Cancer clinical trials in the era of genomic signatures: biomedical innovation, clinical utility, and regulatory-scientific hybrids

Decision impact studies, evidence of clinical utility for genomic assays in cancer: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Decision impact studies have become increasingly prevalent in cancer prognostic research in recent years. These studies aim to evaluate the impact of a genomic test on decision-making and appear to be a new form of evidence of clinical utility. The objectives of this review were to identify and characterize decision impact studies in genomic medicine in cancer care and categorize the types of clinical utility outcomes reported.

METHODS

We conducted a search of four databases, Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science, from inception to June 2022. Empirical studies that reported a "decision impact" assessment of a genomic assay on treatment decisions or recommendations for cancer patients were included. We followed scoping review methodology and adapted the Fryback and Thornbury Model to collect and analyze data on clinical utility. The database searches identified 1803 unique articles for title/abstract screening; 269 articles moved to full-text review.

RESULTS

87 studies met inclusion criteria. All studies were published in the last 12 years with the majority for breast cancer (72%); followed by other cancers (28%) (lung, prostate, colon). Studies reported on the impact of 19 different proprietary (18) and generic (1) assays. Across all four levels of clinical utility, outcomes were reported for 22 discrete measures, including the impact on provider/team decision-making (100%), provider confidence (31%); change in treatment received (46%); patient psychological impacts (17%); and costing or savings impacts (21%). Based on the data synthesis, we created a comprehensive table of outcomes reported for clinical utility.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review is a first step in understanding the evolution and uses of decision impact studies and their influence on the integration of emerging genomic technologies in cancer care. The results imply that DIS are positioned to provide evidence of clinical utility and impact clinical practice and reimbursement decision-making in cancer care. Systematic review registration: Open Science Framework osf.io/hm3jr.

Epistemic in/justice in patient participation. A discourse analysis of the Dutch ME/CFS Health Council advisory process

In healthcare settings, patient participation is increasingly adopted as a possible remedy to ill people suffering from 'epistemic injustices' - that is to their unfair harming as knowers. In exploring and interpreting patient participation discourses within the 2013-2018 Dutch Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME)/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) Health Council advisory process, this paper assesses the epistemological emancipatory value of this participatory practice. It reveals that in the analysed case, patient representatives predominantly offer biomedical knowledge about ME/CFS. They frame this condition as primarily somatic, and accordingly, perceive appropriate diagnostic criteria, research avenues and treatment options as quantifiable, objectifiable and explicitly non-psychogenic. This paper argues that such a dominant biomedical patient participatory practice is ambiguous in terms of its ability to correct epistemic injustices towards ill people. Biomedicalized patient participation may enhance people's credibility and their ability to make sense of their illness, but it may also undermine their valid position within participatory practices as well as lead to (sustaining) biased and reductive ideas about who ill people are and what kind of knowledge they hold. The final section of this paper offers a brief reflection on how to navigate such biomedicalized participatory practices in order to attain more emancipatory ones.

Accomplishing an adaptive clinical trial for cancer: Valuation practices and care work across the laboratory and the clinic

A new generation of adaptive, multi-arm clinical trials has been developed in cancer research including those offering experimental treatments to patients based on the genomic analysis of their cancer. Depending on the molecular changes found in patients’ cancer cells, it is anticipated that targeted and personalised therapies will be made available for those who have reached the end of standard treatment options, potentially extending survival time. Results from these trials are also expected to advance genomic knowledge for patients in the future. Drawing on data from a qualitative study of one such trial in the UK, comprising observations of out-patient clinic appointments, out-patient biopsy procedures, laboratory work, and interviews with practitioners, this paper explores how the clinical and research value of one such trial was accomplished in everyday practice by focussing on the work of clinical trials and laboratory staff across recruitment, laboratory analysis, and results management. In the face of numerous potential set-backs, disappointments and failure, we explore how practitioners worked to balance the need to meet established measures of value such as numbers of patients recruited into the trial, alongside cultivating the value of positive affects for patients by managing their expectations and emotions. This care work was performed primarily by practitioners whose roles have historically been devalued in healthcare practice and yet, as we show, were critical to this process. We conclude by arguing that as complex multi-arm adaptive trials become more commonplace, we need to attend to, and render visible, the dynamic and care-full valuation practices of backstage practitioners through which experimental biomedicine is accomplished, and in doing so show that care both achieves clinical and research value, and is also a series of practices and processes that tends to tissue, patients and staff in the context of ever-present possibility of failure.

•

Experimental genomic based trials are difficult to accomplish in practice.

•

Valuation practices happen throughout recruitment and trial participation.

•

Value was made via coordinative practices of care in the context of failure.

•

Staff balance clinical and research value alongside expectations and emotions.

•

Vital backstage practices of care were performed by devalued healthcare staff.

Imperfect biomarkers for adjuvant chemotherapy in early stage breast cancer with good prognosis

The proliferation of biomarkers has raised concerns regarding the possibility for clinical judgment to be improperly removed from clinician's jurisdiction and included in laboratory tests. To evaluate the ways in which the diffusion of biomarkers questions the autonomy of clinicians, we consider the case of chemotherapy prescription to women with early stage breast cancer and a good prognosis. Drawing on a qualitative study of clinicians working in a diversity of institutional contexts, we follow three biomarkers available to guide this routinely made decision. We show that, biomarkers able to reduce all the uncertainties associated with, what we analyse as an uncomfortable decision, are sought more than dreaded by clinicians. If such ideal tools are unavailable, the fact is well acknowledged by the profession. Rather than precluding their usage, the imperfection of existing biomarkers is controlled by the profession, through their integration as additional tools in the decision process. The fact that the biomarkers are recognized as imperfect biomedical entities reinforces the importance of local material, organizational and financial constraints over that of international science, technology and clinical data, in their diffusion. The regulation of the uncertainties associated with these imperfections is organized at the professional level. Through an important work, relying on guidelines and enforced in collective bodies, the series of heterogeneous bioclinical evidences available are articulated. Biomarkers tend to be subordinated to the clinic. While maintaining the professional autonomy, the process also strengthens the internal professional hierarchy. When the most expert clinicians manage to inhabit a space for clinical autonomy, the nonexpert are torn between stronger professional rules and patient preferences. In this alliance between biomarkers and experts, their clinical autonomy tends to be the price for the professional autonomy.

Diagnosis: From classification to prediction

Over the last two decades diagnostic labels have increasingly been sub-divided based on molecular and genetic 'signatures'. But this emphasis on disease sub-types defined in molecular terms, elides the central role of population-based predictive technologies in determining these new diagnoses. While molecular diagnostic sub-types might flow from the laboratory, the clinical validity of every putative diagnostic category must ultimately be tested against its predictive powers. In effect, the former logic of prognosis following diagnosis is reversed. This paper explores the emergence of this new method of diagnostic practice over the last half century.

Multi-polar scripts: Techno-regulatory environments and the rise of precision oncology diagnostic tests

The paper examines the development and marketing of five multi-gene tests, a.k.a. as tumor signatures, designed to aid clinicians and cancer patients in therapeutic decision-making, and, in particular, to avoid overtreatment. We build on a 2011 paper that investigated the emergence of this new domain by opening the 'black box' of two pioneering tests and analyzing the hybrid, scientific-regulatory 'scripts' that were built into them. In subsequent years, second-generation tests, produced by a diverse blend of academic and commercial initiatives, have become available, and they all built into their scripts the lessons learned from their predecessors. The present paper confirms the heuristic value of the initial script-analysis but expands it to consider the multi-polar nature of the space within which multigene tests mutually position themselves. We examine how the tests were first problematized - i.e. how they described and prescribed the kind of world in which they would operate - and how their initial problematization was re-specified following the emergence of a comparative arena and their resulting informational enrichment. In parallel, we explore valuation processes, i.e. the evolving definition of the set of referents against which the assays are mutually compared, and the debates about the appropriate criteria for doing so. We note that the cancer diagnostic industry is involved in the reconfiguration of the multi-polar environment defined by socio-technical, techno-scientific, and regulatory matters of concern that seamlessly blend commercial and scientific considerations.

The sociology of cancer: a decade of research

Biomedicine is often presented as the driving force behind improvements in cancer care, with genomics the latest innovation poised to change the meaning, diagnosis, treatment, prevention and lived experience of cancer. Reviewing sociological analyses of a diversity of patient and practitioner experiences and accounts of cancer during the last decade (2007-17), we explore the experiences of, approaches to and understandings of cancer in this period. We identify three key areas of focus: (i) cancer patient experiences and identities; (ii) cancer risk and responsibilities and (iii) bioclinical collectives. We explore these sociological studies of societal and biomedical developments and how sociologists have sought to influence developments in cancer identities, care and research. We end by suggesting that we extend our understanding of innovations in the fields of cancer research to take better account of these wider social and cultural innovations, together with patients, activists' and sociologists' contributions therein.

Informing materials: drugs as tools for exploring cancer mechanisms and pathways

This paper builds on previous work that investigated anticancer drugs as 'informed materials', i.e., substances that undergo an informational enrichment that situates them in a dense relational web of qualifications and measurements generated by clinical experiments and clinical trials. The paper analyzes the recent transformation of anticancer drugs from 'informed' to 'informing material'. Briefly put: in the post-genomic era, anti-cancer drugs have become instruments for the production of new biological, pathological, and therapeutic insights into the underlying etiology and evolution of cancer. Genomic platforms characterize individual patients' tumors based on their mutational landscapes. As part of this new approach, drugs targeting specific mutations transcend informational enrichment to become tools for informing (and destabilizing) their targets, while also problematizing the very notion of a 'target'. In other words, they have become tools for the exploration of cancer pathways and mechanisms. While several studies in the philosophy and history of biomedicine have called attention to the heuristic relevance and experimental use of drugs, few have investigated concrete instances of this role of drugs in clinical research.

Translating genetics beyond bench and bedside: A comparative perspective on health care infrastructures for 'familial' breast cancer

Developments in genomics research are considered to have great potential for improving health care - making genomics an urgent site for translational efforts. Yet while much emphasis is put on the technical challenges of translation, there is less scholarly attention for the social infrastructures through which novel medical interventions may be delivered to patient populations. Reflecting the idea that cancer is at the frontier of genomic applications in health care, this paper explores how the assessment of familial breast cancer risks was 'translated' into routine health care in Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. The paper identifies regulation, institutionalization and standardization as key mechanisms of translation that find distinct expression in particular sociocultural contexts and shape both the social and technical making of genomics into routine clinical practice. Translation is therefore an area of social as well as technical concern, and therefore requires collective decision-making.

"Triple negative breast cancer": Translational research and the (re)assembling of diseases in post-genomic medicine

The paper examines the debate about the nature and status of "Triple-negative breast cancer", a controversial biomedical entity whose existence illustrates a number of features of post-genomic translational research. The emergence of TNBC is intimately linked to the rise of molecular oncology, and, more generally, to the changing configuration of the life sciences at the turn of the new century. An unprecedented degree of integration of biological and clinical practices has led to the proliferation of bio-clinical entities emerging from translational research. These translations take place between platforms rather than between clinical and laboratory settings. The complexity and heterogeneity of TNBC, its epistemic and technical, biological and clinical dualities, result from its multiple instantiations via different platforms, and from the uneven distribution of biological materials, techniques, and objects across clinical research settings. The fact that TNBC comes in multiple forms, some of which seem to be incompatible or, at least, only partially overlapping, appears to be less a threat to the whole endeavor, than an aspect of an ongoing translational research project. Discussions of translational research that rest on a distinction between basic research and its applications fail to capture the dynamics of this new domain of activity, insofar as application is built-in from the very beginning in the bio-clinical entities that emerge from the translational research domain.

Controlled human malaria infection trials: How tandems of trust and control construct scientific knowledge

Controlled human malaria infections are clinical trials in which healthy volunteers are deliberately infected with malaria under controlled conditions. Controlled human malaria infections are complex clinical trials: many different groups and institutions are involved, and several complex technologies are required to function together. This functioning together of technologies, people, and institutions is under special pressure because of potential risks to the volunteers. In this article, the authors use controlled human malaria infections as a strategic research site to study the use of control, the role of trust, and the interactions between trust and control in the construction of scientific knowledge. The authors argue that tandems of trust and control play a central role in the successful execution of clinical trials and the construction of scientific knowledge. More specifically, two aspects of tandems of trust and control will be highlighted: tandems are sites where trust and control coproduce each other, and tandems link the personal, the technical, and the institutional domains. Understanding tandems of trust and control results in setting some agendas for both clinical trial research and science and technology studies.

SOCIO-ETHICAL ISSUES IN PERSONALIZED MEDICINE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTS OF GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING TESTS FOR BREAST CANCER PROGNOSIS

OBJECTIVES

There have been multiple calls for explicit integration of ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) in health technology assessment (HTA) and addressing ELSI has been highlighted as key in optimizing benefits in the Omics/Personalized Medicine field. This study examines HTAs of an early clinical example of Personalized Medicine (gene expression profile tests [GEP] for breast cancer prognosis) aiming to: (i) identify ELSI; (ii) assess whether ELSIs are implicitly or explicitly addressed; and (iii) report methodology used for ELSI integration.

METHODS

A systematic search for HTAs (January 2004 to September 2012), followed by descriptive and qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Seventeen HTAs for GEP were retrieved. Only three (18%) explicitly presented ELSI, and only one reported methodology. However, all of the HTAs included implicit ELSI. Eight themes of implicit and explicit ELSI were identified. "Classical" ELSI including privacy, informed consent, and concerns about limited patient/clinician genetic literacy were always presented explicitly. Some ELSI, including the need to understand how individual patients' risk tolerances affect clinical decision-making after reception of GEP results, were presented both explicitly and implicitly in HTAs. Others, such as concern about evidentiary deficiencies for clinical utility of GEP tests, occurred only implicitly.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a wide variety of important ELSI raised, these were rarely explicitly addressed in HTAs. Explicit treatment would increase their accessibility to decision-makers, and may augment HTA efficiency maximizing their utility. This is particularly important where complex Personalized Medicine applications are rapidly expanding choices for patients, clinicians and healthcare systems.

Homogeneity and heterogeneity as situational properties: producing--and moving beyond?--race in post-genomic science

In this article, we explore current thinking and practices around the logics of difference in gene-environment interaction research in the post-genomic era. We find that scientists conducting gene-environment interaction research continue to invoke well-worn notions of racial difference and diversity, but use them strategically to try to examine other kinds of etiologically significant differences among populations. Scientists do this by seeing populations not as inherently homogeneous or heterogeneous, but rather by actively working to produce homogeneity along some dimensions and heterogeneity along others in their study populations. Thus we argue that homogeneity and heterogeneity are situational properties--properties that scientists seek to achieve in their study populations, the available data, and other aspects of the research situation they are confronting, and then leverage to advance post-genomic science. Pointing to the situatedness of homogeneity and heterogeneity in gene-environment interaction research underscores the work that these properties do and the contingencies that shape decisions about research procedures. Through a focus on the situational production of homogeneity and heterogeneity more broadly, we find that gene-environment interaction research attempts to shift the logic of difference from solely racial terms as explanatory ends unto themselves, to racial and other dimensions of difference that may be important clues to the causes of complex diseases.

Translating biomedical science into clinical practice: Molecular diagnostics and the determination of malignancy

The identification of new biomarkers that help understand the epidemiological basis of patterns of malignancy at a population level is reshaping conceptions of health, disease and normality. These developments create new challenges for clinicians and the ways in which they work with scientists and engage with patients. Bioclinical collectives, an assemblage of laboratory and clinical evidence and practice, comprise different expert groups of scientists and clinicians who typically enact their expertise through boundary work to establish some degree of jurisdictional authority over their practice. Serra (2010) has argued for the existence of 'medical technocracies' wherein each speciality involved defines the boundaries between themselves in daily medical practices and use technology as a resource to construct their particular strategies. In this article we explore these two aspects of biomedical expertise - the collective and the boundaried domains of diagnostic practice (especially in regard to clinical utility) - to understand how haematological malignancy and disease are perceived and managed. The empirical data for the article are based on extensive primary research in hospitals based in the north of the UK, and among clinicians and laboratory scientists working in haematological malignancies. Our chosen field of inquiry - a haematological malignancy diagnostic service in the UK - is a particularly rich site through which to explore these twin aspects.

The challenge of implementing genetic tests with clinical utility while avoiding unsound applications

Genetics and genomics have developed fast in the last decade, but have not revolutionized medicine, as some had expected. While translation of research findings to public health applications is lagging behind, direct-to-consumer (DTC) offers of genetic testing have become available, both for monogenic and severe genetic disorders and for genetic variants possibly associated with common complex diseases (susceptibility variants). The European Society of Human Genetics is concerned about the way in which commercial companies are currently introducing genetic tests into the market outside of the scope of the traditional health-care system. There is a sort of a paradox between the lagging implementation in health care of the few genetic tests with proven clinical utility, on the one hand, and the speedy DTC offer of tests, with or without clinical utility. To translate research findings into appropriate clinical applications, assessment of the clinical validity and utility is needed. Many of the parameters needed in assessment frameworks are not available yet. Clinically relevant associations between genetic variants and disease risks have been established, e.g., in oncogenetics and cardiogenetics, and can be used to reflect on the possibilities and obstacles in using the new genetics in public health. In the absence of sufficient information on clinical validity and clinical utility, introduction of genetic tests in common complex disorders is often premature. Priority should be given to settings where clinical utility is proven or likely, to gain additional information concerning diagnosis, prognosis, and disease management. Monitoring and evaluation are essential.

[The emergence and development of gene expression profiling: a key component of the 3B (bench, bedside, bytes) in translational research]

This paper examines the emergence and development of one of the key components of genomics, namely gene expression profiling. It does so by resorting to computer-based methods to analyze and visualize networks of scientific publications. Our results show the central role played by oncology in this domain, insofar as the initial proof-of-principle articles based on a plant model organism have quickly led to the demonstration of the value of these techniques in blood cancers and to applications in the field of solid tumors, and in particular breast cancer. The article also outlines the essential role played by novel bioinformatics and biostatistical tools in the development of the domain. These computational disciplines thus qualify as one of the three corners (in addition to the laboratory and the clinic) of the translational research triangle.

When humans are the exception: cross-species databases at the interface of biological and clinical research

Cross-species comparison has long been regarded as a stepping-stone for medical research, enabling the discovery and testing of prospective treatments before they undergo clinical trial on humans. Post-genomic medicine has made cross-species comparison crucial in another respect: the 'community databases' developed to collect and disseminate data on model organisms are now often used as a template for the dissemination of data on humans and as a tool for comparing results of medical significance across the human-animal boundary. This paper identifies and discusses four key problems encountered by database curators when integrating human and non-human data within the same database: (1) picking criteria for what counts as reliable evidence, (2) selecting metadata, (3) standardising and describing research materials and (4) choosing nomenclature to classify data. An analysis of these hurdles reveals epistemic disagreement and controversies underlying cross-species comparisons, which in turn highlight important differences in the experimental cultures of biologists and clinicians trying to make sense of these data. By considering database development through the eyes of curators, this study casts new light on the complex conjunctions of biological and clinical practice, model organisms and human subjects, and material and virtual sources of evidence--thus emphasizing the fragmented, localized and inherently translational nature of biomedicine.

Regulating diagnosis in post-genomic medicine: re-aligning clinical judgment?

In recent years, genomic technologies have entered oncology. In particular, so-called tumor signatures are now commercially available for diagnosing breast cancer. These new diagnostic tools have expanded the content and meaning of diagnosis, by adding a distinctive prognostic (will the disease recur?) and predictive (how will the disease react to treatment?) dimension to this activity, and modifying the relations between diagnosis and therapy. In particular, they raise the issue of the locus of clinical judgment and clinical decision-making insofar as they involve a re-alignment of the biological and clinical components of medical activities. Using as a case study a debate over the regulation of tests for genomic signatures by the US FDA, this paper examines how the actors problematize the issues related to the introduction of molecular diagnostics into clinical settings.