Combined Focused Next-Generation Sequencing Assays to Guide Precision Oncology in Solid Tumors: A Retrospective Analysis from an Institutional Molecular Tumor Board

Evolution of publicly available large language models for complex decision-making in breast cancer care

PURPOSE

This study investigated the concordance of five different publicly available Large Language Models (LLM) with the recommendations of a multidisciplinary tumor board regarding treatment recommendations for complex breast cancer patient profiles.

METHODS

Five LLM, including three versions of ChatGPT (version 4 and 3.5, with data access until September 3021 and January 2022), Llama2, and Bard were prompted to produce treatment recommendations for 20 complex breast cancer patient profiles. LLM recommendations were compared to the recommendations of a multidisciplinary tumor board (gold standard), including surgical, endocrine and systemic treatment, radiotherapy, and genetic testing therapy options.

RESULTS

GPT4 demonstrated the highest concordance (70.6%) for invasive breast cancer patient profiles, followed by GPT3.5 September 2021 (58.8%), GPT3.5 January 2022 (41.2%), Llama2 (35.3%) and Bard (23.5%). Including precancerous lesions of ductal carcinoma in situ, the identical ranking was reached with lower overall concordance for each LLM (GPT4 60.0%, GPT3.5 September 2021 50.0%, GPT3.5 January 2022 35.0%, Llama2 30.0%, Bard 20.0%). GPT4 achieved full concordance (100%) for radiotherapy. Lowest alignment was reached in recommending genetic testing, demonstrating a varying concordance (55.0% for GPT3.5 January 2022, Llama2 and Bard up to 85.0% for GPT4).

CONCLUSION

This early feasibility study is the first to compare different LLM in breast cancer care with regard to changes in accuracy over time, i.e., with access to more data or through technological upgrades. Methodological advancement, i.e., the optimization of prompting techniques, and technological development, i.e., enabling data input control and secure data processing, are necessary in the preparation of large-scale and multicenter studies to provide evidence on their safe and reliable clinical application. At present, safe and evidenced use of LLM in clinical breast cancer care is not yet feasible.

[Personalized medicine in oncology]

Due to the considerable technological progress in molecular and genetic diagnostics as well as increasing insights into the molecular pathogenesis of diseases, there has been a fundamental paradigm shift in the past two decades from a "one-size-fits-all approach" to personalized, molecularly informed treatment strategies. Personalized medicine or precision medicine focuses on the genetic, physiological, molecular, and biochemical differences between individuals and considers their effects on the development, prevention, and treatment of diseases. As a pioneer of personalized medicine, the field of oncology is particularly noteworthy, where personalized diagnostics and treatment have led to lasting change in the treatment of cancer patients in recent years. In this article, the significant change towards personalized treatment concepts, especially in the field of personalized oncology, will be discussed and examined in more detail.

[Precision oncology and molecular tumor boards]

Precision oncology is a field of personalized medicine in which tumor biology forms the basis for tailored treatments. The preferred approach currently applied in clinical practice is based on the concept of malignant tumors as genetic diseases that are caused by mutations in oncogenes and tumor suppressors. On the one hand, these can be targeted by molecular drugs, while on the other hand, next-generation sequencing allows for comprehensive analysis of all relevant aberrations, thus enabling the matching of appropriate treatments across entities based on molecular information. Rational molecular therapies are developed and annotated with supporting evidence by molecular tumor boards, which have been established at various academic centers in recent years. Advancing precision oncology to a new standard of care requires improved applicability of personalized molecular therapies and thorough scientific evaluation of precision oncology programs.

NGS-Guided Precision Oncology in Breast Cancer and Gynecological Tumors-A Retrospective Molecular Tumor Board Analysis

Background: Precision oncology treatments are being applied more commonly in breast and gynecological oncology through the implementation of Molecular Tumor Boards (MTBs), but real-world clinical outcome data remain limited. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted in patients with breast cancer (BC) and gynecological malignancies referred to our center's MTB from 2018 to 2023. The analysis covered patient characteristics, next-generation sequencing (NGS) results, MTB recommendations, therapy received, and clinical outcomes. Results: Sixty-three patients (77.8%) had metastatic disease, and forty-four patients (54.3%) had previously undergone three or more lines of systemic treatment. Personalized treatment recommendations were provided to 50 patients (63.3%), while 29 (36.7%) had no actionable target. Ultimately, 23 patients (29.1%) underwent molecular-matched treatment (MMT). Commonly altered genes in patients with pan-gyn tumors (BC and gynecological malignancies) included TP53 (n = 42/81, 51.9%), PIK3CA (n = 18/81, 22.2%), BRCA1/2 (n = 10/81, 12.3%), and ARID1A (n = 9/81, 11.1%). Patients treated with MMT showed significantly prolonged progression-free survival (median PFS 5.5 vs. 3.5 months, p = 0.0014). Of all patients who underwent molecular profiling, 13.6% experienced a major clinical benefit (PFSr ≥ 1.3 and PR/SD ≥ 6 months) through precision oncology. Conclusions: NGS-guided precision oncology demonstrated improved clinical outcomes in a subgroup of patients with gynecological and breast cancers.

[Precision medicine in oncology]

Personalized oncology according to current practice is primarily based on tumor biology, which is translated into genomic biomarkers. Mutations in oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes are targeted by rationally designed drugs and, conversely, are used to inform tailored treatment strategies. Faster and cheaper technologies for DNA sequencing enable genomic medicine in a clinical routine setting. Genomic features, tumor biology and clinical implications are integrated into individual therapy recommendations by molecular tumor boards, which have been established at many cancer centers in Germany and worldwide throughout recent years. This article discusses the promises and limitations of genomics-centered precision oncology and highlights future avenues and alternative approaches to individualize cancer treatment.

Molecular Tumor Board Improves Outcomes for Hispanic Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors

PURPOSE

Multidisciplinary molecular tumor boards (MTBs) decode complex genomic data into clinical recommendations. Although MTBs are well-established in the oncology practice in developed countries, this strategy needs to be better explored in developing countries. Herein, we describe the possible benefits and limitations of the first MTB established in Colombia.

METHODS

Demographic, clinical, and genomic information was collected between August 2020 and November 2021. By mid-2020, an MTB strategy was created to discuss clinical cases with one or more genomic alterations identified by next-generation sequencing using an open-access virtual platform. We characterized the patient population as benefiting from the recommended treatment option. We assessed the benefits and access to available targeted therapies that have the potential to change clinical management by making recommendations to treating oncologists on the basis of genomic profiling. However, we did not assess the treatment oncologists' compliance with MTB recommendations because they were not intended to replace clinical judgment/standard of care.

RESULTS

A total of 146 patients were included in the discussions of the MTB. The median age was 59 years, and 59.6% were women. Genomic results prompting a change in therapeutic decisions were obtained in 53.1% of patients (95% CI, 44.9 to 61.3). The most prevalent malignancy was non-small-cell lung cancer (51%). Other malignancies represented 60%, 50%, and 30% of patients with soft-tissue sarcomas, brain tumors, and breast cancer, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Using an open-access virtual platform, MTBs were feasible in low- and middle-income countries on the basis of the capability to provide the benefits and access to available targeted therapies that are not standard of care. Furthermore, MTB recommendations were made available to the treating oncologist in different locations across Colombia, providing the option to modify clinical management in most of these patients.

Challenging ChatGPT 3.5 in Senology-An Assessment of Concordance with Breast Cancer Tumor Board Decision Making

With the recent diffusion of access to publicly available large language models (LLMs), common interest in generative artificial-intelligence-based applications for medical purposes has skyrocketed. The increased use of these models by tech-savvy patients for personal health issues calls for a scientific evaluation of whether LLMs provide a satisfactory level of accuracy for treatment decisions. This observational study compares the concordance of treatment recommendations from the popular LLM ChatGPT 3.5 with those of a multidisciplinary tumor board for breast cancer (MTB). The study design builds on previous findings by combining an extended input model with patient profiles reflecting patho- and immunomorphological diversity of primary breast cancer, including primary metastasis and precancerous tumor stages. Overall concordance between the LLM and MTB is reached for half of the patient profiles, including precancerous lesions. In the assessment of invasive breast cancer profiles, the concordance amounts to 58.8%. Nevertheless, as the LLM makes considerably fraudulent decisions at times, we do not identify the current development status of publicly available LLMs to be adequate as a support tool for tumor boards. Gynecological oncologists should familiarize themselves with the capabilities of LLMs in order to understand and utilize their potential while keeping in mind potential risks and limitations.

[Clinically relevant molecular pathological diagnostics in breast cancer]

In breast cancer, the current guideline for pathological workup includes recommendations for advanced molecular analysis of certain predictive molecular markers in addition to basic immunohistochemical diagnostics. These markers are determined depending on tumor stage, including sequencing techniques and immunohistochemical methods. This comprises the systematic investigation of molecular alterations such as PIK3CA or BRCA1,2 mutations, NTRK fusions, or microsatellite instability as a basis for targeted therapy. Further alterations, for example in the PI3K pathway, ESR1 alterations, or ERBB2 mutations, may also be relevant for individual therapy decisions especially in the context of resistant or relapsed disease. Thus, particularly in advanced stages, a more comprehensive molecular characterization of the tumor may reveal genetic alterations that act as tumor drivers and provide targets for personalized therapies. Due to the large number of potential molecular targets, NGS panel diagnostics are a suitable approach in this conjunction with immunohistochemical characterization and the individual clinical situation. Molecular based therapeutical strategies outside of entity-specific approvals should be discussed in an interdisciplinary team within the framework of a molecular tumor board.