Assessment of a cancer genomic profile test for patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Comprehensive cancer genomic profile (CGP) tests are being implemented under Japanese universal health insurance system. However, the clinical usefulness of CGP test for breast cancer patients has not been evaluated. Of the 310 patients who underwent CGP testing at our institution between November 2019 and April 2021, 35 patients with metastatic breast cancer whose treatment strategy was discussed by our molecular tumor board within the study period were investigated after exclusion of 2 cases that could not be analyzed. The turn-around time, drug accessibility, and germline identification detection were evaluated. The subtype was luminal in 20 patients (57.1%), triple-negative in 12 patients (34.3%), and luminal-HER2 in 3 patients (8.6%). Actionable gene mutations were detected in 30 patients (85.7%), and 7 patients (20.0%) were recommended for clinical trial participation, with the drug administered to 2 patients (5.7%). Three patients (8.6%) died due to disease progression before the test results were disclosed. We report the results of an initial assessment of the utility of CGP testing for patients with metastatic breast cancer under Japanese universal health insurance system. Conducting CGP tests at a more appropriate time could provide patients with greater benefit from treatments based on their specific gene mutations.

Recall of Genomic Testing Results Among Patients with Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Genomic testing of somatic and germline DNA has transformed cancer care. However, low genetic knowledge among patients may compromise care and health outcomes. Given the rise in genomic testing, we sought to understand patients' knowledge of their genetic test results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a survey-based study with 85 patients at a comprehensive cancer center. We compared self-reported recall of (a) having had somatic/germline testing and (b) their specific somatic/germline results to the genomic test results documented in the medical record. RESULTS: Approximately 30% of patients did not recall having had testing. Of those who recalled having testing, 44% of patients with pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline mutations and 57% of patients with reported somatic alterations did not accurately recall their specific gene or variant-level results. CONCLUSION: Given significant knowledge gaps in patients' recall of genomic testing, there is a critical need to improve patient-directed education and return-of-results strategies.

Comparative Phytochemical Characterization, Genetic Profile, and Antiproliferative Activity of Polyphenol-Rich Extracts from Pigmented Tubers of Different Solanum tuberosum Varieties.

Plants produce a vast array of biomolecules with beneficial effects for human health. In this study, polyphenol and anthocyanin-rich extracts (PAE) from pigmented tubers of Solanum tuberosum L. varieties "Blue Star", "Magenta Love", and "Double Fun" in comparison with the more extensively studied "Vitelotte" were evaluated and compared for antiproliferative effects in human leukemia cells, and their phytochemical and genetic profiles were determined. In U937 cells, upon treatment with PAE, it was possible to reveal the expression of specific apoptotic players, such as caspase 8, 9, 3, and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), as well as the induction of monocyte and granulocyte differentiation. A liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry (LC-ESI-MS/MS) investigation revealed the presence of polyphenolic compounds in all the varieties of potatoes analyzed, among which caffeoyl and feruloyl quinic acid derivatives were the most abundant, as well as several acylated anthocyanins. Each pigmented variety was genotyped by DNA-based molecular markers, and flavonoid-related transcription factors were profiled in tubers in order to better characterize these outstanding resources and contribute to their exploitation in breeding. Interesting biological activities were observed for "Blue Star" and "Vitelotte" varieties with respect to the minor or no effect of the "Double Fun" variety.

Treatment recommendations to cancer patients in the context of FDA guidance for next generation sequencing.

BACKGROUND: Regulatory approval of next generation sequencing (NGS) by the FDA is advancing the use of genomic-based precision medicine for the therapeutic management of cancer as standard care. Recent FDA guidance for the classification of genomic variants based on clinical evidence to aid clinicians in understanding the actionability of identified variants provided by comprehensive NGS panels has also been set forth. In this retrospective analysis, we interpreted and applied the FDA variant classification guidance to comprehensive NGS testing performed for advanced cancer patients and assessed oncologist agreement with NGS test treatment recommendations. METHODS: NGS comprehensive genomic profiling was performed in a CLIA certified lab (657 completed tests for 646 patients treated at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center) between June 2016 and June 2017. Physician treatment recommendations made within 120 days post-test were gathered from tested patients' medical records and classified as targeted therapy, precision medicine clinical trial, immunotherapy, hormonal therapy, chemotherapy/radiation, surgery, transplant, or non-therapeutic (hospice, surveillance, or palliative care). Agreement between NGS test report targeted therapy recommendations based on the FDA variant classification and physician targeted therapy treatment recommendations were evaluated. RESULTS: Excluding variants contraindicating targeted therapy (i.e., KRAS or NRAS mutations), at least one variant with FDA level 1 companion diagnostic supporting evidence as the most actionable was identified in 14% of tests, with physicians most frequently recommending targeted therapy (48%) for patients with these results. This stands in contrast to physicians recommending targeted therapy based on test results with FDA level 2 (practice guideline) or FDA level 3 (clinical trial or off label) evidence as the most actionable result (11 and 4%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We found an appropriate "dose-response" relationship between the strength of clinical evidence supporting biomarker-directed targeted therapy based on application of FDA guidance for NGS test variant classification, and subsequent treatment recommendations made by treating physicians. In view of recent changes at FDA, it is paramount to define regulatory grounds and medical policy coverage for NGS testing based on this guidance.