Management of patients with presumed germline pathogenic variant from tumor-only genomic sequencing: A retrospective analysis at a single facility.

Cancer treatment is increasingly evolving toward personalized medicine, which sequences numerous cancer-related genes and identifies therapeutic targets. On the other hand, patients with germline pathogenic variants (GPV) have been identified as secondary findings (SF) and oncologists have been urged to handle them. All SF disclosure considerations for patients are addressed and decided at the molecular tumor boards (MTB) in the facility. In this study, we retrospectively summarized the results of all cases in which comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) test was conducted at our hospital, and discussed the possibility of presumed germline pathogenic variants (PGPV) at MTB. MTB recommended confirmatory testing for 64 patients. Informed consent was obtained from attending physicians for 53 of them, 30 patients requested testing, and 17 patients tested positive for a confirmatory test. Together with already known variants, 4.5 % of the total confirmed in this cohort. Variants verified in this study were BRCA1 (n = 12), BRCA2 (n = 6), MSH2 (n = 2), MSH6 (n = 2), WT1 (n = 2), TP53, MEN1, CHEK2, MLH1, TSC2, PTEN, RB1, and SMARCB1. There was no difference in the tumor's VAF between confirmed positive and negative cases for variants determined as PGPV by MTB. Current results demonstrate the actual number of cases until confirmatory germline test for patients with PGPV from tumor-only CGP test through the discussion at the MTB. The practical results at this single facility will serve as a guide for the management of the selection and distribution of SF in the genome analysis.

Clinical decisions by the molecular tumor board on comprehensive genomic profiling tests in Japan: A retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: A paradigm shift has occurred in cancer chemotherapy from tumor-specific treatment with cytotoxic agents to personalized medicine with molecular-targeted drugs. Thus, it is essential to identify genomic alterations and molecular features to recommend effective targeted molecular medicines regardless of the tumor site. Nevertheless, it takes considerable expertise to identify treatment targets from primary-sequencing data in order to provide drug recommendations. The Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) denotes a platform that integrates clinical and molecular features for clinical decisions. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyses all the cases of discussion and decision at the MTB in Tohoku University Hospital and summarizes genetic alterations and treatment recommendations. RESULTS: The MTB discussed 1003 comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) tests conducted in patients with solid cancer, and the resulting rate of assessing treatment recommendations was approximately 19%. Among hundreds of genes in the CGP test, only 30 genetic alterations or biomarkers were used to make treatment recommendations. The leading biomarkers that led to treatment recommendations were tumor mutational burden-high (TMB-H) (n = 32), ERBB2 amplification (n = 24), BRAF V600E (n = 16), and BRCA1/2 alterations (n = 32). Thyroid cancer accounted for most cancer cases for which treatment recommendation was provided (81.3%), followed by non-small cell lung cancer (42.4%) and urologic cancer (31.3%). The number of tests performed for gastrointestinal cancers was high (n = 359); however, the treatment recommendations for the same were below average (13%). CONCLUSION: The results of this study may be used to simplify treatment recommendations from the CGP reports and help select patients for testing, thereby increasing the accuracy of personalized medicine.