Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) Combined with NGS Panel Testing Increases Accuracy in Hereditary Breast Cancer Risk Estimation.

Breast cancer (BC) is the most prominent tumor type among women, accounting for 32% of newly diagnosed cancer cases. BC risk factors include inherited germline pathogenic gene variants and family history of disease. However, the etiology of the disease remains occult in most cases. Therefore, in the absence of high-risk factors, a polygenic basis has been suggested to contribute to susceptibility. This information is utilized to calculate the Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) which is indicative of BC risk. This study aimed to evaluate retrospectively the clinical usefulness of PRS integration in BC risk calculation, utilizing a group of patients who have already been diagnosed with BC. The study comprised 105 breast cancer patients with hereditary genetic analysis results obtained by NGS. The selection included all testing results: high-risk gene-positive, intermediate/low-risk gene-positive, and negative. PRS results were obtained from an external laboratory (Allelica). PRS-based BC risk was computed both with and without considering additional risk factors, including gene status and family history. A significantly different PRS percentile distribution consistent with higher BC risk was observed in our cohort compared to the general population. Higher PRS-based BC risks were detected in younger patients and in those with FH of cancers. Among patients with a pathogenic germline variant detected, reduced PRS values were observed, while the BC risk was mainly determined by a monogenic etiology. Upon comprehensive analysis encompassing FH, gene status, and PRS, it was determined that 41.90% (44/105) of the patients demonstrated an elevated susceptibility for BC. Moreover, 63.63% of the patients with FH of BC and without an inherited pathogenic genetic variant detected showed increased BC risk by incorporating the PRS result. Our results indicate a major utility of PRS calculation in women with FH in the absence of a monogenic etiology detected by NGS. By combining high-risk strategies, such as inherited disease analysis, with low-risk screening strategies, such as FH and PRS, breast cancer risk stratification can be improved. This would facilitate the development of more effective preventive measures and optimize the allocation of healthcare resources.

The Clinical and Genetic Landscape of Hereditary Cancer: Experience from a Single Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The application of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology in the genetic investigation of hereditary cancer is important for clinical surveillance, therapeutic approach, and reducing the risk of developing new malignancies. The aim of the study was to explore genetic predisposition in individuals referred for hereditary cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 8,261 individuals were referred for multigene genetic testing, during the period 2020-2023, in the laboratory, and underwent multigene genetic testing using NGS. Among the examined individuals, 56.17% were diagnosed with breast cancer, 6.77% with ovarian cancer, 2.88% with colorectal cancer, 1.91% with prostate cancer, 6.43% were healthy with a significant family history of cancer, while 3.06% had a different type of cancer and 0.21% had not provided any information. Additionally, in 85 women with breast cancer we performed whole exome sequencing analysis. RESULTS: 20% of the examined individuals carried a pathogenic variant. Specifically, 54.8% of the patients had a pathogenic variant in a clinically significant gene (BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51C, PMS2, CDKN2A, MLH1, MSH2, TP53, MSH6, APC, RAD51D, PTEN, RET, CDH1, MEN1, and VHL). Among the different types of pathogenic variants detected, a significant percentage (6.52%) represented copy number variation (CNV). With WES analysis, the following findings were detected: CTC1: c.880C>T, p.(Gln294*); MLH3: c.405del, p.(Asp136Metfs*2), PPM1D: c.1426_1430del, p.(Glu476Leufs*3), and SDHB: c.395A>G, p.(His132Arg). CONCLUSION: Comprehensive multigene genetic testing is necessary for appropriate clinical management of pathogenic variants' carriers. Additionally, the information obtained is important for determining the risk of malignancy development in family members of the examined individuals.

Genetic Testing of Breast Cancer Patients with Very Early-Onset Breast Cancer (≤30 Years) Yields a High Rate of Germline Pathogenic Variants, Mainly in the BRCA1, TP53, and BRCA2 Genes.

Early-onset breast cancer constitutes a major criterion for genetic testing referral. Nevertheless, studies focusing on breast cancer patients (≤30 years) are limited. We investigated the contribution and spectrum of known breast-cancer-associated genes in 267 Greek women with breast cancer ≤30 years while monitoring their clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes. In this cohort, a significant proportion (39.7%) carried germline pathogenic variants (PVs) distributed in 8 genes. The majority, namely 36.7%, involved BRCA1, TP53, and BRCA2. PVs in BRCA1 were the most prevalent (28.1%), followed by TP53 (4.5%) and BRCA2 (4.1%) PVs. The contribution of PVs in CHEK2, ATM, PALB2, PTEN, and RAD51C was limited to 3%. In the patient group ≤26 years, TP53 PVs were significantly higher compared to the group 26-30 years (p = 0.0023). A total of 74.8% of TP53 carriers did not report a family history of cancer. Carriers of PVs receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy showed an improved event-free survival (p < 0.0001) compared to non-carriers. Overall, many women with early-onset breast cancer carry clinically actionable variants, mainly in the BRCA1/2 and TP53 genes. The inclusion of timely testing of TP53 in these patients provides essential information for appropriate clinical management. This is important for countries where reimbursement involves the cost of genetic analysis of BRCA1/2 only.

Nationwide Real-World Data of Microsatellite Instability and/or Mismatch Repair Deficiency in Cancer: Prevalence and Testing Patterns.

Determination of microsatellite instability (MSI)/mismatch repair (MMR) status in cancer has several clinical implications. Our aim was to integrate MSI/MMR status from patients tested in Greece to assess the prevalence of MSI-high (MSI-H)/deficient MMR (dMMR) per tumor type, testing patterns over time and concordance between MSI and MMR status. We retrospectively recorded MSI/MMR testing data of patients with diverse tumor types performed in pathology and molecular diagnostics laboratories across Greece. Overall, 18 of 22 pathology and/or molecular diagnostics laboratories accepted our invitation to participate. In the 18 laboratories located across the country, 7916 tumor samples were evaluated for MSI/MMR status. MSI/MMR testing significantly increased in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and other tumor types overtime (p < 0.05). The highest prevalence was reported in endometrial cancer (47 of 225 patients, 20.9%). MSI-H/dMMR was observed in most tumor types, even in low proportions. Among 904 tumors assessed both for MSI and MMR status, 21 had discordant results (overall discordance rate, 2.3%). We reported MSI-H/dMMR prevalence rates in patients with diverse cancers, while demonstrating increasing referral patterns from medical oncologists in the country overtime. The anticipated high rate of concordance between MSI and MMR status in paired analysis was confirmed.

Clinical trials in older patients with cancer - typical challenges, possible solutions, and a paradigm of study design in breast cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: While the prevalence of older breast cancer patients is rapidly increasing, these patients are greatly underrepresented in clinical trials. We discuss barriers to recruitment of older patients to clinical trials and propose solutions on how to mitigate these challenges and design optimal clinical trials through the paradigm of IMPORTANT trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a narrative review of the current literature evaluating barriers to including older breast cancer patients in clinical trials and how mitigating strategies can be implemented in a pragmatic clinical trial. RESULTS: The recognized barriers can be roughly divided into trial design-related (e.g. the adoption of strict inclusion criteria, the lack of pre-specified age-specific analysis), patient-related (e.g. lack of knowledge, valuation of the quality-of-life instead of survival, transportation issues), or physician-related (e.g. concern for toxicity). Several strategies to mitigate barriers have been identified and should be considered when designing a clinical trial dedicated to older patients with cancer. The pragmatic, de-centralized IMPORTANT trial focusing on dose optimization of CDK4/6 -inhibitors in older breast cancer patients is a paradigm of a study design where different mitigating strategies have been adopted. INTERPRETATION: Because of the existing barriers, older adults in clinical trials are considerably healthier than the average older patients treated in clinical practice. Thus, the study results cannot be generalized to the older population seen in daily clinical practice. Broader inclusion/exclusion criteria, offering telehealth visits, and inclusion of patient-reported, instead of physician-reported outcomes may increase older patient participation in clinical trials.

Tumor-agnostic baskets to N-of-1 platform trials and real-world data: Transforming precision oncology clinical trial design.

Choosing the right drug(s) for the right patient via advanced genomic sequencing and multi-omic interrogation is the sine qua non of precision cancer medicine. Traditional cancer clinical trial designs follow well-defined protocols to evaluate the efficacy of new therapies in patient groups, usually identified by their histology/tissue of origin of their malignancy. In contrast, precision medicine seeks to optimize benefit in individual patients, i.e., to define who benefits rather than determine whether the overall group benefits. Since cancer is a disease driven by molecular alterations, innovative trial designs, including biomarker-defined tumor-agnostic basket trials, are driving ground-breaking regulatory approvals and deployment of gene- and immune-targeted drugs. Molecular interrogation further reveals the disruptive reality that advanced cancers are extraordinarily complex and individually distinct. Therefore, optimized treatment often requires drug combinations and N-of-1 customization, addressed by a new generation of N-of-1 trials. Real-world data and structured master registry trials are also providing massive datasets that are further fueling a transformation in oncology. Finally, machine learning is facilitating rapid discovery, and it is plausible that high-throughput computing, in silico modeling, and 3-dimensional printing may be exploitable in the near future to discover and design customized drugs in real time.

CONTACT-01: A Randomized Phase III Trial of Atezolizumab + Cabozantinib Versus Docetaxel for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After a Checkpoint Inhibitor and Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Although checkpoint inhibitors have improved first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a therapeutic need remains for patients whose disease does not respond or who experience disease progression after anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy. CONTACT-01 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04471428) evaluated atezolizumab plus cabozantinib versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic NSCLC who developed disease progression after concurrent or sequential treatment with anti-PD-L1/PD-1 and platinum-containing chemotherapy. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, phase III trial randomly assigned patients 1:1 to atezolizumab 1,200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks (q3w) plus cabozantinib 40 mg orally once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One hundred eighty-six patients were assigned atezolizumab plus cabozantinib, and 180 docetaxel. Minimum OS follow-up was 10.9 months. Median OS was 10.7 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 12.3) with atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 10.5 months (95% CI, 8.6 to 13.0) with docetaxel (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.16]; P = .3668). Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 5.6) and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.1 to 4.4), respectively (stratified HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92]). Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71 (38.4%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 73 (39.5%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 5 AEs occurred in 14 (7.6%) and 10 (6.0%) patients in the atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and docetaxel arms, respectively (treatment-related in four [2.2%] and one [0.6%], respectively). CONCLUSION: Atezolizumab plus cabozantinib after disease progression following anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy and platinum-containing chemotherapy for metastatic NSCLC did not improve OS compared with docetaxel. Safety was consistent with known profiles of these agents.

Microsatellite Instability Is Insufficiently Used as a Biomarker for Lynch Syndrome Testing in Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE: The pan-cancer presence of microsatellite instability (MSI)-positive tumors demonstrates its clinical utility as an agnostic biomarker for identifying immunotherapy-eligible patients. Additionally, MSI is a hallmark of Lynch syndrome (LS), the most prevalent cancer susceptibility syndrome among patients with colorectal and endometrial cancer. Therefore, MSI-high results should inform germline genetic testing for cancer-predisposing genes. However, in clinical practice, such analysis is frequently disregarded. METHODS: A next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based technique was used for MSI analysis in 4,553 patients with various tumor types. Upon request, somatic BRAF gene analysis was conducted. In addition, hereditary testing of cancer-associated genes was performed in MSI-high cases using a capture-based NGS protocol. MLH1 promoter methylation analysis was conducted retrospectively in patients with colorectal and endometrial cancer to further investigate the origin of MSI at the tumor level. RESULTS: The MSI positivity rate for the entire cohort was 5.27%. Endometrial, gastric, colorectal, urinary tract, and prostate cancers showed the highest proportion of MSI-high cases (15.69%, 8.54%, 7.40%, 4.55%, and 3.19%, respectively). A minority of 45 patients (22.73%) among the MSI-high cases underwent germline testing to determine whether the mismatch repair pathway deficiency was inherited. 24.44% of those who performed the genetic test carried a pathogenic variant in an LS-associated gene. Three MSI-high individuals had non-LS gene alterations, including BRCA1, BRCA2, and CDKN2A pathogenic variants, indicating the presence of non-LS-associated gene alterations among MSI-high patients. CONCLUSION: Although MSI analysis is routinely performed in clinical practice, as many as 77% of MSI-high patients do not undergo LS genetic testing, despite international guidelines strongly recommending it. BRAF and MLH1 methylation analysis could shed light on the somatic origin of MSI in 42.50% of the MSI-high patients; however, MLH1 analysis is barely ever requested in clinical practice.

Concordance between Three Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) Assays in Patients with High-Grade Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.

Our aim was to evaluate the concordance between the Myriad MyChoice and two alternative homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) assays (AmoyDx HRD Focus NGS Panel and OncoScan™) in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Tissue samples from 50 patients with newly diagnosed EOC and known Myriad MyChoice HRD status were included. DNA aliquots from tumor samples, previously evaluated with Myriad MyChoice and centrally reassessed, were distributed to laboratories to assess their HRD status using the two platforms, after being blinded for the Myriad MyChoice CDx HRD status. The primary endpoint was the concordance between Myriad MyChoice and each alternative assay. Tumor samples were evaluated with an AmoyDx® HRD Focus Panel (n = 50) and with OncoScan™ (n = 43). Both platforms provided results for all tumors. Analysis showed that correlation was high for the Myriad MyChoice GI score and AmoyDx® HRD Focus Panel (r = 0.79) or OncoScan™ (r = 0.87) (continuous variable). The overall percent agreement (OPA) between Myriad MyChoice GI status (categorical variable) and each alternative assay was 83.3% (68.6-93.3%) with AmoyDx and 77.5% (61.5-89.2%) with OncoScan™. The OPA in HRD status between Myriad MyChoice and AmoyDx was 88.6% (75.4-96.2). False-positive rates were 31.6% (6/19) for AmoyDx GI status and 31.9% (7/22) for OncoScan™, while false-negative rates were 0% (0/28, AmoyDx) and 11.1% (2/18, OncoScan™) compared with the Myriad MyChoice GI status. While substantial concordance between Myriad MyChoice and alternative assays was demonstrated, prospective validation of the analytical performance and clinical relevance of these assays is warranted.

Dataset of phase I and II immunotherapy clinical trials used for a meta-analysis to assess the role of biomarkers in treatment outcomes in diverse cancers.

We performed a literature search in PubMed to identify phase I/II clinical trials with immunotherapy drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (labeled, off-label, and/or combined with investigational immune checkpoint inhibitors or other treatment modalities) from 2018 to 2020. We used the following key words: clinical trials, phase 1, Phase 2; and the following filters: cancer, humans; and selected the checkpoint inhibitors that had been approved by the FDA by March 2021, i.e., "pembrolizumab", "nivolumab", "atezolizumab", "durvalumab", "cemiplimab", "avelumab", and "ipilimumab. Clinical trials with their checkpoint inhibitors as in their labeled indications, off-label use or their combinations with investigational immune checkpoint inhibitors or other treatment modalities were included. Studies describing supportive care or locoregional treatments; cellular, viral, or vaccine therapy; studies in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting; and pediatric studies were excluded. Overall, 173 articles reporting on relevant studies were identified. Using these articles, we compiled a data file of study-specific covariates for each study. We recorded the immunotherapeutic agent, tumor type and biomarker, and clinical outcomes (objective response rate and median values [point estimate] and confidence intervals for progression-free survival and overall survival. Using these data, we carried out meta-analyses for the three outcomes and meta-regression on study-specific covariates. The same data could be used for any alternative implementation of meta-analysis and meta-regression, using more structured inference models reflecting different levels of dependence based on the available study-specific covariates.

The Utility of NGS Analysis in Homologous Recombination Deficiency Tracking.

Several tumor types have been efficiently treated with PARP inhibitors (PARPis), which are now approved for the treatment of ovarian, breast, prostate, and pancreatic cancers. The BRCA1/2 genes and mutations in many additional genes involved in the HR pathway may be responsible for the HRD phenomenon. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association between genomic loss of heterozygosity (gLOH) and alterations in 513 genes with targeted and immuno-oncology therapies in 406 samples using an NGS assay. In addition, the %gLOHs of 24 samples were calculated using the Affymetrix technology in order to compare the results obtained via the two methodologies. HR variations occurred in 20.93% of the malignancies, while BRCA1/2 gene alterations occurred in 5.17% of the malignancies. The %LOH was highly correlated with alterations in the BRCA1/2 genes, since 76.19% (16/21) of the BRCA1/2 positive tumors had a high %LOH value (p = 0.007). Moreover, the LOH status was highly correlated with the TP53 and KRAS statuses, but there was no association with the TMB value. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient for the 24 samples simultaneously examined via both assays was 0.87, indicating a nearly perfect agreement. In conclusion, the addition of gLOH analysis could assist in the detection of additional patients eligible for treatment with PARPis.

Investigation of Clinically Significant Molecular Aberrations in Patients with Prostate Cancer: Implications for Personalized Treatment, Prognosis and Genetic Testing.

The data on tumor molecular profiling of European patients with prostate cancer is limited. Our aim was to evaluate the prevalence and prognostic and predictive values of gene alterations in unselected patients with prostate cancer. The presence of gene alterations was assessed in patients with histologically confirmed prostate cancer using the ForeSENTIA® Prostate panel (Medicover Genetics), targeting 36 clinically relevant genes and microsatellite instability testing. The primary endpoint was the prevalence of gene alterations in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes. Overall, 196 patients with prostate cancer were evaluated (median age 72.2 years, metastatic disease in 141 (71.9%) patients). Gene alterations were identified in 120 (61%) patients, while alteration in HRR genes were identified in 34 (17.3%) patients. The most commonly mutated HRR genes were ATM (17, 8.7%), BRCA2 (9, 4.6%) and BRCA1 (4, 2%). The presence of HRR gene alterations was not associated with advanced stage (p = 0.21), age at diagnosis (p = 0.28), Gleason score (p = 0.17) or overall survival (HR 0.72; 95% CI: 0.41-1.26; p = 0.251). We identified clinically relevant somatic gene alterations in European patients with prostate cancer. These molecular alterations have prognostic significance and therapeutic implications and/or may trigger genetic testing in selected patients. In the era of precision medicine, prospective research on the predictive role of these alterations for innovative treatments or their combinations is warranted.

Correlation between biomarkers and treatment outcomes in diverse cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of phase I and II immunotherapy clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Many immuno-oncology (IO) trials are conducted without biomarker selection. We performed a meta-analysis of phase I/II clinical trials evaluating immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) to determine the association between biomarkers and clinical outcomes, if any. METHODS: A PubMed search for phase I/II clinical trials with drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (labelled, off-label, combined with investigational ICIs or other treatment modalities) from 2018 to 2020 was performed. The objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between biomarker-positive and biomarker-negative groups, using studies that explored the correlation of biomarkers with outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 174 clinical studies that included 19,178 patients were identified, and 132 studies investigated>30 correlative biomarkers that included PD-L1 expression (≥1%, 111 studies), tumour mutational burden (20 studies) and microsatellite instability/mismatch repair deficiency (10 studies). Overall, 123, 46 and 30 cohorts (drugs, tumour types or biomarkers) with 11,692, 3065, and 2256 patient outcomes for ORR, PFS and OS, respectively, were analysed in correlation with biomarkers. Meta-analyses demonstrated that ICIs in patients with biomarker-positive tumours were associated with higher ORR (odds ratio 2.15 [95% CI, 1.79-2.58], p < 0.0001); and longer PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.55 [95% CI, 0.45-0.67], p < 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.65 [95% CI, 0.53-0.80], p < 0.0001) compared with those with biomarker-negative tumours. Significance for ORR and PFS was retained in multivariate analysis (p < 0.001) (OS, not included owing to the small number of trials reporting OS). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that IO biomarkers should be used in patient selection for ICIs. Prospective studies are warranted.

Real-world Data and Economic Evaluation of Nivolumab in Previously Treated Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Greek Patients.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Nivolumab is an FDA-approved immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) for patients with advanced, pre-treated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, treatment profiles and patient outcomes often differ in routine clinical practice while the financial impact of approved therapies is largely unknown. In this study, we investigated the efficacy, tolerability, and economic impact of nivolumab in real-world settings (RWS) in Greece. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with advanced pre-treated NSCLC, receiving nivolumab were recruited from October 2015 until November 2019 across 18 different clinical centers in Greece. Endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. Cost analysis was conducted using a third-party public-payer perspective (National Organization for Healthcare Services Provision; EOPYY). RESULTS: A total of 346 patients, median age 66.5 years, were included. With 43.4 months median follow-up, median PFS was 7.8 months and median OS 15.8 months. The 1-year OS rate was 56.5%, 2-year OS 38.8%, and 3-year OS 27.3%. The ORR was 29.5% and DCR 58.7%, with a median response duration of 26.8 months. Patients with objective response were more likely to experience long-term survival (HR=0.14, p<0.001). Only 8.4% of patients experienced grade 3-4 adverse events. The presence of immune-related adverse events was associated with improved OS (HR=0.77, p=0.043). Nivolumab-associated economic burden accounted for €2,214.10 per cycle for each patient, mainly attributed to drug-acquisition costs. CONCLUSION: This is the first report of real-world efficacy, safety, and economic burden of nivolumab in pre-treated patients with NSCLC in Greece. Indirectly compared to clinical trials, nivolumab was associated with improved efficacy in RWS, further supporting its use in clinical practice and providing insights on clinical prognosticators. The main cost component affecting the nivolumab economic burden was drug-acquisition costs, while toxicity-associated cost was negligible.

Neoadjuvant treatment in ovarian cancer: New perspectives, new challenges.

Ovarian cancer remains the leading cause of death from gynecological cancer. Survival is significantly related to the stage of the disease at diagnosis. Of quite importance is primary cytoreductive surgery, having as a goal to remove all visible tumor tissue, and is the standard primary treatment in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has been implemented mostly in treating advanced disease, with studies performed having numerous limitations. Data extrapolated from these studies have not shown inferiority survival of NACT, compared to primary debulking surgery. The role of NACT is of particular interest because of the intrinsic mechanisms that are involved in the process, which can be proven as therapeutic approaches with enormous potential. NACT increases immune infiltration and programmed death ligand-1 (PDL-1) expression, induces local immune activation, and can potentiate the immunogenicity of immune-exclude high grade serous ovarian tumors, while the combination of NACT with bevacizumab, PARP inhibitors or immunotherapy remains to be evaluated. This article summarizes all available data on studies implementing NACT in the treatment of ovarian cancer, focusing on clinical outcomes and study limitations. High mortality rates observed among ovarian cancer patients necessitates the identification of more effective treatments, along with biomarkers that will aid treatment individualization.

Clinical trial design in the era of precision medicine.

Recent rapid biotechnological breakthroughs have led to the identification of complex and unique molecular features that drive malignancies. Precision medicine has exploited next-generation sequencing and matched targeted therapy/immunotherapy deployment to successfully transform the outlook for several fatal cancers. Tumor and liquid biopsy genomic profiling and transcriptomic, immunomic, and proteomic interrogation can now all be leveraged to optimize therapy. Multiple new trial designs, including basket and umbrella trials, master platform trials, and N-of-1 patient-centric studies, are beginning to supplant standard phase I, II, and III protocols, allowing for accelerated drug evaluation and approval and molecular-based individualized treatment. Furthermore, real-world data, as well as exploitation of digital apps and structured observational registries, and the utilization of machine learning and/or artificial intelligence, may further accelerate knowledge acquisition. Overall, clinical trials have evolved, shifting from tumor type-centered to gene-directed and histology-agnostic trials, with innovative adaptive designs and personalized combination treatment strategies tailored to individual biomarker profiles. Some, but not all, novel trials now demonstrate that matched therapy correlates with superior outcomes compared to non-matched therapy across tumor types and in specific cancers. To further improve the precision medicine paradigm, the strategy of matching drugs to patients based on molecular features should be implemented earlier in the disease course, and cancers should have comprehensive multi-omic (genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, immunomic) tumor profiling. To overcome cancer complexity, moving from drug-centric to patient-centric individualized combination therapy is critical. This review focuses on the design, advantages, limitations, and challenges of a spectrum of clinical trial designs in the era of precision oncology.

Lung cancer as a predominant feature in a patient with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome: Case report.

Peutz-Jeghers syndrome (PJS) is characterized by mucocutaneous pigmentation and gastrointestinal hamartomatous polyposis, which can lead to intussusception. PJS patients face high lifetime risks for various cancer types, with the majority of patients being diagnosed with tumors along the gastrointestinal tract. Herein, we present the case of a 34-year-old man who carried a germline STK11 pathogenic variant, while lacking the cardinal features of PJS syndrome. Interestingly, he was diagnosed with lung adenocarcinoma despite being a never-smoker. Tumor testing revealed clinically relevant molecular alterations, including the known germline pathogenic variant STK11, a KRAS somatic pathogenic variant, and FGFR3 gene amplification. Treatment with standard chemotherapy and immunotherapy did not have a clinical benefit. Due to clinical deterioration, the patient deceased 18 months after his initial diagnosis prior to having the chance for targeted therapy. Identification of rare hereditary cancer syndromes and the respective presence of tumor biomarkers can provide important alternatives to targeted treatments, including immunotherapy in patients with tumors unresponsive to conventional treatment protocols. This case highlights that although only a small proportion of lung cancer diagnoses will be due to hereditary predisposition, STK11 germline carriers should be under close surveillance for early detection of lung cancer.

Physicians' experience, practice and education, on genetic testing and genetic counseling: a nationwide survey study in Greece.

Genetic testing has been implemented in clinical practice. However, data on physician's practices and education related to cancer genetics, risk assessment and clinical management in Greece, is limited. In Greece, genetic counseling is performed by treating physicians in collaboration with clinical laboratory geneticists due to the absence of medical geneticists and genetic counsellors. We evaluated treating physicians' experience on genetic testing for hereditary cancer and counseling practices in Greece, thus providing critical areas for improvement of genetic counseling processes. A 28-question survey was used to assess physicians' experience with genetic testing practices, factors that affect their clinical management and decision making and limitations in their education. Of 250 physicians, 208 (83%) completed the survey; of whom 89 (42.8%) were medical oncologists, 88 general surgeons (42.3%), 26 gynecologists (12.5%) and 5 (2.4%) of other specialties. Overall, 91.8% of participants referred patients for genetic testing, with 51.8% recommending multigene panel testing. While most clinicians (84%) reported lack of a clinical genetics department at their institution, 75.7% referred patients for genetic counseling at available departments or healthcare professionals with expertise in genetic counseling. Overall, 68.8% of respondents reported no training or moderate training on cancer genetics. A higher proportion of medical oncologists reported sufficient/very satisfactory training (40.9%) compared to general surgeons (27.3%) or gynecologists (11.5%) (p = 0.012). Time spent on pre- and post-testing sessions varied significantly among respondents. Of 199 physicians, 70% would manage patients with BRCA1 VUS as patients with pathogenic variants, mainly surgeons (83.1%) and gynecologists (80%), compared to oncologists (52.3%) (p < 0.001). Additionally, 64% of physicians treating patients with breast and ovarian cancer would recommend an intervention based on the presence of a BRCA1 VUS. Most respondents (87%) were interested in receiving additional education on cancer risk assessment. Limited consensus was observed during physicians' genetic testing, counseling practices and clinical management of patients with increased predisposition to cancer. Our findings highlight the need for improvement in physician education on cancer risk assessment and increase of genetic counseling resources and services.

Transcriptomics and solid tumors: The next frontier in precision cancer medicine.

Transcriptomics, which encompasses assessments of alternative splicing and alternative polyadenylation, identification of fusion transcripts, explorations of noncoding RNAs, transcript annotation, and discovery of novel transcripts, is a valuable tool for understanding cancer mechanisms and identifying biomarkers. Recent advances in high-throughput technologies have enabled large-scale gene expression profiling. Importantly, RNA expression profiling of tumor tissue has been successfully used to determine clinically actionable molecular alterations. The WINTHER precision medicine clinical trial was the first prospective trial in diverse solid malignancies that assessed both genomics and transcriptomics to match treatments to specific molecular alterations. The use of transcriptome analysis in WINTHER and other trials increased the number of targetable -omic changes compared to genomic profiling alone. Other applications of transcriptomics involve the evaluation of tumor and circulating noncoding RNAs as predictive and prognostic biomarkers, the improvement of risk stratification by the use of prognostic and predictive multigene assays, the identification of fusion transcripts that drive tumors, and an improved understanding of the impact of DNA changes as some genomic alterations are silenced at the RNA level. Finally, RNA sequencing and gene expression analysis have been incorporated into clinical trials to identify markers predicting response to immunotherapy. Many issues regarding the complexity of the analysis, its reproducibility and variability, and the interpretation of the results still need to be addressed. The integration of transcriptomics with genomics, proteomics, epigenetics, and tumor immune profiling will improve biomarker discovery and our understanding of disease mechanisms and, thereby, accelerate the implementation of precision oncology.

Real-world safety and efficacy data of immunotherapy in patients with cancer and autoimmune disease: the experience of the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group.

BACKGROUND: Data on the safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with concurrent autoimmune diseases (AID) are limited. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter review of medical records of patients with cancer and underlying AID who received ICI. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Among 123 patients with pre-existing AID who received ICI, the majority had been diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC, 68.3%) and melanoma (14.6%). Most patients had a rheumatologic (43.9%), or an endocrine disorder (21.1%). Overall, 74 (60.2%) patients experienced an immune-related adverse event (irAE) after ICI initiation, AID flare (25.2%), or new irAE (35%). Frequent irAEs included thyroiditis, dermatitis and colitis. ICI was permanently discontinued due to unacceptable (8.1%) or fatal (0.8%) toxicity. In patients with NSCLC, corticosteroid treatment at the initiation of immunotherapy was associated with poor PFS (HR = 2.78, 95% CI 1.40-5.50, p = 0.003). The occurrence of irAE was associated with increased PFS (HR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.25-0.92, p = 0.026). Both parameters maintained their independent prognostic significance. CONCLUSIONS: ICI in patients with cancer and pre-existing AID is associated with manageable toxicity that infrequently requires treatment discontinuation. However, since severe AID flare might occur, expected ICI efficacy and toxicity must be balanced. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: NCT04805099.