The clinical impact of using complex molecular profiling strategies in routine oncology practice

Beyond traditional therapies: clinical significance of complex molecular profiling in patients with advanced solid tumours-results from a Turkish multi-centre study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this multi-centre, real-world study was to examine the potential influence of comprehensive molecular profiling on the development of treatment decisions or adjustments for patients with advanced solid malignancies. We then evaluated the impact of these informed choices on patient treatment outcomes.

METHODS

The study encompassed 234 adult patients (mean age: 52.7 ± 14.3 years, 54.7% women) who were diagnosed with solid tumours at 21 different medical centres in Turkey. Remarkably, 67.9% of the patients exhibited metastasis at the time of diagnosis. We utilized an OncoDNA (Gosselies, Belgium) platform (OncoDEEP) integrating next-generation sequencing with additional tests to harvest complex molecular profiling data. The results were analyzed in relation with two specific outcomes: (i) the impact on therapeutic decisions, including formulation or modifications, and (ii) associated treatment response.

RESULTS

Out of the 228 patients with final molecular profiling results, 118 (50.4%) had their treatment modified, whilst the remaining 110 (47.0%) did not. The response rates were comparable, with 3.9 versus 3.4% for complete response, 13.6 versus 29.3% for partial response, 66.9 versus 51.7% for progressive disease and 15.5 versus 15.5% for stable disease for treatments informed and not informed by complex molecular profiling, respectively (P = 0.16).

CONCLUSION

Our real-world findings highlight the significant impact of complex molecular profiling on the treatment decisions made by oncologists for a substantial portion of patients with advanced solid tumours. Regrettably, no significant advantage was detected in terms of treatment response or disease control rates.

Challenges in integrating molecular profiles into clinical cancer care

Profiling of malignancies with next-generation sequencing (NGS) is now routine in clinical practice. While many cases of approved targeted therapies are straightforward based on well-characterized alterations, applying large NGS multigene panels to therapeutic use is frequently challenging. In this article, variant interpretation, therapy matching, and final treatment selection challenges are discussed.

What are the challenges with multi-targeted drug design for complex diseases?

INTRODUCTION

Current findings on multifactorial diseases with a complex pathomechanism confirm that multi-target drugs are more efficient ways in treating them as opposed to single-target drugs. However, to design multi-target ligands, a number of factors and challenges must be taken into account.

AREAS COVERED

In this perspective, we summarize the concept of application of multi-target drugs for the treatment of complex diseases such as neurodegenerative diseases, schizophrenia, diabetes, and cancer. We discuss the aspects of target selection for multifunctional ligands and the application of in silico methods in their design and optimization. Furthermore, we highlight other challenges such as balancing affinities to different targets and drug-likeness of obtained compounds. Finally, we present success stories in the design of multi-target ligands for the treatment of common complex diseases.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite numerous challenges resulting from the design of multi-target ligands, these efforts are worth making. Appropriate target selection, activity balancing, and ligand drug-likeness belong to key aspects in the design of ligands acting on multiple targets. It should be emphasized that in silico methods, in particular inverse docking, pharmacophore modeling, machine learning methods and approaches derived from network pharmacology are valuable tools for the design of multi-target drugs.

Comprehensive genome profiling by next generation sequencing of circulating tumor DNA in solid tumors: a single academic institution experience

Background:

Recently, new evidence of the next-generation sequencing (NGS) liquid biopsy utility in clinical practice has been developed. This assay is emerging as a new promising tool to use as a noninvasive biomarker for cancer mutation profiling. Additional data supporting the clinical validity of cell free DNA (cfDNA) based testing is necessary to inform optimal use of these assays in the clinic.

Materials and methods:

A total of 398 cancer patients were analyzed by FoundationOne Liquid Analysis (F1LA), a genomic profiling assay and by standard NGS diagnostic ThermoFisher platform. The association between diagnostic technique was evaluated using a Poisson regression model. FoundationOne Liquid (F1L) and FoundationOne Liquid CDx (F1LCDx) detect 70 and 324 cancer-related genes alterations, respectively, including genomic signatures tumor fraction, blood tumor mutational burden (only for the 324 genes version), and microsatellite instability high status. Both assays used a single DNA extraction method to obtain cfDNA. The real-life clinical impact and feasibility of F1L and F1LCDx were evaluated across different solid tumors in our department.

Results:

Between 1 January 2019 and 28 February 2021, 398 samples of different tumor types from 398 patients were analyzed (overall success rate: 92%, in FoundationOne Liquid CDx Analysis success rate: 97%). Most frequent molecular alterations were TP53 (74), APC (40), DNMT3A (39), KRAS (23). The comprehensive clinical impact of F1LA compared with standard diagnostic was 64.7% versus 22.1% [risk ratio (RR) = 2.94; p < 0.001] and the potential clinical impact was 58.6% versus 11.0% (RR = 5.32; p < 0.001), respectively. Furthermore, some clinical cases were selected, in which F1LA detected actionable alterations offering an unexpected therapeutic choice.

Conclusions:

Although additional studies are needed to better select patients and setting, NGS F1LA is a useful, noninvasive, and repeatable assay to guide therapeutic choice in oncology. It provides a snapshot of cancer heterogeneity profile that could be incorporated in routinely clinical practice.

Mutational Landscape and Actionable Target Rates on Advanced Stage Refractory Cancer Patients: A Multicenter Chilean Experience

Major advances in sequencing technologies and targeted therapies have accelerated the incorporation of oncology into the era of precision medicine and “biomarker-driven” treatments. However, the impact of this approach on the everyday clinic has yet to be determined. Most precision oncology reports are based on developed countries and usually involve metastatic, hard-to-treat or incurable cancer patients. Moreover, in many cases race and ethnicity in these studies is commonly unreported and real-world evidence in this topic is scarce. Herein, we report data from a total of 202 Chilean advanced stage refractory cancer patients. Retrospectively, we collected patient data from NGS tests and IHC in order to determine the proportion of patients that would benefit from targeted treatments. Overall >20 tumor types were included in our cohort and 37% of patients (n = 74) displayed potentially actionable alterations, including on-label, off-label and immune checkpoint inhibitor recommendations. Our findings were in-line with previous reports such as the cancer genome atlas (TCGA). To our knowledge, this is the first report of its kind in Latin America delivering real-world evidence to estimate the percentage of refractory tumor patients that might benefit from precision oncology. Although this approach is still in its infancy in Chile, we strongly encourage the implementation of mutational tumor boards in our country in order to provide more therapeutic options for advanced stage refractory patients.

Molecular Tumor Board Review and Improved Overall Survival in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

With the introduction of precision medicine, treatment options for non-small-cell lung cancer have improved dramatically; however, underutilization, especially in disadvantaged patients, like those living in rural Appalachian regions, is associated with poorer survival. Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) represent a strategy to increase precision medicine use. UK HealthCare at the University of Kentucky (UK) implemented a statewide MTB in January 2017. We wanted to test the impact of UK MTB review on overall survival in Appalachian and other regions in Kentucky.

METHODS

We performed a case-control study of Kentucky patients newly diagnosed with non-small-cell lung cancer between 2017 and 2019. Cases were reviewed by the UK MTB and were compared with controls without UK MTB review. Controls were identified from the Kentucky Cancer Registry and propensity-matched to cases. The primary end point was the association between MTB review and overall patient survival.

RESULTS

Overall, 956 patients were included, with 343 (39%) residing in an Appalachian region. Seventy-seven (8.1%) were reviewed by the MTB and classified as cases. Cox regression analysis showed that poorer survival outcome was associated with lack of MTB review (hazard ratio [HR] = 8.61; 95% CI, 3.83 to 19.31; P < .0001) and living in an Appalachian region (hazard ratio = 1.43; 95% CI, 1.17 to 1.75; P = .004). Among individuals with MTB review, survival outcomes were similar regardless of whether they lived in Appalachia or other parts of Kentucky.

CONCLUSION

MTB review is an independent positive predictor of overall survival regardless of residence location. MTBs may help overcome some health disparities for disadvantaged populations.

Feasibility of next-generation sequencing in clinical practice: results of a pilot study in the Department of Precision Medicine at the University of Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli'

Background

The emerging role of next-generation sequencing (NGS) targeted panels is revolutionising our approach to cancer patients, providing information on gene alterations helpful for diagnosis and clinical decision, in a short time and with acceptable costs.

Materials and methods

In this work, we evaluated the clinical application of FoundationOne CDx test, a hybrid capture-based NGS. This test identifies alterations in 324 genes, tumour mutational burden and genomic signatures as microsatellite instability. The decision to obtain the NGS assay for a particular patient was done according to investigator’s choice.

Results

Overall, 122 tumour specimens were analysed, of which 84 (68.85%) succeeded. The success rate was influenced by type of specimen formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE block vs FFPE slides), by origin of the sample (surgery vs biopsy) and by time of fixation (<5 years vs ≥5 years). The most frequent subgroups of effective reports derived from colorectal cancer (25 samples), non-small-cell lung cancer (16 samples), ovarian cancer (10 samples), biliary tract cancer (9 samples), breast cancer (7 samples), gastric cancer (7 samples). The most frequent alterations found in whole population referred to TP53 (45.9%), KRAS (19.6%) and APC (13.9%). Furthermore, we performed an analysis of patients in whom this comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) had a relevance for the patient’s disease.

Conclusions

On our opinion, CGP could be proposed in clinical practice in order to select patients that could most benefit from the analysis proposed, like patients with good performance status without any available treatments or with unexpected resistance to a therapy.

Clinical Massively Parallel Sequencing

BACKGROUND

The newest advances in DNA sequencing are based on technologies that perform massively parallel sequencing (MPS). Since 2006, the output from MPS platforms has increased from 20 Mb to >7 Tb. First-generation MPS platforms amplify individual DNA molecules to multiple copies and then interrogate the sequence of those molecules. Second-generation MPS analyzes single unamplified molecules to generate much longer sequence reads but with less output than first-generation MPS and lower first-pass accuracy. With MPS technologies, it is now possible to analyze genomes, exomes, a defined subset of genes, transcriptomes, and even methylation across the genome. These technologies have and will continue to completely transform the clinical practice.

CONTENT

The major first- and second-generation MPS platforms and how they are used in clinical practice are discussed.

SUMMARY

The ability to sequence terabases of DNA per run on an MPS platform will dramatically change how DNA sequencing is used in clinical practice. Currently, MPS of targeted gene panels is the most common use of this technology clinically, but as the cost for genome sequencing inches downward to $100, this may soon become the method of choice (with the caveat that, at least in the near term, clinical-grade genome sequencing with interpretation may cost much more than $100). Other uses of this technology include sequencing of a mixture of bacterial and viral species (metagenomics), as well as the characterization of methylation across the genome.

Pharmacogenomic Testing to Guide Personalized Cancer Medicine Decisions in Private Oncology Practice: A Case Study

Innovative tumor profiling methodologies are utilized to elucidate the pharmacogenomic landscape of tumor cells in order to support the molecularly guided delivery of therapeutics. Indeed, improved clinical outcomes are achieved in oncology practice by providing the physicians with expert-guided, standardized, and easily interpretable knowledge, translated from molecular profiling analysis to support clinical decision-making. However, there is still limited utilization of the technology especially in small private oncology practices. In this work, we analyzed how molecularly guided interventions in 17 consented cancer patients led to an overall improvement of disease response rates in a private oncology center. The precision medicine strategy was based on the OncoDEEP™ profiling solutions and focused on finding clinically actionable relationships between tumor biomarkers and drug responses. The obtained data support the notion that (a) following the pharmacogenomic-derived recommendations favorably impacted cancer therapy progression, and (b) the earlier profiling followed by the delivery of molecularly targeted therapy led to more durable and improved pharmacological response rates. Moreover, we report the example of a patient with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma who, based on the molecular profiling data, received an off-label therapy that resulted in a complete response and a current cancer-free maintenance status. Overall, our data provide a paradigm on how molecular tumor profiling can improve decision-making in the routine private oncology practice.

Decoding the Genomic Report for Radiologists

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this review is to provide a guide for radiologists that explains the language and format of modern genomic reports and summarizes the relevance of this information for modern oncologic imaging. CONCLUSION. Genomic testing plays a critical role in guiding oncologic therapies in the age of targeted treatments. Understanding and interpreting genomic reports is a valuable skill for radiologists involved with oncologic imaging interpretation.

Oncologist uptake of comprehensive genomic profile guided targeted therapy

We describe the extent to which comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) results were used by oncologists to guide targeted therapy selection in a cohort of solid tumor patients tested as part of standard care at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center June 2016-June 2017, with adequate follow up through September 2018 (n = 620). Overall, 28.4% of CGP tests advised physicians about targeted therapy use supported by companion diagnostic or practice guideline evidence. Post-test targeted therapy uptake was highest for patients in active treatment at the time of order (86% versus 76% of treatment naïve patients), but also took longer to initiate (median 50 days versus 7 days for treatment naïve patients), with few patients (2.6%) receiving targeted agents prior to testing. 100% of patients with resistance variants did not receive targeted agents. Treatment naïve patients received immunotherapy as the most common alternative. When targeted therapy given off-label or in a trial was the best CGP option, (7%) of patients received it. Our data illustrate the appropriate and heterogeneous use of CGP by oncologists as a longitudinal treatment decision tool based on patient history and treatment needs, and that some patients may benefit from testing prior to initiation of other standard treatments.