Assessment of Different Circulating Tumor Cell Platforms for Uveal Melanoma: Potential Impact for Future Routine Clinical Practice.

Liquid biopsy and circulating tumor cell (CTC) screening has gained interest over the last two decades for detecting almost all solid malignancies. To date, the major limitation in terms of the applicability of CTC screening in daily clinical practice is the lack of reproducibility due to the high number of platforms available that use various technologies (e.g., label-dependent versus label-free detection). Only a few studies have compared different CTC platforms. The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of four commercially available CTC platforms (Vortex (VTX-1), ClearCell FX, ISET, and Cellsearch) for the detection and identification of uveal melanoma cells (OMM 2.3 cell line). Tumor cells were seeded in RPMI medium and venous blood from healthy donors, and then processed similarly using these four platforms. Melan-A immunochemistry was performed to identify tumor cells, except when the Cellsearch device was used (automated identification). The mean overall recovery rates (with mean recovered cells) were 39.2% (19.92), 22.2% (11.31), 8.9% (4.85), and 1.1% (0.20) for the ISET, Vortex (VTX-1), ClearCell FX, and CellSearch platforms, respectively. Although paramount, the recovery rate is not sufficient to assess a CTC platform. Other parameters, such as the purpose for using a platform (diagnosis, genetics, drug sensitivity, or patient-derived xenograft models), reproducibility, purity, user-friendliness, cost-effectiveness, and ergonomics, should also be considered before they can be used in daily clinical practice and are discussed in this article.

Ultrafast Gene Fusion Assessment for Nonsquamous NSCLC.

Introduction: Gene fusion testing of ALK, ROS1, RET, NTRK, and MET exon 14 skipping mutations is guideline recommended in nonsquamous NSCLC (NS-NSCLC). Nevertheless, assessment is often hindered by the limited availability of tissue and prolonged next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing, which can protract the initiation of a targeted therapy. Therefore, the development of faster gene fusion assessment is critical for optimal clinical decision-making. Here, we compared two ultrafast gene fusion assays (UFGFAs) using NGS (Genexus, Oncomine Precision Assay, Thermo Fisher Scientific) and a multiplex reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (Idylla, GeneFusion Assay, Biocartis) approach at diagnosis in a retrospective series of 195 NS-NSCLC cases and five extrapulmonary tumors with a known NTRK fusion. Methods: A total of 195 NS-NSCLC cases (113 known gene fusions and 82 wild-type tumors) were included retrospectively. To validate the detection of a NTRK fusion, we added five NTRK-positive extrathoracic tumors. The diagnostic performance of the two UFGFAs and standard procedures was compared. Results: The accuracy was 92.3% and 93.1% for Idylla and Genexus, respectively. Both systems improved the sensitivity for detection by including a 5'-3' imbalance analysis. Although detection of ROS1, MET exon 14 skipping, and RET was excellent with both systems, ALK fusion detection was reduced with sensitivities of 87% and 88%, respectively. Idylla had a limited sensitivity of 67% for NTRK fusions, in which only an imbalance assessment was used. Conclusions: UFGFA using NGS and reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction approaches had an equal level of detection of gene fusion but with some technique-specific limitations. Nevertheless, UFGFA detection in routine clinical care is feasible with both systems allowing faster initiation of therapy and a broad degree of screening.

Real-world assessment of the BRAF status in non-squamous cell lung carcinoma using VE1 immunohistochemistry: A single laboratory experience (LPCE, Nice, France).

INTRODUCTION: International guidelines recommend BRAF mutational status assessment in treatment-naive advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) patients since the presence of a BRAFV600 mutation enables specific BRAF inhibitor treatment. For this purpose, the mutational status needs to be obtained in 10 working days. Herein, we prospectively evaluated the feasibility of systematic assessment of the BRAF status using immunohistochemistry (IHC) in a single institution (LPCE, Nice) at baseline for NSCLC diagnosed. METHODS: 1317 NSCLC were evaluated using BRAF IHC from 2011 to 2019. Initially the BRAF status was prospectively assessed using NGS and/or pyrosequencing in 618 consecutively diagnosed NSCLC patients from 2012 to 2016; BRAFV600E and BRAF nonV600E mutated tumors detected in this cohort were retrospectively evaluated using BRAF IHC. Secondarily, 699 biopsies of NSCLC were prospectively analyzed between 2017 and 2019 using BRAF IHC. BRAF IHC positive tumors were tested using a rapid BRAF specific PCR based assay. RESULTS: Initially, 21/618 (3%) of tumors (15 early and 6 late stage tumors) were BRAFV600E mutated according to the results of NGS and/or pyrosequencing. BRAF IHC was positive in 21/21 of these cases and negative in 51/51 (100 %) BRAF non V600E mutated cases. In the prospective BRAF IHC tested cohort of patients, 24/699 (3%) tumors (13 early and 11 late stage tumors) were positive with VE1 IHC. The BRAF PCR assay was positive in 20/24 (83 %) of these cases. CONCLUSION: BRAFV600E IHC screening of treatment-naïve NSCLC patients is a rapid, specific and very sensitive method which can lead in advanced stage positive NSCLC tumors to a BRAF inhibitor treatment. This test can be routinely integrated into mandatory predictive biomarker 'testing of NSCLC. According to the organization of patient care and the physician's request, this practice can be proposed as an alternative to NGS-based tissue biopsy made at baseline.

Targeted Assessment of the EGFR Status as Reflex Testing in Treatment-Naive Non-Squamous Cell Lung Carcinoma Patients: A Single Laboratory Experience (LPCE, Nice, France).

BACKGROUND: Assessment of actionable EGFR mutations is mandatory for treatment-naïve advanced or metastatic non-squamous lung carcinoma (NSLC), but the results need to be obtained in less than 10 working days. For rapid EGFR testing, an EGFR-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay is an alternative and simple approach compared to next generation sequencing (NGS). Here, we describe how a rapid EGFR-specific PCR assay can be implemented in a single laboratory center (LPCE, Nice, France) as reflex testing in treatment-naïve NSLC. METHODS: A total of 901 biopsies from NSLC with more than 10% of tumor cells were prospectively and consecutively evaluated for EGFR mutation status between November 2017 and December 2019 using the Idylla system (Biocartis NV, Mechelen, Belgium). NGS was performed for nonsmokers with NSLC wild type for EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and BRAF and with less than 50% PD-L1 positive cells using the Hotspot panel (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). RESULTS: Results were obtained from 889/901 (97%) biopsies with detection of EGFR mutations in 114/889 (13%) cases using the Idylla system. Among the 562 EGFR wild type tumors identified with Idylla, NGS detected one actionable and one nonactionable EGFR mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid and targeted assessment of EGFR mutations in treatment-naïve NSLC can be implemented in routine clinical practice. However, it is mandatory to integrate this approach into a molecular algorithm that allows evaluation of potentially actionable genomic alterations other than EGFR mutations.

Critical Assessment in Routine Clinical Practice of Liquid Biopsy for EGFR Status Testing in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Single-Laboratory Experience (LPCE, Nice, France).

BACKGROUND: The introduction of liquid biopsy using PCR-based assays into routine practice has had a strong impact on the treatment of EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma and is now commonly used for routine testing of EGFR mutations in certain clinical settings. To assess whether the claimed benefits of PCR-based assays hold true in daily practice at a multicenter clinical institution, we assessed how treatment decisions are affected by PCR-based assays for the analysis of EGFR mutations from plasma samples in a centralized laboratory (LPCE, Nice, France). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 345 samples were analyzed using the US Food and Drug Administration-approved Cobas EGFR Mutation Test v2 and 103 using the Therascreen EGFR Plasma RGQ PCR Kit over 3 years (395 samples from 324 patients). Eleven plasma samples were validated independently using Cobas at 3 institutions, and 130 samples were analyzed using Stilla digital PCR. Clinical data were collected for 175 (54%) of 324 patients. RESULTS: Cobas was superior to the Therascreen assay and demonstrated 100% reproducibility. Digital PCR showed only 48%, 83%, and 58% concordance with Cobas for exon 19 deletions, L858R mutations, and T790M mutations, respectively. Liquid biopsies helped inform and change treatment when resistance occurred and enabled the detection of EGFR mutations in patients when biopsy tissue results were unavailable. CONCLUSION: PCR-based assays are a fast and convenient test, allowing the detection of primary and secondary EGFR mutations from plasma. Cobas proved to be a reliable test, whereas digital PCR produced too many inconclusive results to be currently recommended as a principal testing device.

High expression of TRF2, SOX10, and CD10 in circulating tumor microemboli detected in metastatic melanoma patients. A potential impact for the assessment of disease aggressiveness.

Circulating tumors cells (CTCs) can be detected in the blood of metastatic melanoma patients (MMPs) both as isolated circulating tumor cells (iCTCs) and circulating tumor microemboli (CTMs), but their clinical significance remains unknown. The aim of this work was to evaluate the prognostic impact in metastatic cutaneous melanoma of CTMs and iCTCs identified by a cytomorphological approach using the isolation by size of tumor cell (ISET) method. We characterized the phenotype of CTCs using anti-PS100, anti-SOX10, anti-CD10, and anti-TRF2 antibodies. 128 MMPs and 37 control healthy individuals with benign nevi were included in this study. Results were compared to the follow-up of patients. 109/128 (85%) MMPs showed CTCs, 44/128 (34%) with 2 to 6 CTMs and 65/128 (51%) with 4 to 9 iCTCs. PS100 expression was homogeneous in iCTCs and heterogeneous in CTMs. SOX10, CD10, and TRF2 were mainly expressed in CTMs. None of the control subjects demonstrated circulating malignant tumor cells. Overall survival was significantly decreased in patients with CTMs, independently of the therapeutic strategies. In conclusion, the presence of CTMs is an independent predictor of shorter survival from the time of diagnosis of MMPs.

Usefulness of tissue microarrays for assessment of protein expression, gene copy number and mutational status of EGFR in lung adenocarcinoma.

Specific inhibitors targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) can increase survival rates in certain lung adenocarcinoma patients with mutations in the EGFR gene. Although such EGFR-targeted therapies have been approved for use, there is no general consensus among surgical pathologists on how the EGFR status should be tested in lung adenocarcinoma tissues and whether the results of immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and mutational analysis by molecular methods correlate. We evaluated the EGFR status in 61 lung adenocarcinomas by IHC (using total and mutant-specific antibodies against EGFR), by FISH analysis on tissue microarrays (TMAs), and by direct sequencing. The results of each method were compared using χ² and κappa statistics. The sensitivity and negative predictive value estimating the presence of abnormal EGFR for each test was calculated. The results show that, with respect to expression patterns and clinicopathological parameters, the total and mutant-specific EGFR detected by immunohistochemistry and FISH analysis on TMAs are valid and are equivalent to conventional methods performed on whole-tissue sections. Abnormal EGFR was detected in 52.4% of patients by IHC, FISH, and sequencing. The best sensitivity (100%) and negative predictive value (100%) was determined by evaluating the EGFR status with all methods. Testing for molecular changes in EGFR using a single test is likely to underestimate the presence of EGFR abnormalities. Taken together, these results demonstrate the high potential of TMAs to test for the major mechanisms of EGFR activation in patients with lung adenocarcinoma.