Best practices for companion diagnostic and therapeutic development: translating between the stakeholders

Evaluation of personalized cancer therapies based on comprehensive genomic profiling in a middle-sized oncologic center in Austria, the University Clinic Krems

•

64 of 69 patients’ samples could be profiled. Median alterations: 4 (0 - 23), most frequently TP53, KRAS & CDKN2A/B.

•

In 13 patients (20% of 64 successful profiles), personalized therapies could be initiated.

•

Effectiveness was seen in 8/13 patients (61,5%) of the precision oncology cohort vs 3/22 (13,5%) treated with chemotherapy.

•

Kaplan-Meier curves show significant PFS benefit for personalized treated patients (p = 0,0165; median 151 days vs 83 days).

•

Personalized cancer therapy is effective and feasible also in the setting of a middle-sized oncologic center.

Background and Aim

To successfully apply personalized cancer therapies, thorough understanding of the patient's tumor is needed. In-depth, comprehensive genomic profiling systems allow gathering this knowledge by testing hundreds of cancer-related genes. Several large institutions have established precision oncology programs in recent years with promising results for patients. However, especially middle-sized oncologic institutions face challenges to implement such programs.

This study aims to retrospectively analyze the effects of comprehensive genomic tumor profiling with respect to feasibility and effectiveness in a middle-sized oncologic center in Austria.

Methods

From May 1st, 2016 to December 31st, 2019 patients at the University Clinic Krems, who suffered from CUP-syndromes plus patients, who were resistant to conventional therapy or have progressed after all available therapy lines, were offered to get their tumors analyzed by comprehensive genomic profiling in order to establish a customized therapy.

Results

Of 69 considered patients, 64 patients’ samples could be profiled. The median number of detected alterations was 4 (minimum 0; maximum 23). Most frequent alterations were reported for TP53, KRAS and CDKN2A/B.

In 13 patients (20% of 64 successful profiles), personalized therapies could be initiated. 22 patients were treated with another line of chemotherapy as no actionable alteration could be detected. Effectiveness, determined by a PFS of the newly initiated therapy longer than 130% of the last conventional therapy line, could be seen in 8 of 13 patients (61,5%) of the precision oncology cohort compared to only 3 of 22 patients (13,5%) in the chemotherapy group. Additionally, Kaplan-Meier curves of PFS demonstrate a significant benefit for personalized treated patients (p = 0,0165 with a median PFS of 151 days, compared to 83 days in the chemotherapy group).

Conclusion

In summary, personalized cancer therapy based on comprehensive genomic profiling is effective and feasible also in the setting of a middle-sized oncologic center.

Pre-approval incentives to promote adoption of personalized medicine: a theoretical approach

BACKGROUND

Currently, personalised medicine is becoming more frequently used and many drug companies are including this strategy to gain market access for very specialized therapies. In this article, in order to understand the relationships between the health authority and the drug company when deciding upon the implementation of personalized medicines, we take a theoretical perspective to model it when the price and reimbursement policy follows a pay-for-performance scheme. During the development of a new drug, the firm must decide whether to generate additional knowledge by investing in additional resources to stratify the target population based on a biomarker or directly apply for marketing authorization for the new treatment without information on the characteristics of patients who could respond to it. In this context, we assume that the pricing policy is set by the health authority, and then we characterize the pricing and investment decisions contingent on the rate of response to the treatment.

RESULTS

We find that the price when the firm carries out R&D leading to the personalized treatments is not necessarily higher than the price if the firm does not carry out the R&D investment. When the rate of response to the treatment is too low, then the new drug is not marketed. If the rate of response is too high, personalized medicine is not implemented. For intermediate values of the rate of response, the adoption of personalized medicine may occur if the investment costs are sufficiently low; otherwise, the treatment is given to all patients without additional information on their characteristics. The higher the quality of the genetic test (in terms of its sensitivity and specificity), the wider the interval for the values of the proportional responders for which personalized medicine may be implemented.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that pre-approval incentives (prices) to promote the personalized treatments depend on the specific characteristics of the disease and the efficacy of the treatment. The model gives an intuitive idea about what to expect in terms of price incentives when the possibility of personalizing treatments becomes a strategic decision for the stakeholders.

PTEN as a Prognostic/Predictive Biomarker in Cancer: An Unfulfilled Promise?

Identifying putative biomarkers of clinical outcomes in cancer is crucial for successful enrichment, and for the selection of patients who are the most likely to benefit from a specific therapeutic approach. Indeed, current research in personalized cancer therapy focuses on the possibility of identifying biomarkers that predict prognosis, sensitivity or resistance to therapies. Phosphatase and tensin homolog deleted on chromosome 10 (PTEN) is a tumor suppressor gene that regulates several crucial cell functions such as proliferation, survival, genomic stability and cell motility through both enzymatic and non-enzymatic activities and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)-dependent and -independent mechanisms. Despite its undisputed role as a tumor suppressor, assessment of PTEN status in sporadic human tumors has yet to provide clinically robust prognostic, predictive or therapeutic information. This is possibly due to the exceptionally complex regulation of PTEN function, which involves genetic, transcriptional, post-transcriptional and post-translational events. This review shows a brief summary of the regulation and function of PTEN and discusses its controversial aspects as a prognostic/predictive biomarker.

The changing face of clinical trials in the personalized medicine and immuno-oncology era: report from the international congress on clinical trials in Oncology & Hemato-Oncology (ICTO 2017)

In the past decade, the oncology community has witnessed major advances in the understanding of cancer biology and major breakthroughs in several different therapeutic areas, from solid tumors to hematological malignancies; moreover, the advent of effective immunotherapy approaches, such as immune-checkpoint blockade, is revolutionizing treatment algorithms in almost all oncology disease areas. As knowledge evolves and new weapons emerge in the “war against cancer”, clinical and translational research need to adapt to a rapidly changing environment to effectively translate novel concepts into sustainable and accessible therapeutic options for cancer patients.

With this in mind, translational cancer researchers, oncology professionals, treatment experts, CRO and industry leaders, as well as patient representatives gathered in London, 16-17 March 2017, for The International Congress on Clinical Trials in Oncology and Hemato-Oncology (ICTO2017), to discuss the changing face of oncology clinical trials in the new era of personalized medicine and immuno-oncology. A wide range of topics, including clinical trial design in immuno-oncology, biomarker-oriented drug development paths, statistical design and endpoint selection, challenges in the design and conduct of personalized medicine clinical trials, risk-based monitoring, financing and reimbursement, as well as best operational practices, were discussed in an open, highly interactive format, favoring networking among all relevant stakeholders. The most relevant data, approaches and issues emerged and discussed during the conference are summarized in this report.

Other side of the coin for personalised medicine and healthcare: content analysis of 'personalised' practices in the literature

OBJECTIVES

Various terms and definitions are used to describe personalised approaches to medicine and healthcare, but in ambiguous and inconsistent ways. They mostly have been defined in a top-down manner. However, actual practices might take different paths. Here, we aimed to provide a 'practice-based' perspective on the debate by analysing the content of 'personalised' practices published in the literature.

METHODS

The search in PubMed and EMBASE (April 2014) using the terms frequently used for personalised approaches resulted in 5333 records. 2 independent researchers used different strategies for screening, resulting in 157 articles describing 88 'personalised' practices that were implemented/presented on at least 1 individual/patient case. The content analysis was grounded on these data and did not have a priori analytical frameworks.

RESULTS

'Personalised medicine/healthcare' can be a commodity in the healthcare market, a way how health services are provided, or a keyword for emerging applications. It can help individuals/patients to gain control of their health, health professionals to provide better services, healthcare organisations to increase effectiveness and efficiency, or national health systems to increase performance. Country examples indicated that for integration of practices into health services, attitude towards innovations and health system and policy context is important. Categorisation based on the terms or the technologies used, if any, was not possible.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to provide a comprehensive content analysis of the 'personalised' practices in the literature. Unlike the top-down definitions, our findings highlighted not the technologies but real-life issues faced by the practices. 'Personalised medicine' and 'personalised healthcare' can be differentiated by using the former for specific tools available and the latter for health services with a holistic approach, implemented in certain contexts. To realise integration of 'personalised medicine/healthcare' into real life, science, technology, health policy and practice, and society domains must work together.

An index of barriers for the implementation of personalised medicine and pharmacogenomics in Europe

BACKGROUND

Personalised medicine (PM) is an innovative way to produce better patient outcomes by using an individualised or stratified approach to disease and treatment rather than a collective treatment approach for patients. Despite its tangible advantages, the complex process to translate PM into the member states and European healthcare systems has delayed its uptake. The aim of this study is to identify relevant barriers represented by an index to summarise challenging areas for the implementation of PM in Europe.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted, and a gaps-and-needs assessment together with a strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-and-threats analysis were applied to review strategic reports and conduct interviews with key stakeholders. Furthermore, surveys were sent out to representatives of stakeholder groups. The index was constructed based on the priorisation of relevant factors by stakeholders.

RESULTS

A need for stakeholder-agreed standards at all levels of implementation of PM exists, from validating biomarkers to definitions of 'informed consent'. The barriers to implement PM are identified in 7 areas, namely, stakeholder involvement, standardisation, interoperable infrastructure, European-level policy making, funding, data and research, and healthcare systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Challenges in the above-mentioned areas can and must be successfully tackled if we are to create a healthier Europe through PM. In order to create an environment in which PM can thrive for the patients' best outcomes, there is an urgent need for systematic actions to remove as many barriers as possible.

Preclinical and translational research to discover potentially effective antifibrotic therapies in systemic sclerosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the strategies for preclinical and early clinical characterization of targeted antifibrotic therapies in order to optimize the probability of positive results in later stage clinical trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is a high unmet clinical need for effective antifibrotic therapies in systemic sclerosis (SSc), and in parallel a rapid development in the identification of potential molecular targets in preclinical research. Herein, we discuss the strategies for the improvement of preclinical and early clinical trials. These strategies include identification and characterization of molecular targets for therapy in vitro, selection of relevant parameters in translational animal models, confirmation of target activation in human SSc, analysis of successful target coverage after drug exposure in human SSc, and conduct of biomarker-driven proof-of-concept studies as a bridge between animal studies and Phase IIB/III studies with clinical endpoints.

SUMMARY

These strategies could increase the possibility to develop successful drugs against the fibrotic manifestations of SSc.