Evidence blocks for effective presentation of genomic findings at molecular tumor boards: Single institution experience.

Genomic profiling, or molecular profiling of the tumor, is becoming a key component of therapeutic decision making in clinical oncology, and is typically carried out via next generation sequencing. However, the interpretation of the results and evaluation of rationale for targeting the uncovered alterations is challenging and requires a deep understanding of cancer biology, genetics, genomics and oncology. Multidisciplinary molecular tumor boards represent a promising strategy in the facilitation of molecularly-informed therapeutic decisions, and usually consist of specialists with various fields of expertise. To effectively communicate the biological and clinical significance of genomic findings, as well as to make molecular tumor board discussions more productive, we developed and implemented evidence blocks into case discussions in our center. We found that this approach facilitated clinicians' understanding of the results of genomic profiling, and resulted in shorter yet more efficient case discussions within the molecular tumor board. Here, we discuss our experience with evidence blocks and how their implementation influenced the molecular tumor board practice.

Untapped Potential of Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors: Lessons Learned From the Real-World Clinical Homologous Recombination Repair Mutation Testing.

Background: Testing for homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) mutations is pivotal to assess individual risk, to proact preventive measures in healthy carriers and to tailor treatments for cancer patients. Increasing prominence of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors with remarkable impact on molecular-selected patient survival across diverse nosologies, ingrains testing for BRCA genes and beyond in clinical practice. Nevertheless, testing strategies remain a question of debate. While several pathogenic BRCA1/2 gene variants have been described as founder pathogenic mutations frequently found in patients from Russia, other homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes have not been sufficiently explored. In this study, we present real-world data of routine HRR gene testing in Russia. Methods: We evaluated clinical and sequencing data from cancer patients who had germline/somatic next-generation sequencing (NGS) HRR gene testing in Russia (BRCA1/2/ATM/CHEK2, or 15 HRR genes). The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the frequency of BRCA1/2 and non-BRCA gene mutations in real-world unselected patients from Russia, and to determine whether testing beyond BRCA1/2 is feasible. Results: Data of 2,032 patients were collected from February 2021 to February 2023. Most had breast (n = 715, 35.2%), ovarian (n = 259, 12.7%), pancreatic (n = 85, 4.2%), or prostate cancer (n = 58, 2.9%). We observed 586 variants of uncertain significance (VUS) and 372 deleterious variants (DVs) across 487 patients, with 17.6% HRR-mutation positivity. HRR testing identified 120 (11.8%) BRCA1/2-positive, and 172 (16.9%) HRR-positive patients. With 51 DVs identified in 242 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE), testing for variant origin clarification was required in one case (0.4%). Most BRCA1/2 germline variants were DV (121 DVs, 26 VUS); in non-BRCA1/2 genes, VUS were ubiquitous (53 DVs, 132 VUS). In silico prediction identified additional 4.9% HRR and 1.2% BRCA1/2/ATM/CHEK2 mutation patients. Conclusions: Our study represents one of the first reports about the incidence of DV and VUS in HRR genes, including genes beyond BRCA1/2, identified in cancer patients from Russia, assessed by NGS. In silico predictions of the observed HRR gene variants suggest that non-BRCA gene testing is likely to result in higher frequency of patients who are candidates for PARP inhibitor therapy. Continuing sequencing efforts should clarify interpretation of frequently observed non-BRCA VUS.

Transcriptomic Signatures in Colorectal Cancer Progression.

AIMS: Due to a large number of identified hub-genes encoding key molecular regulators, which are involved in signal transduction and metabolic pathways in cancers, it is relevant to systemize and update these findings. BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer death in the world, with high metastatic potential. Elucidating the pathogenic mechanisms and selection of novel biomarkers in CRC is of great clinical significance. OBJECTIVE: This analytical review aims at the systematization of bioinformatics and experimental identification of hub-genes associated with CRC for a more consolidated understanding of common features in networks and pathways in CRC progression as well as hub-genes selection. RESULTS: In total, 301 hub-genes were derived from 40 articles. The "core" consisted of 28 hub-genes (CCNB1, LPAR1, BGN, CXCL3, COL1A2, UBE2C, NMU, COL1A1, CXCL2, CXCL11, CDK1, TOP2A, AURKA, SST, CXCL5, MMP3, CCND1, TIMP1, CXCL8, CXCL1, CXCL12, MYC, CCNA2, GCG, GUCA2A, PAICS, PYY and THBS2) mentioned in not less than three articles and having clinical significance in cancerassociated pathways. Of them, there were two discrete clusters enriched in chemokine signaling and cell cycle regulatory genes. High expression levels of BGN and TIMP1 and low expression levels of CCNB1, CXCL3, CXCL2, CXCL2 and PAICS were associated with unfavorable overall survival of patients with CRC. Differently expressed genes such as LPAR1, SST, CXCL12, GUCA2A, and PYY were shown as down regulated, whereas BGN, CXCL3, UBE2C, NMU, CXCL11, CDK1, TOP2A, AURKA, MMP3, CCND1, CXCL1, MYC, CCNA2, PAICS were up regulated genes in CRC. It was also found that MMP3, THBS2, TIMP1 and CXCL12 genes were associated with metastatic CRC. Network analysis in ONCO.IO showed that upstream master regulators RELA, STAT3, SOX2, FOXM1, SMAD3 and NF-kB were connected with "core" hub-genes. Conclusión: Results obtained are of useful fundamental information on revealing the mechanism of pathogenicity, cellular target selection for optimization of therapeutic interventions, as well as transcriptomics prognostic and predictive biomarkers development.

Microsatellite Instability: A Review of Molecular Epidemiology and Implications for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy.

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is one of the most important molecular characteristics of a tumor, which occurs among various tumor types. In this review article, we examine the molecular characteristics of MSI tumors, both sporadic and Lynch-associated. We also overview the risks of developing hereditary forms of cancer and potential mechanisms of tumor development in patients with Lynch syndrome. Additionally, we summarize the results of major clinical studies on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors for MSI tumors and discuss the predictive role of MSI in the context of chemotherapy and checkpoint inhibitors. Finally, we briefly discuss some of the underlying mechanisms causing therapy resistance in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Utility of public knowledge bases for the interpretation of comprehensive tumor molecular profiling results.

With the growing use of comprehensive tumor molecular profiling (CTMP), the therapeutic landscape of cancer is rapidly evolving. NGS produces large amounts of genomic data requiring complex analysis and subsequent interpretation. We sought to determine the utility of publicly available knowledge bases (KB) for the interpretation of the cancer mutational profile in clinical practice. Analysis was performed across patients who previously underwent CTMP. Independent interpretation of the CTMP was performed manually, and then, the recommendations were compared to ones present in KBs (OncoKB, CIViC, CGI, CGA, VICC, MolecularMatch). A total of 222 CTMP reports from 222 patients with 932 genomic alterations (GA) were identified. For 368 targetable GA identified in 171 (77%) of the patients, 1381 therapy recommendations were compiled. Except for CGA, therapy ESCAT LOE I, II, IIIA and IIIB therapy options were equally represented in the majority of KB. Personalized treatment options with ESCAT LOE I-II were provided for 35 patients (16%); MolecularMatch/CIViC allowed to collect ESCAT I-II treatment options for 34 of them (97%), OncoKB/CGI-for 33 of them (94%). Employing VICC and CGA 6 (17%) and 20 (57%) of patients were left without ESCAT I or II treatment options. For 88 patients with ESCAT level III-B therapy recommendations: only 2 (2%), 3 (3%), 4 (5%) and 6 (7%) of patients were left without options with CIViC, MolecularMatch, CGI and OncoKB, and with VICC-12 (14%). Highest overlap ratio was observed for IIIA (0.81) biomarkers, with the comparable results for LOE I-II. Meanwhile, overlap ratio for ESCAT LOE IV was 0.22. Public KBs provide substantial information on ESCAT-I/R1 biomarkers, but the information on ESCAT II-IV and resistance biomarkers is underrepresented. Manual curation should be considered the gold standard for the CTMP interpretation.