strength / tier
- [Tier under the documented framework — named once confirmed]
- Supporting evidence
- [Studies or curated entries that support the interpretation]
- Conflicting evidence
- [Observations that point the other way, if any]
- Context required
- Tumour type, stage, prior therapy and sample type the interpretation depends on
- Limitations & uncertainty
- Coverage, tumour content, assay limits and open questions
- Last checked
- [Date the evidence was last reviewed]
- Review status
- Pending treating-oncologist review and signature
About the illustrations
Walk through a report with the team.
See the report structure, the evidence display and the sign-off sequence in a professional demonstration.