Structural Alterations Driving Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Revealed by Linked-Read Genome Sequencing.

Nearly all prostate cancer deaths are from metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), but there have been few whole-genome sequencing (WGS) studies of this disease state. We performed linked-read WGS on 23 mCRPC biopsy specimens and analyzed cell-free DNA sequencing data from 86 patients with mCRPC. In addition to frequent rearrangements affecting known prostate cancer genes, we observed complex rearrangements of the AR locus in most cases. Unexpectedly, these rearrangements include highly recurrent tandem duplications involving an upstream enhancer of AR in 70%-87% of cases compared with <2% of primary prostate cancers. A subset of cases displayed AR or MYC enhancer duplication in the context of a genome-wide tandem duplicator phenotype associated with CDK12 inactivation. Our findings highlight the complex genomic structure of mCRPC, nominate alterations that may inform prostate cancer treatment, and suggest that additional recurrent events in the non-coding mCRPC genome remain to be discovered.

Circulating tumor DNA in advanced solid tumors: Clinical relevance and future directions.

The application of genomic profiling assays using plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is rapidly evolving in the management of patients with advanced solid tumors. Diverse plasma ctDNA technologies in both commercial and academic laboratories are in routine or emerging use. The increasing integration of such testing to inform treatment decision making by oncology clinicians has complexities and challenges but holds significant potential to substantially improve patient outcomes. In this review, the authors discuss the current role of plasma ctDNA assays in oncology care and provide an overview of ongoing research that may inform real-world clinical applications in the near future.

Postradical prostatectomy prostate-specific antigen outcomes after 6 versus 18 months of perioperative androgen-deprivation therapy in men with localized, unfavorable intermediate-risk or high-risk prostate cancer: Results of part 2 of a randomized phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with localized, unfavorable intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer have an increased risk of relapse after radical prostatectomy (RP). The authors previously reported on part 1 of this phase 2 trial testing neoadjuvant apalutamide, abiraterone, prednisone, plus leuprolide (AAPL) or abiraterone, prednisone, and leuprolide (APL) for 6 months followed by RP. The results demonstrated favorable pathologic responses (tumor <5 mm) in 20.3% of patients (n = 24 of 118). Herein, the authors report the results of part 2. METHODS: For part 2, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either AAPL for 12 months (arm 2A) or observation (arm 2B), stratified by neoadjuvant therapy and pathologic tumor classification. The primary end point was 3-year biochemical progression-free survival. Secondary end points included safety and testosterone recovery (>200 ng/dL). RESULTS: Overall, 82 of 118 patients (69%) enrolled in part 1 were randomized to part 2. A higher proportion of patients who were not randomized to adjuvant therapy had a favorable prostatectomy pathologic response (32.3% in nonrandomized patients compared with 17.1% in randomized patients). In the intent-to-treat analysis, the 3-year biochemical progression-free survival rate was 81% for arm 2A and 72% for arm 2B (hazard ratio, 0.81; 90% confidence interval, 0.43-1.49). Of the randomized patients, 81% had testosterone recovery in the AAPL group compared with 95% in the observation group, with a median time to recovery of <12 months in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, because 30% of patients declined adjuvant treatment, part B was underpowered to detect differences between arms. Future perioperative studies should be biomarker-directed and include strategies for investigator and patient engagement to ensure compliance with protocol procedures.

Insulin resistance during androgen deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in prostate cancer (PCa) has been associated with development of insulin resistance. However, the predominant site of insulin resistance remains unclear. METHODS: The ADT & Metabolism Study was a single-center, 24-week, prospective observational study that enrolled ADT-naive men without diabetes who were starting ADT for at least 24 weeks (ADT group, n = 42). The control group comprised men without diabetes with prior history of PCa who were in remission after prostatectomy (non-ADT group, n = 23). Prevalent diabetes mellitus was excluded in both groups using all three laboratory criteria defined in the American Diabetes Association guidelines. All participants were eugonadal at enrollment. The primary outcome was to elucidate the predominant site of insulin resistance (liver or skeletal muscle). Secondary outcomes included assessments of body composition, and hepatic and intramyocellular fat. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 12, and 24 weeks. RESULTS: At 24 weeks, there was no change in hepatic (1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.10 to 4.43; p = .47) or skeletal muscle (-3.2; 95% CI, -7.07 to 0.66; p = .10) insulin resistance in the ADT group. No increase in hepatic or intramyocellular fat deposition or worsening of glucose was seen. These changes were mirrored by those observed in the non-ADT group. Men undergoing ADT gained 3.7 kg of fat mass. CONCLUSIONS: In men with PCa and no diabetes, 24 weeks of ADT did not change insulin resistance despite adverse body composition changes. These findings should be reassuring for treating physicians and for patients who are being considered for short-term ADT.

MR-guided prostate SBRT in prostate cancer patients with low-volume metastatic disease.

BACKGROUND: Recent data have found an overall survival benefit from prostate-directed radiotherapy in patients with low-volume metastatic prostate cancer. Prostate SBRT is an attractive treatment in this setting and may be optimised with MR-guided adaptive treatment. Here, we share our institutional experience delivering stereotactic MR-guided adaptive prostate SBRT (SMART) for patients with low-volume metastatic disease. METHODS: We reviewed patients with low-volume metastatic disease who received prostate SMART from October 2019 to December 2021 on a 0.35T MR-Linac. The cohort included 14 patients. Genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities were assessed using CTCAE v 5.0. Progression was defined as a change in systemic or hormonal therapy regimen as a result of PSA rise or disease progression. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 29 months. Seven patients had hormone sensitive prostate cancer and 7 had castrate resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). 13 patients received 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions and one patient received 33 Gy in 5 fractions. At the time of last follow-up, 11 patients had not experienced progression and three patients, all with CRPC, had experienced progression. No patients developed local progression in the prostate after SMART. One patient experienced acute grade 2 urinary toxicity (7%) and no patients experienced acute grade 2 GI toxicity (0%). No grade 3 + acute toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate SMART was found to be well tolerated and all patients had local control of disease within the prostate at the time of last follow-up. Prostate SMART may represent a low-risk and well-tolerated approach for delivering prostate-directed radiotherapy for patients with limited metastatic disease.

Development of PARP Inhibitors in Targeting Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Prostate cancer is a genetically heterogenous disease and a subset of prostate tumors harbor alterations in DNA damage and repair (DDR) genes. Prostate tumor DDR gene alterations can arise via germline or somatic events and are enriched in high-grade and advanced disease. Alterations in genes in the homologous recombination (HR) repair pathway are associated with sensitivity to PARP inhibition in breast and ovarian cancer, and data from recently completed randomized trials also demonstrate benefit of PARP inhibitor therapy in patients with advanced metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and tumor HR gene alterations. PARP inhibitors have been investigated in first-line mCRPC in biomarker-selected and unselected populations, and are currently under study in earlier disease states in patients with DDR gene alterations. This chapter focuses on the current state of PARP inhibitor development in prostate cancer with particular emphasis on biomarkers and combination therapy approaches.

PTEN-PI3K pathway alterations in advanced prostate cancer and clinical implications.

BACKGROUND: Despite significant advances in molecular characterization and therapeutic targeting of advanced prostate cancer, it remains the second most common cause of cancer death in men in the United States. The PI3K (Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase)/AKT (AKT serine/threonine kinase)/mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) signaling pathway is commonly altered in prostate cancer, most frequently through loss of the PTEN (Phosphatase and Tensin Homolog) tumor suppressor, and is critical for cancer cell proliferation, migration, and survival. METHODS: This study summarizes signaling through the PTEN/PI3K pathway, alterations in pathway components commonly seen in advanced prostate cancer, and results of clinical trials of pathway inhibitors reported to date with a focus on more recently reported studies. It also reviews rationale for combination approaches currently under study, including with taxanes, immune checkpoint inhibitors and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, and discusses future directions in biomarker testing and therapeutic targeting of this pathway. RESULTS: Clinical trials studying pharmacologic inhibitors of PI3K, AKT or mTOR kinases have demonstrated modest activity of specific agents, with several trials of pathway inhibitors currently in progress. A key challenge is the importance of PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling in noncancerous tissues, leading to predictable but often severe toxicities at therapeutic doses. RESULTS: Further advances in selective pharmacologic inhibition of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway in tumors, development of rational combinations, and appropriate biomarker selection to identify the appropriate tumor- and patient-specific vulnerabilities will be required to optimize clinical benefit from therapeutic targeting of this pathway.

Implementation of a prostate cancer-specific targeted sequencing panel for credentialing of patient-derived cell lines and genomic characterization of patient samples.

BACKGROUND: Primary and metastatic prostate cancers have low mutation rates and recurrent alterations in a small set of genes, enabling targeted sequencing of prostate cancer-associated genes as an efficient approach to characterizing patient samples (compared to whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing). For example, targeted sequencing provides a flexible, rapid, and cost-effective method for genomic assessment of patient-derived cell lines to evaluate fidelity to initial patient tumor samples. METHODS: We developed a prostate cancer-specific targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel to detect alterations in 62 prostate cancer-associated genes as well as recurring gene fusions with ETS family members, representing the majority of common alterations in prostate cancer. We tested this panel on primary prostate cancer tissues and blood biopsies from patients with metastatic prostate cancer. We generated patient-derived cell lines from primary prostate cancers using conditional reprogramming methods and applied targeted sequencing to evaluate the fidelity of these cell lines to the original patient tumors. RESULTS: The prostate cancer-specific panel identified biologically and clinically relevant alterations, including point mutations in driver oncogenes and ETS family fusion genes, in tumor tissues from 29 radical prostatectomy samples. The targeted panel also identified genomic alterations in cell-free DNA and circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from patients with metastatic prostate cancer, and in standard prostate cancer cell lines. We used the targeted panel to sequence our set of patient-derived cell lines; however, no prostate cancer-specific mutations were identified in the tumor-derived cell lines, suggesting preferential outgrowth of normal prostate epithelial cells. CONCLUSIONS: We evaluated a prostate cancer-specific targeted NGS panel to detect common and clinically relevant alterations (including ETS family gene fusions) in prostate cancer. The panel detected driver mutations in a diverse set of clinical samples of prostate cancer, including fresh-frozen tumors, cell-free DNA, CTCs, and cell lines. Targeted sequencing of patient-derived cell lines highlights the challenge of deriving cell lines from primary prostate cancers and the importance of genomic characterization to credential candidate cell lines. Our study supports that a prostate cancer-specific targeted sequencing panel provides an efficient, clinically feasible approach to identify genetic alterations across a spectrum of prostate cancer samples and cell lines.

Results of a multicenter, phase 2 study of nivolumab and ipilimumab for patients with advanced rare genitourinary malignancies.

BACKGROUND: In this multicenter, single-arm, multicohort, phase 2 trial, the efficacy of nivolumab and ipilimumab was evaluated in patients with advanced rare genitourinary cancers, including bladder and upper tract carcinoma of variant histology (BUTCVH), adrenal tumors, platinum-refractory germ cell tumors, penile carcinoma, and prostate cancer of variant histology (NCT03333616). METHODS: Patients with rare genitourinary malignancies and no prior immune checkpoint inhibitor exposure were enrolled. Patients received nivolumab at 3 mg/kg and ipilimumab at 1 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks for 4 doses, and this was followed by 480 mg of nivolumab intravenously every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were enrolled at 6 institutions between April 2018 and July 2019 in 3 cohorts: BUTCVH (n = 19), adrenal tumors (n = 18), and other tumors (n = 18). The median follow-up was 9.9 months (range, 1 to 21 months). Twenty-eight patients (51%) received 4 doses of nivolumab and ipilimumab; 25 patients received nivolumab maintenance for a median of 4 cycles (range, 1-18 cycles). The ORR for the entire study was 16% (80% confidence interval, 10%-25%); the ORR in the BUTCVH cohort, including 2 complete responses, was 37%, and it was 6% in the other 2 cohorts. Twenty-two patients (40%) developed treatment-related grade 3 or higher toxicities; 24% (n = 13) required high-dose steroids (≥40 mg of prednisone or the equivalent). Grade 5 events occurred in 3 patients; 1 death was treatment related. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab and ipilimumab resulted in objective responses in a subset of patients with rare genitourinary malignancies, especially those with BUTCVH. An additional cohort exploring their activity in genitourinary tumors with neuroendocrine differentiation is ongoing. LAY SUMMARY: Patients with rare cancers are often excluded from studies and have limited treatment options. Fifty-five patients with rare tumors of the genitourinary system were enrolled from multiple sites and were treated with nivolumab and ipilimumab, a regimen used for kidney cancer. The regimen showed activity in some patients, particularly those with bladder or upper tract cancers of unusual or variant histology; 37% of those patients responded to therapy. Additional studies are ongoing to better determine who benefits the most from this combination.

Systematic Review of Time to Definitive Treatment for Intermediate Risk and High Risk Prostate Cancer: Are Delays Associated with Worse Outcomes?

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer is most commonly an indolent disease, especially when detected at a localized stage. Unlike other tumors that may benefit from timely receipt of definitive therapy, it is generally accepted that treatment delays for localized prostate cancer are acceptable, especially for low risk prostate cancer. Since treatment delay for intermediate risk and high risk disease is more controversial, we sought to determine if delays for these disease states negatively impacted oncological outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature with searches of Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to June 30, 2020. General study characteristics as well as study population and delay information were collected. The outcomes of interest extracted included biochemical recurrence, pathological features (positive surgical margins, upgrading, extracapsular extension, and other pathological features), cancer specific survival and overall survival. RESULTS: After identifying 1,793 unique references, 24 manuscripts met criteria for data extraction, 15 of which were published after 2013. Based on our review, delays up to 3 months are safe for all localized prostate cancer and are not associated with worse oncological outcomes. Some studies identified worse oncological outcomes as a result of delays beyond 6 to 9 months. However, these studies are counterbalanced by others finding no statistically significant association with delays up to 12 months. Studies that did find worse outcomes as a result of delays identified a higher risk of biochemical recurrence and worse pathological outcomes but not worse cancer specific or overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Definitive treatment for intermediate risk and high risk prostate cancer can be delayed up to 3 months without any oncological consequences. Some evidence suggests that there is a higher risk of biochemical recurrence and worse pathological outcomes associated with delays beyond 6 to 9 months. To date, there are no reports of worse cancer specific survival or overall survival as a result of delayed treatment for intermediate risk and high risk prostate cancer.

Results of a Randomized Phase II Trial of Intense Androgen Deprivation Therapy prior to Radical Prostatectomy in Men with High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: This multicenter randomized phase 2 trial investigates the impact of intense androgen deprivation on radical prostatectomy pathologic response and radiographic and tissue biomarkers in localized prostate cancer (NCT02903368). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had a Gleason score ≥4+3=7, prostate specific antigen >20 ng/mL or T3 disease and lymph nodes <20 mm. In Part 1, patients were randomized 1:1 to apalutamide, abiraterone acetate, prednisone and leuprolide (AAPL) or abiraterone, prednisone, leuprolide (APL) for 6 cycles (1 cycle=28 days) followed by radical prostatectomy. Surgical specimens underwent central review. The primary end point was the rate of pathologic complete response or minimum residual disease (minimum residual disease, tumor ≤5 mm). Secondary end points included prostate specific antigen response, positive margin rate and safety. Magnetic resonance imaging and tissue biomarkers of pathologic outcomes were explored. RESULTS: The study enrolled 118 patients at 4 sites. Median age was 61 years and 94% of patients had high-risk disease. The combined pathologic complete response or minimum residual disease rate was 22% in the AAPL arm and 20% in the APL arm (difference: 1.5%; 1-sided 95% CI -11%, 14%; 1-sided p=0.4). No new safety signals were observed. There was low concordance and correlation between posttherapy magnetic resonance imaging assessed and pathologically assessed tumor volume. PTEN-loss, ERG positivity and presence of intraductal carcinoma were associated with extensive residual tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Intense neoadjuvant hormone therapy in high-risk prostate cancer resulted in favorable pathologic responses (tumor <5 mm) in 21% of patients. Pathologic responses were similar between treatment arms. Part 2 of this study will investigate the impact of adjuvant hormone therapy on biochemical recurrence.

A model combining clinical and genomic factors to predict response to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade in advanced urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC), predictive biomarkers that correlate with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are lacking. Here, we interrogated genomic and clinical features associated with response to ICIs in mUC. METHODS: Sixty two mUC patients treated with ICI who had targeted tumour sequencing were studied. We examined associations between candidate biomarkers and clinical benefit (CB, any objective reduction in tumour size) versus no clinical benefit (NCB, no change or objective increase in tumour size). Both univariable and multivariable analyses for associations were conducted. A comparator cohort of 39 mUC patients treated with taxanes was analysed by using the same methodology. RESULTS: Nine clinical and seven genomic factors correlated with clinical outcomes in univariable analysis in the ICI cohort. Among the 16 factors, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥5 (OR = 0.12, 95% CI, 0.01-1.15), visceral metastasis (OR = 0.05, 95% CI, 0.01-0.43) and single-nucleotide variant (SNV) count < 10 (OR = 0.04, 95% CI, 0.006-0.27) were identified as independent predictors of NCB to ICI in multivariable analysis (c-statistic = 0.90). None of the 16 variables were associated with clinical benefit in the taxane cohort. CONCLUSIONS: This three-factor model includes genomic (SNV count >9) and clinical (NLR <5, lack of visceral metastasis) variables predictive for benefit to ICI but not taxane therapy for mUC. External validation of these hypothesis-generating results is warranted to enable use in routine clinical care.

Biological and therapeutic advances in the pursuit of effective immunotherapy for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The successful development of effective cancer immunotherapy, in particular immune checkpoint inhibitors, has changed the treatment paradigm of many tumor types. In light of the limited efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors demonstrated in recent clinical trials in refractory prostate cancer, this review highlights important recent and ongoing studies that are shaping the pursuit of effective immunotherapy for prostate cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: We review two overarching themes with respect to recent studies of prostate cancer immunotherapy: evolving therapeutic strategies and novel biological findings, including the landscape of predictive biomarkers of immunotherapy response. SUMMARY: Novel and combinatorial immunotherapy strategies are being implemented across the clinical spectrum of prostate cancer. Greater understanding of complex tumor-immune interactions and the determinants of therapy response in prostate cancer is an area of intense investigation, and will inform both translational and clinical immuno-oncology research in the field.

A phase 2 trial of abiraterone acetate without glucocorticoids for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Abiraterone acetate suppresses adrenal androgens and glucocorticoids through the inhibition of CYP17; however, given the risk of mineralocorticoid excess, it is administered with glucocorticoids. Herein, the authors performed a phase 2, single-arm study that was designed to assess the safety of abiraterone acetate without steroids in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: Eligible patients had castration-resistant prostate cancer with controlled blood pressure and normal potassium. Patients initially received abiraterone acetate at a dose of 1000 mg daily alone. Those with persistent or severe mineralocorticoid toxicity received treatment with prednisone initiated at a dose of 5 mg twice daily. Therapy was continued until radiographic progression, toxicity, or withdrawal. The primary objective of the current study was to determine the percentage of men requiring prednisone to manage mineralocorticoid toxicity. Toxicity was graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. RESULTS: A total of 58 patients received at least 1 dose of abiraterone acetate; the majority had metastases (53 patients; 91.4%). Sixteen patients (27.6%) received prior chemotherapy, 6 patients (10.3%) received prior enzalutamide, and 4 patients (7%) received prior ketoconazole. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events of interest included hypertension (9 patients; 15.5%) and hypokalemia (4 patients; 7%). There was no grade ≥3 edema. Seven patients (12%) initiated prednisone therapy for mineralocorticoid toxicity, 3 patients for hypertension (5%), and 4 patients for hypokalemia (7%). Two patients initiated prednisone therapy for fatigue (3%). Forty patients (68%) experienced a decline in prostate-specific antigen of ≥50% with the use of abiraterone acetate alone. Patients with lower baseline levels of androstenedione (P = .04), androsterone (P = .01), dehydroepiandrosterone (P = .03), and 17-hydroxyprogesterone (P = .03) were found to be more likely to develop mineralocorticoid toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with abiraterone acetate without steroids is feasible, although clinically significant adverse events can occur in a minority of patients. The use of abiraterone acetate without prednisone should be balanced with the potential for toxicity and requires close monitoring.

A dose finding clinical trial of cabozantinib (XL184) administered in combination with abiraterone acetate in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib can enhance the effect of abiraterone in preclinical prostate cancer models. This study aimed to define the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) and preliminary efficacy of abiraterone + cabozantinib in mCRPC. METHODS: Patients with progressive mCRPC with 0-2 prior chemotherapy regimens but no prior CYP17A1 or MET inhibitor received abiraterone acetate at 1000 mg daily with prednisone 5 mg BID in combination with cabozantinib at 20, 40, or 60 mg daily in a dose-escalation 3 + 3 open-label phase 1 design (Part A). After tolerable doses were defined, cohorts were expanded to better define toxicity and efficacy (Part B). RESULTS: There were no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in the first 4 weeks at any of the three dose levels in Part A. Two of the three patients at the 60 mg dose level required dose reductions beyond cycle 2 due to fatigue. In Part B, nine more patients were accrued to each of the 20 and 40 mg doses. Of the 12 patients treated at the 40 mg dose, only one DLT (grade 3 Lipase elevation) was observed in cycle 1. The median time to radiographic progression was 12.88 months (95% CI:5.42- not estimated [NE]) in the 20 mg cohort and 22.01 months (95% CI:15.44-NE) in the 40 mg cohort. Median overall survival was 23.29 months (95% CI:19.06-NE) in the 20 mg cohort and 39.08 months (95% CI:17.38-NE) in the 40 mg cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Based on tolerability and preliminary efficacy, 40 mg cabozantinib plus 1000 mg abiraterone daily is the RP2D.

Late Subacute Cerebral Hematoma Mimicking a Metastasis on PSMA PET/CT.

ABSTRACT: A 64-year-old man with history of prostate cancer was found to have rising prostate-specific antigen after radical prostatectomy. 18 F-DCFPyL PET/CT demonstrated a prostate-specific membrane antigen-avid brain lesion in the left frontal lobe and no other findings to account for rising prostate-specific antigen. Brain MRI demonstrated a small intraparenchymal hematoma with late subacute features in this location. The patient reported a seizure 3 weeks before but was otherwise asymptomatic, and neurologic examination was normal. Follow-up MRI demonstrated gradual decrease in size of the hematoma without treatment.

FinaleMe: Predicting DNA methylation by the fragmentation patterns of plasma cell-free DNA.

Analysis of DNA methylation in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) reveals clinically relevant biomarkers but requires specialized protocols and sufficient input material that limits its applicability. Millions of cfDNA samples have been profiled by genomic sequencing. To maximize the gene regulation information from the existing dataset, we developed FinaleMe, a non-homogeneous Hidden Markov Model (HMM), to predict DNA methylation of cfDNA and, therefore, tissues-of-origin directly from plasma whole-genome sequencing (WGS). We validated the performance with 80 pairs of deep and shallow-coverage WGS and whole-genome bisulfite sequencing (WGBS) data.

A Panel-Based Mutational Signature of Mismatch Repair Deficiency is Associated With Durable Response to Pembrolizumab in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have limited efficacy in prostate cancer (PCa). Better biomarkers are needed to predict responses to ICIs. We sought to demonstrate that a panel-based mutational signature identifies mismatch repair (MMR) deficient (MMRd) PCa and is a biomarker of response to pembrolizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinico-genomic data was obtained for 2664 patients with PCa sequenced at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) and Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK). Clinical outcomes were collected for patients with metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC) treated with pembrolizumab at DFCI. SigMA was used to characterize tumors as MMRd or MMR proficient (MMRp). The concordance between MMRd with microsatellite instability (MSI-H) was assessed. Radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) were collected for patients treated with pembrolizumab. Event-time distributions were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methodology. RESULTS: Across both cohorts, 100% (DFCI: 12/12; MSK: 43/43) of MSI-H tumors were MMRd. However, 14% (2/14) and 9.1% (6/66) of MMRd tumors in the DFCI and MSK cohorts respectively were microsatellite stable (MSS), and 26% (17/66) were MSI-indeterminate in the MSK cohort. Among patients treated with pembrolizumab, those with MMRd (n = 5) versus MMRp (n = 14) mCRPC experienced markedly improved rPFS (HR = 0.088, 95% CI: 0.011-0.70; P = .0064) and OS (HR = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.014-0.80; P = .010) from start of treatment. Four patients with MMRd experienced remissions of >= 2.5 years. CONCLUSION: SigMA detects additional cases of MMRd as compared to MSI testing in PCa and identifies patients likely to experience durable response to pembrolizumab.