Genetics and beyond: Precision Medicine Real-World Data for Patients with Cervical, Vaginal or Vulvar Cancer in a Tertiary Cancer Center.

Advances in molecular tumor diagnostics have transformed cancer care. However, it remains unclear whether precision oncology has the same impact and transformative nature across all malignancies. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-related gynecologic malignancies who underwent comprehensive molecular profiling and subsequent discussion at the interdisciplinary Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) of the University Hospital, LMU Munich, between 11/2017 and 06/2022. We identified a total cohort of 31 patients diagnosed with cervical (CC), vaginal or vulvar cancer. Twenty-two patients (fraction: 0.71) harbored at least one mutation. Fifteen patients (0.48) had an actionable mutation and fourteen (0.45) received a recommendation for a targeted treatment within the MTB. One CC patient received a biomarker-guided treatment recommended by the MTB and achieved stable disease on the mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus for eight months. Factors leading to non-adherence to MTB recommendations in other patient cases included informed patient refusal, rapid deterioration, stable disease, or use of alternative targeted but biomarker-agnostic treatments such as antibody-drug conjugates or checkpoint inhibitors. Despite a remarkable rate of actionable mutations in HPV-related gynecologic malignancies at our institution, immediate implementation of biomarker-guided targeted treatment recommendations remained low, and access to targeted treatment options after MTB discussion remained a major challenge.

NGS-guided precision oncology in metastatic breast and gynecological cancer: first experiences at the CCC Munich LMU.

PURPOSE: Comprehensive genomic profiling identifying actionable molecular alterations aims to enable personalized treatment for cancer patients. The purpose of this analysis was to retrospectively assess the impact of personalized recommendations made by a multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) on the outcome of patients with breast or gynecological cancers, who had progressed under standard treatment. Here, first experiences of our Comprehensive Cancer Center Molecular Tumor Board are reported. METHODS: All patients were part of a prospective local registry. 95 patients diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer or gynecological malignancies underwent extended molecular profiling. From May 2017 through March 2019, the MTB reviewed all clinical cases considering tumor profile and evaluated molecular alterations regarding further diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations. RESULTS: 95 patients with metastatic breast or gynecological cancers were discussed in the MTB (68% breast cancer, 20% ovarian cancer, 5% cervical cancer, 3% endometrial cancer and 4% others). Genes with highest mutation rate were PIK3CA and ERBB2. Overall, 34 patients (36%) received a biomarker-based targeted therapy recommendation. Therapeutic recommendations were implemented in nine cases; four patients experienced clinical benefit with a partial response or disease stabilization lasting over 4 months. CONCLUSION: In the setting of a multidisciplinary molecular tumor board, a small but clinically meaningful group of breast and gynecological cancer patients benefits from comprehensive genomic profiling. Broad and successful implementation of precision medicine is complicated by patient referral at late stage disease and limited access to targeted agents and early clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 284-10 (03.05.2018).

Implementation of Precision Oncology for Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer in an Interdisciplinary MTB Setting.

The advent of molecular diagnostics and the rising number of targeted therapies have facilitated development of precision oncology for cancer patients. In order to demonstrate its impact for patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC), we initiated a Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) to provide treatment recommendations for mBC patients who had disease progression under standard treatment. NGS (next generation sequencing) was carried out using the Oncomine multi-gene panel testing system (Ion Torrent). The MTB reviewed molecular diagnostics' results, relevant tumor characteristics, patient's course of disease and made personalized treatment and/or diagnostic recommendations for each patient. From May 2017 to December 2019, 100 mBC patients were discussed by the local MTB. A total 72% of the mBC tumors had at least one molecular alteration (median 2 per case, range: 1 to 6). The most frequent genetic changes were found in the following genes: PIK3CA (19%) and TP53 (17%). The MTB rated 53% of these alterations as actionable and treatment recommendations were made accordingly for 49 (49%) patients. Sixteen patients (16%) underwent the suggested therapy. Nine out of sixteen patients (56%; 9% of all) experienced a clinical benefit with a progression-free survival ratio ≥ 1.3. Personalized targeted therapy recommendations resulting from MTB case discussions could provide substantial benefits for patients with mBC and should be implemented for all suitable patients.

Phenotype Discordance between Primary Tumor and Metastasis Impacts Metastasis Site and Outcome: Results of WSG-DETECT-PriMet.

INTRODUCTION: Tumor biological factors of breast cancer (BC) such as hormone receptor (HR) status, HER2 status, and grade can differ in the metastatic cascade from primary to lymph node (LN) metastasis and to distant metastatic tissue. Systematic data regarding therapeutic consequences are yet limited. METHODS: We conducted a prospectively planned, retrospective cohort study comparing BC phenotype in tissue from primary tumors (PTs), locoregional LN metastases, and disease recurrence (DR). HR and HER2 as well as tumor grade in PTs and DR were obtained by a database search. No centralized biomarker testing was performed. The impact of changes in tumor biological factors on post-recurrence survival (PRS) and overall survival was analyzed. RESULTS: PriMet comprises 635 patients (LN tissue in 142 patients). Discrepancies for HR or HER2 status between PT and DR were observed in 18.7 and 21.6% of cases, respectively. For HR status, positivity of PT and negativity of DR was seen more often (13.2%) than vice versa (5.5%). For HER2 status, negativity of the primary and positivity of DR was seen more often (14.9%) than vice versa (6.7%). Discordance was more often observed between PT and LN metastasis compared to LN versus DR. However, numbers were small. Compared to concordant non-triple-negative (TN) disease, concordant TN disease showed significantly inferior PRS. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate receptor discordance to occur relatively frequently between PT, LN metastasis, and DR and to impact patient prognosis. However, clinical consequences of receptor discordance need to be drawn with caution considering clinical aspects as well as tumor biology.