Dynamic Assessment of Tissue and Plasma EGFR-Activating and T790M Mutations with Droplet Digital PCR Assays for Monitoring Response and Resistance in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancers Treated with EGFR-TKIs.

Assessing tumor EGFR mutation status is necessary for the proper management of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We evaluated the impact of dynamic analyses of the plasma and tissue EGFR mutation using ultra-sensitive droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) assays to manage NSCLC patients treated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs). Paired tumor tissues and plasma samples from 137 EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma patients prior to the first-line EGFR-TKIs treatment (at baseline) and at disease progression were subjected to EGFR mutation analysis using ddPCR, together with the analyses of the clinicopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes. Patients with EGFR-activating mutations detected in baseline plasma were associated with bone metastasis (p = 0.002) and had shorter progression-free survival (12.9 vs. 17.7 months, p = 0.02) and overall survival (24.0 vs. 39.4 months, p = 0.02) compared to those without. Pre-treatment EGFR T790M mutation found in baseline tumor tissues of 28 patients (20.4%; 28/137) was significantly associated with brain metastasis (p = 0.005) and a shorter brain metastasis-free survival (p = 0.001). The presence of EGFR T790M mutations in baseline tumor tissues did not correlate with the emergence of acquired EGFR T790M mutations detected at progression. At disease progression, acquired EGFR T790M mutations were detected in 26.6% (21/79) of the plasma samples and 42.9% (15/35) of the rebiopsy tissues, with a concordance rate of 71.4% (25/35). The dynamic monitoring of tissue and plasma EGFR mutation status at baseline and progression using ddPCR has a clinical impact on the evaluation of EGFR-TKIs treatment efficacy and patient outcomes, as well as the emergence of resistance in NSCLC.

Economic Analysis of Exclusionary EGFR Test Versus Up-Front NGS for Lung Adenocarcinoma in High EGFR Mutation Prevalence Areas.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to determine whether exclusionary EGFR mutation testing followed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a cost-efficient and timely strategy in areas with high prevalence rates of EGFR mutation. METHODS: We developed a decision tree model to compare exclusionary EGFR testing followed by NGS and up-front NGS. Patients entered the model upon diagnosis of metastatic lung adenocarcinoma. Gene alterations with FDA-approved targeted therapies included EGFR, ALK, ROS1, BRAF, RET, MET, NTRK, and KRAS. Model outcomes were testing-related costs; time-to-test results; monetary loss, taking both costs and time into consideration; and percentage of patients who could be treated by FDA-approved therapies. Stacked 1-way and 3-way sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Exclusionary EGFR testing incurred testing-related costs of US $1,387 per patient, a savings of US $1,091 compared with the costs of up-front NGS. The time-to-test results for exclusionary EGFR testing and up-front NGS were 13.0 and 13.6 days, respectively. Exclusionary EGFR testing resulted in a savings of US $1,116 in terms of net monetary loss, without a reduction of patients identified with FDA-approved therapies. The EGFR mutation rate and NGS cost had the greatest impact on minimizing monetary loss. Given that the tissue-based NGS turnaround time was shortened to 7 days, up-front NGS testing would become the best strategy if its price could be reduced to US $568 in Taiwan. CONCLUSIONS: In areas with high prevalence rates of EGFR mutation, exclusionary EGFR testing followed by NGS, rather than up-front NGS, is currently a cost-efficient strategy for metastatic lung adenocarcinoma.