RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is the third most diagnosed cancer in adults in the United States. Early detection could prevent more than 90% of colorectal cancer-related deaths, yet more than one third of the screening-eligible population is not up to date with screening despite multiple available tests. A blood-based test has the potential to improve screening adherence, detect colorectal cancer earlier, and reduce colorectal cancer-related mortality. METHODS: We assessed the performance characteristics of a cell-free DNA (cfDNA) blood-based test in a population eligible for colorectal cancer screening. The coprimary outcomes were sensitivity for colorectal cancer and specificity for advanced neoplasia (colorectal cancer or advanced precancerous lesions) relative to screening colonoscopy. The secondary outcome was sensitivity to detect advanced precancerous lesions. RESULTS: The clinical validation cohort included 10,258 persons, 7861 of whom met eligibility criteria and were evaluable. A total of 83.1% of the participants with colorectal cancer detected by colonoscopy had a positive cfDNA test and 16.9% had a negative test, which indicates a sensitivity of the cfDNA test for detection of colorectal cancer of 83.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 72.2 to 90.3). Sensitivity for stage I, II, or III colorectal cancer was 87.5% (95% CI, 75.3 to 94.1), and sensitivity for advanced precancerous lesions was 13.2% (95% CI, 11.3 to 15.3). A total of 89.6% of the participants without any advanced colorectal neoplasia (colorectal cancer or advanced precancerous lesions) identified on colonoscopy had a negative cfDNA blood-based test, whereas 10.4% had a positive cfDNA blood-based test, which indicates a specificity for any advanced neoplasia of 89.6% (95% CI, 88.8 to 90.3). Specificity for negative colonoscopy (no colorectal cancer, advanced precancerous lesions, or nonadvanced precancerous lesions) was 89.9% (95% CI, 89.0 to 90.7). CONCLUSIONS: In an average-risk screening population, this cfDNA blood-based test had 83% sensitivity for colorectal cancer, 90% specificity for advanced neoplasia, and 13% sensitivity for advanced precancerous lesions. (Funded by Guardant Health; ECLIPSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04136002.).
Asunto(s)
Ácidos Nucleicos Libres de Células , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Tamizaje Masivo , Lesiones Precancerosas , Adulto , Humanos , Ácidos Nucleicos Libres de Células/sangre , Colonoscopía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/sangre , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Lesiones Precancerosas/sangre , Lesiones Precancerosas/diagnóstico , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadAsunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , ADN de Neoplasias , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Heces , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/sangre , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/genética , ADN de Neoplasias/sangre , ADN de Neoplasias/análisis , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Heces/química , Sangre Oculta , Secuenciación de Nucleótidos de Alto Rendimiento , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
Purpose: Despite accumulating data regarding the genomic landscape of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), olaparib is the only biomarker-driven FDA-approved targeted therapy with a PDAC-specific approval. Treating ERBB2(HER2)-amplified PDAC with anti-HER2 therapy has been reported with mixed results. Most pancreatic adenocarcinomas have KRAS alterations, which have been shown to be a marker of resistance to HER2-targeted therapies in other malignancies, though the impact of these alterations in pancreatic cancer is unknown. We describe two cases of ERBB2-amplified pancreatic cancer patients treated with anti-HER2 therapy and provide data on the frequency of ERBB2 amplifications and KRAS alterations identified by clinical circulating cell-free DNA testing. Methods: De-identified molecular test results for all patients with pancreatic cancer who received clinical cell-free circulating DNA analysis (Guardant360) between 06/2014 and 01/2018 were analyzed. Cell-free circulating DNA analysis included next-generation sequencing of up to 73 genes, including select small insertion/deletions, copy number amplifications, and fusions. Results: Of 1,791 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, 36 (2.0%) had an ERBB2 amplification, 26 (72.2%) of whom had a KRAS alteration. Treatment data were available for seven patients. Two were treated with anti-HER2 therapy after their cell-free circulating DNA result, with both benefiting from therapy, including one with a durable response to trastuzumab and no KRAS alteration detected until progression. Conclusion: Our case series illustrates that certain patients with ERBB2-amplified pancreatic adenocarcinoma may respond to anti-HER2 therapy and gain several months of prolonged survival. Our data suggests KRAS mutations as a possible mechanism of primary and acquired resistance to anti-HER2 therapy in pancreatic cancer. Additional studies are needed to clarify the role of KRAS in resistance to anti-HER2 therapy.
RESUMEN
AIM: Insufficient adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening impedes individual and population health benefits, with about one-third of individuals non-adherent to available screening options. The impact of poor adherence is inadequately considered in most health economics models, limiting the evaluation of real-world population-level screening outcomes. This study introduces the CAN-SCREEN (Colorectal cANcer SCReening Economics and adherENce) model, utilizing real-world adherence scenarios to assess the effectiveness of a blood-based test (BBT) compared to existing strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The CAN-SCREEN model evaluates various CRC screening strategies per 1,000 screened individuals for ages 45-75. Adherence is modeled in two ways: (1) full adherence and (2) longitudinally declining adherence. BBT performance is based on recent pivotal trial data while existing strategies are informed using literature. The full adherence model is calibrated using previously published Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models. Outcomes, including life-years gained (LYG), CRC cases averted, CRC deaths averted, and colonoscopies, are compared to no screening. RESULTS: Longitudinal adherence modeling reveals differences in the relative ordering of health outcomes and resource utilization, as measured by the number of colonoscopies performed per 1,000, between screening modalities. BBT outperforms the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and the multitarget stool DNA (mtsDNA) test with more CRC deaths averted (13) compared to FIT and mtsDNA (7, 11), more CRC cases averted (27 vs. 16, 22) and higher LYG (214 vs. 157, 199). BBT yields fewer CRC deaths averted compared to colonoscopy (13, 15) but requires fewer colonoscopies (1,053 vs. 1,928). LIMITATIONS: Due to limited data, the CAN-SCREEN model with longitudinal adherence leverages evidence-informed assumptions for the natural history and real-world longitudinal adherence to screening. CONCLUSIONS: The CAN-SCREEN model demonstrates that amongst non-invasive CRC screening strategies, those with higher adherence yield more favorable health outcomes as measured by CRC deaths averted, CRC cases averted, and LYG.
This study explored the impact of poor adherence to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, where about one-third of people face barriers to screening. Common models don't consider real-world adherence, so we introduced the CAN-SCREEN model. It uses real-world data to determine how well a blood-based test (BBT) could work compared to existing tests. We studied people starting CRC screening at age 45. The model looked at two adherence scenarios: assuming everyone follows guidelines, and using real-world data about how people follow screening guidelines over time. The BBT's performance was based on a recent study, and we compared it to existing methods using data from the literature. Results per 1,000 simulated patients showed that the BBT outperforms two guideline-recommended stool-based tests, fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and the multitarget stool DNA (mtsDNA) test, with more CRC deaths averted (13) compared to FIT and mtsDNA (7, 11), more CRC cases averted (27 vs. 16, 22) and higher LYG (214 vs. 157, 199). BBT prevents less CRC deaths than colonoscopy (13 vs. 15), but it leads to fewer colonoscopies (1,053 compared to 1,928). Despite some limitations due to limited data, our model relies on informed assumptions for the natural history of CRC and real-world adherence. In conclusion, our CAN-SCREEN model shows that CRC screening strategies combining good test performance with high adherence give better health outcomes. Adding a blood test, which could be easier for people to use, could save lives and reduce the number of colonoscopies needed.
Asunto(s)
Colonoscopía , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Sangre Oculta , Cooperación del Paciente , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Masculino , Femenino , Análisis Costo-BeneficioRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Minimal residual disease (MRD) detection can identify the recurrence in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) following definitive treatment. We evaluated a plasma-only MRD assay to predict recurrence and survival in patients with metastatic CRC who underwent curative intent procedures (surgery and/or radiotherapy), with or without (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. The primary objective of this study was to assess the correlation of postprocedure tumor cell-free DNA detection status with radiographic disease recurrence. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Preprocedure and postprocedure longitudinal samples were collected from 53 patients and analyzed with a multiomic MRD assay detecting circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from genomic and epigenomic signals. Preprocedure and postprocedure ctDNA detection correlated with recurrence-free and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: From 52 patients, 230/233 samples were successfully analyzed. At the time of data cutoff, 36 (69.2%) patients recurred with median follow-up of 31 months. Detectable ctDNA was observed in 19/42 patients (45.2%) with ctDNA analyzed 3 weeks postprocedure. ctDNA detection 3 weeks postprocedure was associated with shorter median recurrence-free survival (RFS; HR, 5.27; 95% CI, 2.31-12.0; P < 0.0001) and OS (HR, 12.83; 95% CI, 3.6-45.9; P < 0.0001). Preprocedure ctDNA detection status was not associated with RFS but was associated with improved OS (HR, 4.65; 95% CI, 1.4-15.2; P = 0.0111). Undetectable ctDNA preprocedure had notable long-term OS, >90% 3 years postprocedure. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of oligometastatic CRC, detection of ctDNA preprocedure or postprocedure was associated with inferior outcomes even after accounting for known prognostic clinicopathologic variables. This suggests ctDNA may enhance current risk stratification methods helping the evaluation of novel treatments and surveillance strategies toward improving patient outcomes.