RESUMEN
Background: Comprehensive molecular profiling of tissue samples that can help guide therapy management is not widely available across the globe. Methods: Comprehensive molecular profiling through Caris Molecular Intelligence involves the analysis of DNA through next-generation sequencing, chromogenic or fluorescent in situ hybridization, pyrosequencing, and copy number alterations; RNA through whole-transcriptome sequencing and multiplex PCR of RNA; and protein through immunohistochemistry. Results: Here we describe the experience of molecular profiling of tumor tissue samples from patients diagnosed with advanced solid tumors and treated in two countries, the United Arab Emirates and Thailand. Tumor cancer cases submitted to Caris Life Sciences (Phoenix, Arizona, USA) for molecular profiling from the UAE and Thailand were retrospectively analyzed (data accessed between 2019 and 2020) for their molecular alterations and clinical biomarkers, without regard to ethnicity. A total of 451 samples from 35 distinct types of advanced cancers were examined for mutations, amplifications, overexpression, exon copy number alterations, microsatellite instability, deficient mismatch repair, tumor mutational burden, and fusions. Interrogating each step of the biological pathway, from DNA to RNA to distinct protein, identified an alteration with an associated therapy for 75% of these tumor samples. The most common alterations identified included elevated PDL-1 that can be targeted with an immune checkpoint inhibitors and amplification of HER2 for which a variety of anti HER2 therapies are available. Conclusion: Comprehensive molecular profiling in patients with advanced malignancies can help optimize therapeutic management allowing for improved prognostic outcome.
RESUMEN
In patients with metastatic breast cancer, taxane treatment demonstrates activity but is not curative. Targeted treatment modalities are therefore necessary in order to improve outcomes in this group. A randomized placebo-controlled phase II trial was initiated to evaluate effect and toxicity of gefitinib (250 mg QD) and docetaxel 35 mg/m(2) (six of seven weeks) (NCT 00319618). The inclusion of 66 patients was planned. The study was closed due to treatment-related toxicity. Of the 18 included patients, seven (of which three received gefitinib) were withdrawn from the study due to toxicity. Of the nine patients receiving gefitinib and chemotherapy, one achieved a partial response and four stable disease. In the chemotherapy of nine patients, four had a partial response and four stable disease. The breast cancer patients in this study were genotyped using a panel of 14 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), previously found associated with docetaxel clearance in a cohort of lung cancer patients. We were unable to identify genes related to toxicity in this study. Nevertheless, toxicity was aggravated by the addition of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor. In conclusion, despite adequately tolerated as monotherapy, combination regimens should be carefully considered for overlapping adverse events in order to avoid increased treatment-related toxicity.