Addressing the knowledge gap in the genomic landscape and tailored therapeutic approaches to adolescent and young adult cancers.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) represent a small proportion of patients with cancer. The genomic profiles of AYA patients with cancer are not well-studied, and outcomes of genome-matched therapies remain largely unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We investigated differences between Japanese AYA and older adult (OA) patients in genomic alterations, therapeutic evidence levels, and genome-matched therapy usage by cancer type. We also assessed treatment outcomes. RESULTS: AYA patients accounted for 8.3% of 876 cases. Microsatellite instability-high and/or tumor mutation burden was less common in AYA patients (1.4% versus 7.7% in OA; P = 0.05). However, BRCA1 alterations were more common in AYA patients with breast cancer (27.3% versus 1.7% in OA; P = 0.01), as were MYC alterations in AYA patients with colorectal cancer (23.5% versus 5.8% in OA; P = 0.02) and sarcoma (31.3% versus 3.4% in OA; P = 0.01). Genome-matched therapy use was similar between groups, with overall survival tending to improve in both. However, in AYA patients, the small number of patients prevented statistical significance. Comprehensive genomic profiling-guided genome-matched therapy yielded encouraging results, with progression-free survival of 9.0 months in AYA versus 3.7 months in OA patients (P = 0.59). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that tailored therapeutic approaches can benefit cancer patients regardless of age.

Molecularly matched targeted therapy: a promising approach for refractory metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Only a fraction of patients with metastatic melanoma derive durable benefit from approved treatments. The clinical impact of personalized medicine strategies for melanoma, apart from BRAF, NRAS, or CKIT targeting, has rarely been reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS: By means of the Group of Cutaneous Oncology of the French Society of Dermatology, we retrospectively included all patients with advanced melanoma aged 18 years and older for whom molecular testing identified one or more actionable molecular alterations and who accordingly received molecularly matched therapy. We excluded patients with only BRAF, NRAS, or CKIT alterations and patients who received molecularly matched therapy for less than 15 days. RESULTS: We included 26 patients with a median follow-up of 8 months (1-54), a median age of 63 years (24-89), and a sex ratio of 2.7. These patients had been heavily pretreated, and 64% had elevated LDH levels. The disease control rate was 38%, with 4 cases of partial response (overall response rate: 15%) and 6 of stable disease for at least 6 months. The median duration of treatment was 3.1 months (0.9-13.5). Among patients with disease control, the median duration of control was 6.6 months (2.6-13.5) and 3 cases were ongoing at the end of the study. Patients with controlled disease had GNA11, MAP2K1, FYCO1-RAF1, HRAS, ATM, CCND1, MDM2/CDK4, and CDKN2A/NRAS alterations. CONCLUSIONS: High-throughput sequencing followed by matched targeted therapy is a promising approach for patients with advanced melanoma refractory to approved treatments.

The impact of rare cancer and early-line treatments on the benefit of comprehensive genome profiling-based precision oncology.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive genome profiling (CGP) serves as a guide for suitable genomically matched therapies for patients with cancer. However, little is known about the impact of the timing and types of cancer on the therapeutic benefit of CGP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single hospital-based pan-cancer prospective study (TOP-GEAR; UMIN000011141) was conducted to examine the benefit of CGP with respect to the timing and types of cancer. Patients with advanced solid tumors (>30 types) who either progressed with or without standard treatments were genotyped using a single CGP test. The subjects were followed up for a median duration of 590 days to examine therapeutic response, using progression-free survival (PFS), PFS ratio, and factors associated with therapeutic response. RESULTS: Among the 507 patients, 62 (12.2%) received matched therapies with an overall response rate (ORR) of 32.3%. The PFS ratios (≥1.3) were observed in 46.3% (19/41) of the evaluated patients. The proportion of subjects receiving such therapies in the rare cancer cohort was lower than that in the non-rare cancer cohort (9.6% and 17.4%, respectively; P = 0.010). However, ORR of the rare cancer patients was higher than that in the non-rare cancer cohort (43.8% and 20.0%, respectively; P = 0.046). Moreover, ORR of matched therapies in the first or second line after receiving the CGP test was higher than that in the third or later lines (62.5% and 21.7%, respectively; P = 0.003). Rare cancer and early-line treatment were significantly and independently associated with ORR of matched therapies in multivariable analysis (P = 0.017 and 0.004, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients with rare cancer preferentially benefited from tumor mutation profiling by increasing the chances of therapeutic response to matched therapies. Early-line treatments after profiling increase the therapeutic benefit, irrespective of tumor types.

Availability of genome-matched therapy based on clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) provides new opportunities for patients with advanced cancer to receive genome-matched therapies, but the availability rate of these remains low. We reviewed our CGP cases and suggested possible strategies to improve the current status from a clinical perspective. METHODS: Druggable genomic alterations and barriers to accessing genome-matched therapies were investigated in 653 patients with 30 various types of cancers who underwent CGP. RESULTS: While the availability rate of genome-matched therapies as a whole was 9.5%, CGP was useful in some cancer types. Patients with thyroid cancer and lung cancer harbored druggable genomic alterations at high rates, while sarcoma rarely harbored these alterations (100%, 76%, and 15.2%, respectively). In contrast, the availability rate of genome-matched therapies was highest in patients with sarcoma and head and neck cancer (HNC) (60% and 40%, respectively). One hundred thirteen patients (63.5%) had multiple barriers to accessing genome-matched therapy. Of 178 patients, 21 patients (11.8%) could not be considered for genome-matched therapies solely because of the deterioration of their performance status. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the usefulness of CGP for patients with sarcoma and HNC in addition to lung cancer in clinical practice. Performing CGP at the front line has the potential to improve the availability of genome-matched therapy.

Cost-Effectiveness and the Economics of Genomic Testing and Molecularly Matched Therapies.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of precision oncology can help guide value-driven care. Next-generation sequencing is increasingly cost-efficient over single gene testing because diagnostic algorithms require multiple individual gene tests to determine biomarker status. Matched targeted therapy is often not cost-effective due to the high cost associated with drug treatment. However, genomic profiling can promote cost-effective care by identifying patients who are unlikely to benefit from therapy. Additional applications of genomic profiling such as universal testing for hereditary cancer syndromes and germline testing in patients with cancer may represent cost-effective approaches compared with traditional history-based diagnostic methods.

Progress report of a cross-organ and biomarker-based basket-type clinical trial: BELIEVE Trial.

Cancer genomic medicine using next-generation sequencers has been developing. However, the number of patients who could receive genomically matched therapy is limited because off-label use or patient-oriented compassionate use was not permitted under National Health Insurance in Japan. To improve patient drug accessibility, we initiated a biomarker-based basket-type clinical trial (NCCH1901) in October 2019 under patient-proposed healthcare services. We listed the drugs that had high medical needs but were not covered by National Healthcare Insurance. Then we included these drugs before patient proposal so that they could access off-label drugs soon after they had the results of CGP tests. All drugs were provided free of charge by pharmaceutical companies. The objective was to administer off-label drugs and to collect efficacy and safety data for these drugs. The primary endpoint was the response rate based on the best overall response for up to 16 weeks. As of January 31, 2022, we included 18 drug cohorts and 295 patients were treated in this study. The most common cancer was brain tumor, followed by carcinoma of endocrine organs and colorectal cancer. BRAF mutations and ERBB2 amplifications were the frequent genomic abnormalities to be enrolled. This study was one way to access off-label drugs, and contributed significantly to providing treatment opportunities for patients in Japan.

Prognostic impact of cancer genomic profile testing for advanced or metastatic solid tumors in clinical practice.

Cancer genomic profile (CGP) testing, which is covered by the national health insurance system in Japan, has been introduced as a routine clinical practice. However, the effects of CGP testing on prognoses remain unclear. Drug accessibility rates and prognoses after CGP testing were retrospectively investigated in 713 patients who underwent CGP testing examined by our molecular tumor board between November 2019 and October 2022,. Overall survival (OS) was examined using the log-rank test and the Kaplan-Meier method. The median age of patients (326 males and 387 females) was 58 years (12-85 years). CGP testing revealed one or more gene mutations in 681 cases (95.5%), among which actionable gene mutations were detected in 439 (61.6%). Although treatment options were recommended for 285 cases (40.0%) by the molecular tumor board, only 45 received treatment based on their gene mutations. During the median observation period of 8.6 months, 351 (49.2%) patients died of the exacerbation of existing diseases. No significant differences were observed in OS between patients treated with and without genomically matched therapy (p = 0.285). According to clinical responses to treatment based on gene mutations, median OS was significantly longer in patients who achieved partial response and stable disease (26.5 months; 95% CI 14.4-38.6) than in those with progressive disease and not evaluated (9.8 months; 95% CI 5.8-13.8, p = 0.013). Responses to treatment based on gene mutations may improve prognoses, and it is important to increase the drug accessibility rate after CGP testing.

Assessment for the timing of comprehensive genomic profiling tests in patients with advanced solid cancers.

Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) tests have been covered by public insurance in Japan for patients with advanced solid tumors who have completed or are completing standard treatments or do not have them. Therefore, genotype-matched drug candidates are often unapproved or off-label, and improving clinical trial access is critical, involving the appropriate timing of CGP tests. To address this issue, we analyzed the previous treatment data for 441 patients from an observational study on CGP tests discussed by the expert panel at Hokkaido University Hospital between August 2019 and May 2021. The median number of previous treatment lines was two; three or more lines accounted for 49%. Information on genotype-matched therapies was provided to 277 (63%). Genotype-matched clinical trials were ineligible because of an excess number of previous treatment lines or use of specific agents were found in 66 (15%) patients, with the highest proportion in breast and prostate cancers. Many patients met the exclusion criteria of one to two or more treatment lines across cancer types. In addition, previous use of specific agents was a frequent exclusion criterion for breast, prostate, colorectal, and ovarian cancers. The patients with tumor types with a low median number (two or fewer) of previous treatment lines, including most rare cancers, primary unknown cancers, and pancreatic cancers, had significantly fewer ineligible clinical trials. The earlier timing of CGP tests may improve access to genotype-matched clinical trials, with their proportion varying by cancer type. Each relevant society needs to advocate the desirable timing of CGP testing nationwide.

Clinical Outcomes of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Tests for Gastrointestinal Cancers: Experience from Tokushima University Hospital.

In Japan, cancer genome profiling (CGP) for cancer patients without standard treatment has been covered by public insurance since June 2019. This study analyzed data of 122 patients with gastrointestinal tumors who underwent CGP to clarify cancer genome medicine's current status and possible problems at the Tokushima University Hospital. The major types of cancer included pancreatic (n=30), colorectal (n=25), biliary tract (n=15), gastric (n=11), and hepatocellular carcinoma (n=8). CGP tests included F1CDx in 70 patients (57%), F1LCDx in 36 (30%), TSO500 in 14 (11%), and NCC Oncopanel in 2 (2%). Actionable gene alterations were identified in 72 patients (59%), but only 5 patients (4%) were treated for pancreatic (n=1), colorectal (n=3), and small bowel cancers (n=1). The main reasons for not receiving genotype-matched therapy included the lack of appropriate drugs or clinical trials that matched the actionable gene alterations (n=40) and the inability to participate in clinical trials (n=10). There is still not a sufficient number of patients receiving genotype-matched treatment for gastrointestinal cancers. To promote cancer genome medicine in regional areas, attempts to improve access to genotype-matched therapies are required, as well as to promote the development of new molecular-targeted drugs and clinical trials for these drugs. J. Med. Invest. 70 : 154-159, February, 2023.

Targeting the FGF/FGFR axis and its co-alteration allies.

BACKGROUND: We analyzed the FGF/FGFR and co-alteration cancer landscape, hypothesizing that combination therapy might be useful in the presence of co-drivers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We describe FGF/FGFR-altered pathways, prognosis, and co-alterations [cBioPortal (N = 7574)] and therapeutic outcomes [University of California San Diego Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) (N = 16)]. RESULTS: Patients whose cancers harbored FGF/FGFR alterations (N = 1074) versus those without them (N = 6500) had shorter overall survival (OS) (median: 23.1 versus 26.4 months, P = 0.038) (cBioPortal). Only 6.1% (65/1074 patients) had no pathogenic co-alterations accompanying FGF/FGFR axis abnormalities. The most frequently co-altered pathways/genes involved: TP53 (70%); cell cycle (58%); PI3K (55%); and receptor tyrosine kinases and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) (65%). Harboring alterations in both FGF/FGFR and in the TP53 pathway or in the cell cycle pathway correlated with shorter OS (versus FGF/FGFR-altered without those co-altered signals) (P = 0.0001 and 0.0065). Four of 16 fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor-treated patients presented at MTB attained durable partial responses (PRs) (9, 12, 22+, and 52+ months); an additional two, stable disease (SD) of ≥6 months (13+ and 15 months) [clinical benefit rate (SD ≥ 6 months/PR) = 38%]. Importantly, six patients with cyclin pathway co-alterations received the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib (75 mg p.o. 3 weeks on, 1 week off) and the multikinase FGFR inhibitor lenvatinib (10 mg p.o. daily); three (50%) achieved a PR [9 (ovarian), 12 (biliary), and 52+ months (osteosarcoma)]. Palbociclib and lenvatinib were tolerated well. CONCLUSIONS: FGF/FGFR alterations portend a poor prognosis and are frequently accompanied by pathogenic co-aberrations. Malignancies harboring co-alterations that activate both cyclin and FGFR pathways can be co-targeted by CDK4/6 and FGFR inhibitors.

Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor in clinical practice.

Previous clinical trials indicate that 10%-25% of patients received genomically matched therapy after comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) tests. However, the clinical utility of CGP tests has not been assessed in clinical practice. We assessed the clinical utility of CGP tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor and determined the proportion of patients receiving genomically matched therapy among those with common and non-common cancers. From August 2019 to July 2020, a total of 418 patients had undergone CGP tests, and the results were discussed through the molecular tumor board at our site. The median age of patients was 57 (range: 3-86) years. Colorectal cancer was the most common, with 47 (11%) patients. Actionable genomic alterations (median 3, range: 1-17) were identified in 368 (88.0%) of 418 patients. Druggable genomic alterations were determined in 196 (46.9%) of 418 patients through the molecular tumor board. Genomically matched therapy was administered as the subsequent line of therapy in 51 (12.2%) patients, which is comparable to the proportion we previously reported in a clinical trial (13.4%) (p = 0.6919). The proportion of patients receiving genomically matched therapy was significantly higher among those with common cancers (16.2%) than non-common cancers (9.4%) (p = 0.0365). Genomically matched therapy after the CGP tests was administered to 12.2% of patients, which is similar to the proportion reported in the previous clinical trials. The clinical utility of CGP tests in patients with common cancers greatly exceeded that in patients with non-common cancers.

Effect of comprehensive cancer genomic profiling on therapeutic strategies and clinical outcomes in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: A prospective multicenter study.

Characterization of the genomic landscape of biliary tract cancer (BTC) may lead to applying genotype-matched therapy for patients with this disease. Evidence that comprehensive cancer genomic profiling (CGP) guides genotype-matched therapy to improve clinical outcomes is building. However, the significance of CGP in patients with BTC remains unclarified in clinical practice. Therefore, the purposes of this study were to assess the utility of CGP and identify associations between clinical outcomes and genomic alterations in patients with BTC. In this prospective analysis, detection rates for actionable genomic alterations and access rates for genotype-matched therapy were analyzed in 72 patients with advanced BTC who had undergone commercial CGP. Cox regression analyses assessed relationships between overall survival and genomic alterations detected with CGP. The most common genomic alterations detected were TP53 (41, 56.9%), followed by CDKN2A/B (24, 33.3%/20, 27.8%), and KRAS (20, 27.8%). Actionable genomic alterations were identified in 58.3% (42/72) of patients. Detection rates for FGFR2 fusions, IDH1 mutations, and BRAF V600E were low in this cohort. Eight (11.1%) patients received genotype-matched therapy. For patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), CDKN2A/B loss was associated with shorter overall survival. These real-world data demonstrate that CGP can identify therapeutic options in patients with advanced BTC. CDKN2A/B loss was identified as a poor prognostic factor in patients with ICC. Thus, this study provides a rationale for considering CGP in planning therapeutic strategies for advanced BTC.

Chronological improvement in precision oncology implementation in Japan.

In Japan, comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) tests for refractory cancer patients have been approved since June 2019, under the requirement that all cases undergoing CGP tests are annotated by the molecular tumor board (MTB) at each government-designated hospital. To investigate improvement in precision oncology, we evaluated and compared the proportion of cases receiving matched treatments according to CGP results and those recommended to receive genetic counseling at all core hospitals between the first period (11 hospitals, June 2019 to January 2020) and second period (12 hospitals, February 2020 to January 2021). A total of 754 and 2294 cases underwent CGP tests at core hospitals in the first and second periods, respectively; 28 (3.7%) and 176 (7.7%) patients received matched treatments (p < 0.001). Additionally, 25 (3.3%) and 237 (10.3%) cases were recommended to receive genetic counseling in the first and second periods, respectively (p < 0.001). The proportion was associated with the type of CGP test: tumor-only (N = 2391) vs. tumor-normal paired (N = 657) analysis (10.0% vs. 3.5%). These results suggest that recommendations regarding available clinical trials in networked MTBs might contribute to increasing the numbers of matched treatments, and that tumor-normal paired rather than tumor-only tests can increase the efficiency of patient referrals for genetic counseling.

Molecular matched targeted therapies for primary brain tumors-a single center retrospective analysis.

PURPOSE: Molecular diagnostics including next generation gene sequencing are increasingly used to determine options for individualized therapies in brain tumor patients. We aimed to evaluate the decision-making process of molecular targeted therapies and analyze data on tolerability as well as signals for efficacy. METHODS: Via retrospective analysis, we identified primary brain tumor patients who were treated off-label with a targeted therapy at the University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University. We analyzed which types of molecular alterations were utilized to guide molecular off-label therapies and the diagnostic procedures for their assessment during the period from 2008 to 2021. Data on tolerability and outcomes were collected. RESULTS: 413 off-label therapies were identified with an increasing annual number for the interval after 2016. 37 interventions (9%) were targeted therapies based on molecular markers. Glioma and meningioma were the most frequent entities treated with molecular matched targeted therapies. Rare entities comprised e.g. medulloblastoma and papillary craniopharyngeoma. Molecular targeted approaches included checkpoint inhibitors, inhibitors of mTOR, FGFR, ALK, MET, ROS1, PIK3CA, CDK4/6, BRAF/MEK and PARP. Responses in the first follow-up MRI were partial response (13.5%), stable disease (29.7%) and progressive disease (46.0%). There were no new safety signals. Adverse events with fatal outcome (CTCAE grade 5) were not observed. Only, two patients discontinued treatment due to side effects. Median progression-free and overall survival were 9.1/18 months in patients with at least stable disease, and 1.8/3.6 months in those with progressive disease at the first follow-up MRI. CONCLUSION: A broad range of actionable alterations was targeted with available molecular therapeutics. However, efficacy was largely observed in entities with paradigmatic oncogenic drivers, in particular with BRAF mutations. Further research on biomarker-informed molecular matched therapies is urgently necessary.

Real-world clinical practice for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in the very elderly: A retrospective multicenter analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in very elderly patients is unclear. We aimed to evaluate their treatment in real-world clinical practice and identify suitable therapy that can improve their prognosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 132 Japanese patients aged 80 years and older with advanced NSCLCs who were enrolled at a university hospital and its 9 affiliates were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical characteristics and overall survival (OS) were compared based on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) and biomarker statuses. Patients were defined as biomarker-positive if programmed death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score (PD-L1 TPS) was ≥ 50% or activating mutations were present in epidermal growth factor receptor, anaplastic lymphoma kinase, or c-ros oncogene 1. Finally, the factors contributing to better prognosis were explored in both PS 0 - 2 and PS 3 - 4 patient groups. RESULTS: The PS 0 - 2 patients showed a longer median OS than the PS 3 - 4 patients (5.5 vs. 1.6 months). PS 0 - 2 patients with positive biomarkers who received chemotherapy showed a significantly longer median OS than those without (18.1 vs. 3.7 months). Among the biomarker-negative/unknown PS 0 - 2 patients, the median OS showed no significant difference between those who received chemotherapy and those who did not (4.5 vs. 3.1 months). The multivariate analysis showed that treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors or immune checkpoint inhibitors was related to better prognoses in the PS 0 - 2 group. CONCLUSION: Biomarker-matched therapy is effective even in very elderly patients. Meanwhile, the effectiveness of chemotherapy for biomarker-negative/unknown PS 0 - 2 patients is questionable.

Implementation of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling in Ovarian Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Analysis.

Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) allows for the detection of driver alterations at high resolution, but the limited number of approved targeted therapies and their high costs have contributed to its limited clinical utilization. We retrospectively compared data of 946 women with ovarian cancer (11.4% were referred to CGP, and 88.6% served as control) to examine whether CGP provides a prognosis benefit. Patient baseline parameters were similar between the groups. Cox regression analysis adjusted for age, disease stage at diagnosis, and recurrence status showed statistically significantly longer median overall survival (mOS) in the CGP group versus the control (73.4 versus 54.5 months, p < 0.001). Fifty-four patients (52.9%) had actionable mutations with potential treatments; twenty-six (48.2%) were treated with matched targeted therapy, showing a trend for longer mOS than the eighty-six women in the CGP group who were not given a suggested treatment (105.5 versus 63.6 months, p = 0.066). None of the genomic alterations predicted metastasis location. CCNE1 amplification and KRAS mutations were associated with shorter mOS. Patients with tumor mutation burden ≥4 mutations/megabase had longer mOS. High loss of heterozygosity was associated with longer mOS (99.0 versus 48.2 months, p = 0.004). CGP testing may provide both prognostic and predictive insights for treatment of patients with ovarian cancer. Prospective studies of larger cohorts are warranted.

CRAC (Clinical Relevance of Alterations in Cancer): a Knowledge Base for the Selection of Molecularly Matched Therapy for Solid Tumors.

Multigene testing using NGS (next-generation sequencing) provides a large amount of information and can detect multiple molecular alterations. Subsequent clinical interpretation is a time-consuming process necessary to select a treatment strategy. Existing databases often contain inconsistent information and are not regularly updated. The use of ESCAT levels of evidence requires a deep understanding of the nature of alterations and does not answer the question of which therapy option to select when multiple biomarkers with the same level of evidence are detected. To address these issues, we created the Clinical Relevance of Alterations in Cancer (CRAC) database on the relevance of detected alterations in specific genes, which are often analyzed as part of NGS panels. The team of oncologists and biologists assigned a CRAC score from 1 to 10 to each biomarker (a type of genomic alteration characteristic of specific genes) for 15 malignancies; an average score was entered into the database. CRAC scores are a numerical reflection of the following factors: therapy availability and the prospects of drug treatment with experimental drugs for patients with a particular type of tumor. A total of 134 genes and 15 of the most common tumor types have been selected for CRAC. The biomarker-nosology associations with CRAC scores in the range of 1-3 are the most frequent (n=2719 out of 3495; 77.8%), the least frequent ones (n=52 out of 3495; 1.5%) are with the highest CRAC scores 9 and 10. To estimate the practical effectiveness of the CRAC database, 208 reports on comprehensive molecular profiling were retrospectively analyzed; the applicability of CRAC was compared with the ESCAT level of evidence system. The highest CRAC scores corresponded to the ESCAT maximum levels of evidence: the range of scores 8-10 corresponded to evidence levels I and II. No biomarker within the same level of evidence was represented by the same CRAC score; the largest range of CRAC scores was observed for biomarkers of levels evidence IIIA and IV - from 2 to 10 and from 1 to 9, respectively. The use of CRAC scores allowed to identify additional 95 alterations with CRAC scores of 1-5 in the studied patients. The developed database is available at: https://crac.oncoatlas.ru/.

Clinical Outcomes of Genotype-Matched Therapy for Recurrent Gynecological Cancers: A Single Institutional Experience.

Recent advances in next-generation sequencing and genome medicine have contributed to treatment decisions in patients with cancer. Most advanced gynecological cancers develop resistance to chemotherapy and have a poor prognosis. Therefore, we conducted genomic tests in gynecological tumors to examine the efficacy and clinical feasibility of genotype-matched therapy. Target sequencing was performed in 20 cases of gynecological cancers (cervical cancer, 6; endometrial cancer, 6; and ovarian cancer, 6). Both actionable and druggable genes were identified in 95% (19/20) of the cases. Among them, seven patients (35%) received genotype-matched therapy, which was effective in three patients. Of the three patients, one patient with a PTEN mutation received everolimus, another patient with a TSC2 mutation received everolimus and letrozole, and the patient with a BRIP1 mutation received olaparib. Subsequently, disease control in these three patients lasted for more than half a year. However, all patients relapsed between 9 and 13 months after the initiation of genotype-matched therapy. In this study, the response rate of genotype-matched therapy was 43% (3/7), which may have contributed to improved prognoses. Therefore, genotype-matched therapies may help patients with refractory gynecological cancers achieve better outcomes.

Clinical implications of plasma circulating tumor DNA in gynecologic cancer patients.

Molecular characterization of cancers is important in dictating prognostic factors and directing therapy. Next-generation sequencing of plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) offers less invasive, more convenient collection, and a more real-time representation of a tumor and its molecular heterogeneity than tissue. However, little is known about the clinical implications of ctDNA assessment in gynecologic cancer. We describe the molecular landscape identified on ctDNA, ctDNA concordance with tissue-based analysis, and factors associated with overall survival (OS) in gynecologic cancer patients with ctDNA analysis. We reviewed clinicopathologic and genomic information for 105 consecutive gynecologic cancer patients with ctDNA analysis, including 78 with tissue-based sequencing, enrolled in the Profile-Related Evidence Determining Individualized Cancer Therapy (NCT02478931) trial at the University of California San Diego Moores Cancer Center starting July 2014. Tumors included ovarian (47.6%), uterine (35.2%), cervical (12.4%), vulvovaginal (2.9%), and unknown gynecologic primary (1.9%). Most ovarian and uterine cancers (86%) were high grade. 34% (N = 17) of ovarian cancers had BRCA alterations, and 22% (N = 11) were platinum sensitive. Patients received median 2 (range 0-13) lines of therapy prior to ctDNA collection. Most (75.2%) had at least one characterized alteration on ctDNA analysis, and the majority had unique genomic profiles on ctDNA. Most common alterations were TP53 (N = 59, 56.2% of patients), PIK3CA (N = 26, 24.8%), KRAS (N = 14, 13.3%), BRAF (N = 10, 9.5%), ERBB2 (N = 8, 7.6%), and MYC (N = 8, 7.6%). Higher ctDNA maximum mutation allele frequency was associated with worse OS [hazard ratio (HR): 1.91, P = 0.03], while therapy matched to ctDNA alterations (N = 33 patients) was independently associated with improved OS (HR: 0.34, P = 0.007) compared to unmatched therapy (N = 28 patients) in multivariate analysis. Tissue and ctDNA genomic results showed high concordance unaffected by temporal or spatial factors. This study provides evidence for the utility of ctDNA in determining outcome and individualizing cancer therapy in patients with gynecologic cancer.