Identification of KRASG12C Mutations in Circulating Tumor DNA in Patients With Cancer.

PURPOSE: KRAS is the most mutated proto-oncogene that has been identified in cancer, and treatment of patients with KRAS mutations remains an arduous challenge. Recently, KRASG12C mutation has attracted special interest because it is now considered potentially druggable with recently developed covalent small-molecule KRASG12C inhibitors. Nevertheless, to date, there have been no large-scale analyses of liquid biopsy that include testing for KRASG12C. Here, we performed a comprehensive analysis of KRASG12C mutations in multiple cancer types, as detected by circulating tumor DNA. METHODS: We conducted a 5-year retrospective review of KRASG12C mutations in patients with cancer who had undergone Guardant360 testing between July 1, 2014, and June 30, 2019; our study included treatment-naive and previously treated patients with metastatic solid tumors. RESULTS: KRASG12C mutations were identified in 2,985 of 80,911 patients (3.7%), across > 40 tumor types. KRASG12C mutations were detected most frequently in patients with nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; 7.5%), NSCLC of all subtypes (6.9%), cancer of unknown primary (4.1%), colorectal cancer (3.5%), squamous NSCLC (2.0%), pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors (1.9%), and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (1.2%) and cholangiocarcinoma (1.2%). KRASG12C mutations were predominantly clonal (clonality > 0.9%) in patients with lung adenocarcinoma, non-NSCLC, cancer of unknown primary, NSCLC, and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and patients with colorectal cancer and breast cancer had bimodal distribution of clonal and subclonal KRASG12C mutations. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates the feasibility of using circulating tumor DNA to identify KRASG12C mutations across solid tumors; the highest detection rate was in lung cancer, as previously reported in the literature.

Clinical validation of Guardant360 CDx as a blood-based companion diagnostic for sotorasib.

OBJECTIVES: Effective therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) depends on morphological and genomic classification, with comprehensive screening for guideline-recommended biomarkers critical to guide treatment. Companion diagnostics, which provide robust genotyping results, represent an important component of personalized oncology. We evaluated the clinical validity of Guardant360 CDx as a companion diagnostic for sotorasib for detection of KRAS p.G12C, an important oncogenic NSCLC driver mutation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: KRAS p.G12C was tested in NSCLC patients from CodeBreaK100 (NCT03600833) in pretreatment plasma samples using Guardant360 CDx liquid biopsy and archival tissue samples using therascreen® KRAS RGQ polymerase chain reaction (PCR) kit tissue testing. Matched tissue and plasma samples were procured from other clinical trials or commercial vendors, and results were compared. Demographics and clinical characteristics and objective response rate (ORR) were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 126 CodeBreaK patients, 112 (88.9%) were tested for KRASp.G12C mutations with Guardant360 CDx. Among 189 patients in the extended analysis cohort, the positive and negative percent agreement (95% CI) for Guardant360 CDx plasma testing relative to therascreen® KRAS RGQ PCR kit tissue testing were 0.71 (0.62, 0.79) and 1.00 (0.95, 1.00), respectively; overall percent agreement (95% CI) was 0.82 (0.76, 0.87). TP53 co-mutations were the most common regardless of KRAS p.G12C status (KRAS p.G12C-positive, 53.4%; KRAS p.G12C-negative, 45.5%). STK11 was co-mutated in 26.1% of KRAS p.G12C-positive samples. The ORR was similar among patients selected by plasma and tissue testing. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive genotyping for all therapeutic targets including KRAS p.G12C is critical for management of NSCLC. Liquid biopsy using Guardant360 CDx has clinical validity for identification of patients with KRASp.G12C-mutant NSCLC and, augmented by tissue testing methodologies as outlined on the approved product label, will identify patients for treatment with sotorasib.

Clinical genetic testing for patients with autism spectrum disorders.

BACKGROUND: Multiple lines of evidence indicate a strong genetic contribution to autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). Current guidelines for clinical genetic testing recommend a G-banded karyotype to detect chromosomal abnormalities and fragile X DNA testing, but guidelines for chromosomal microarray analysis have not been established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cohort of 933 patients received clinical genetic testing for a diagnosis of ASD between January 2006 and December 2008. Clinical genetic testing included G-banded karyotype, fragile X testing, and chromosomal microarray (CMA) to test for submicroscopic genomic deletions and duplications. Diagnostic yield of clinically significant genetic changes was compared. RESULTS: Karyotype yielded abnormal results in 19 of 852 patients (2.23% [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.73%-2.73%]), fragile X testing was abnormal in 4 of 861 (0.46% [95% CI: 0.36%-0.56%]), and CMA identified deletions or duplications in 154 of 848 patients (18.2% [95% CI: 14.76%-21.64%]). CMA results for 59 of 848 patients (7.0% [95% CI: 5.5%-8.5%]) were considered abnormal, which includes variants associated with known genomic disorders or variants of possible significance. CMA results were normal in 10 of 852 patients (1.2%) with abnormal karyotype due to balanced rearrangements or unidentified marker chromosome. CMA with whole-genome coverage and CMA with targeted genomic regions detected clinically relevant copy-number changes in 7.3% (51 of 697) and 5.3% (8 of 151) of patients, respectively, both higher than karyotype. With the exception of recurrent deletion and duplication of chromosome 16p11.2 and 15q13.2q13.3, most copy-number changes were unique or identified in only a small subset of patients. CONCLUSIONS: CMA had the highest detection rate among clinically available genetic tests for patients with ASD. Interpretation of microarray data is complicated by the presence of both novel and recurrent copy-number variants of unknown significance. Despite these limitations, CMA should be considered as part of the initial diagnostic evaluation of patients with ASD.