Molecular analysis of non-small cell lung cancer using a dual-targeted DNA and RNA comprehensive genomic profiling panel.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive cancer genomic profiling tests have recently been used clinically to guide optimal treatment. Currently approved tests use DNA from tissue or plasma samples to analyze a few hundred genes. RNA panels complement DNA panels to detect fusion and exon skipping. METHODS: Between April 2017 and March 2022, we analyzed non-small cell lung cancer samples using Todai OncoPanel, a matched tumor/normal pair panel targeting both DNA and RNA. Publicly available genomic data was downloaded from the Center for Cancer Genomics and Advanced Therapeutics database on 2022/11/3. RESULTS: Sixty non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) samples were analyzed. With the DNA panel, 32 samples (53%) had TP53 loss-of-function mutations. Among adenocarcinoma, 17 (33%) had EGFR activating mutations, and 6 (12%) had ERBB2 activating mutations. One BRCA1 and one BRCA2 pathogenic germline variant were also detected. With the RNA panel, 11 fusion genes were detected, all in adenocarcinoma. Specifically, EML4-ALK and KIF5B-RET were detected from one sample each, and 9 others were all novel fusions with unknown pathogenicity. In addition, 4 of 60 (7%) NSCLC samples harbored MET exon 14 skipping. Analysis of the Center for Cancer Genomics and Advanced Therapeutics database found 37 MET exon 14 splice site mutations in 1514 NSCLC samples (2%, p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of NSCLC with Todai OncoPanel detected many druggable targets. Its RNA panel may detect MET exon 14 skipping with high sensitivity.

Implementation of HER2 Testing in Endometrial Cancer, a Summary of Real-World Initial Experience in a Large Tertiary Cancer Center.

HER2-targeted therapies have transformed the management of advanced or recurrent serous endometrial cancer (EC), leading to an increased clinical demand for HER2 testing. Despite its adoption in select academic centers, the global extent of such tumor testing is unclear. In this study, we report on the initial two-year experience of HER2 testing at a major academic center with a reference gynecologic oncology service and biomarker reference laboratory. All patients who underwent HER2 testing based on physician discretion, reflex HER2 testing, and reference laboratory requests were included. From February 2021 to October 2023, HER2 testing was performed on 192 tumor tissue samples from 180 EC patients. Serous carcinoma constituted 52% of samples, reflecting diagnostic challenges and limited therapeutic options for advanced EC. HER2 positivity was found in 28% of all cases and 30% of p53-aberrant cases. An immunohistochemistry (IHC) score of 3+ was found in 15% of samples, while IHC 2+ was found in 45% (13% IHC 2+/ISH+ and 32% IHC 2+/ISH-). The newly identified 'HER2-low' category comprised 46% of the samples. Heterogeneity was noted in 42% of HER2-positive cases, with complex patterns in 3%. NGS and HER2 IHC-FISH showed a 24% discordance, attributed to intratumoral heterogeneity, tumor cellularity, a small number of amplified cells, and the HER2/CEP17 ratio near the cut-off. This study offers real-world insights into HER2 testing in EC, highlighting the challenges and underscoring the need for standardized guidelines in specimen handling, proficiency testing, and scoring criteria to enhance patient management and therapeutic decision-making.

Double-Edged Sword: A Positive Brain Scan Result Heightens Confidence in an Alzheimer's Diagnosis But Also Leads to Higher Stigma Among Older Adults in a Vignette-Based Experiment.

OBJECTIVES: Early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) using brain scans and other biomarker tests will be essential to increasing the benefits of emerging disease-modifying therapies, but AD biomarkers may have unintended negative consequences on stigma. We examined how a brain scan result affects AD diagnosis confidence and AD stigma. METHODS: The study used a vignette-based experiment with a 2 × 2 × 3 factorial design of main effects: a brain scan result as positive or negative, treatment availability and symptom stage. We sampled 1,283 adults ages 65 and older between June 11and July 3, 2019. Participants (1) rated their confidence in an AD diagnosis in each of four medical evaluations that varied in number and type of diagnostic tools and (2) read a vignette about a fictional patient with varied characteristics before completing the Modified Family Stigma in Alzheimer's Disease Scale (FS-ADS). We examined mean diagnosis confidence by medical evaluation type. We conducted between-group comparisons of diagnosis confidence and FS-ADS scores in the positive versus negative brain scan result conditions and, in the positive condition, by symptom stage and treatment availability. RESULTS: A positive versus negative test result corresponds with higher confidence in an AD diagnosis independent of medical evaluation type (all p < .001). A positive result correlates with stronger reactions on 6 of 7 FS-ADS domains (all p < .001). DISCUSSION: A positive biomarker result heightens AD diagnosis confidence but also correlates with more AD stigma. Our findings inform strategies to promote early diagnosis and clinical discussions with individuals undergoing AD biomarker testing.

EGFR mutation testing, treatment and survival in stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer: CancerLinQ Discovery database retrospective analysis.

Aim: To describe real-world biomarker testing, treatment and survival in stage IA-IIIC non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Electronic records of USA-based patients in the CancerLinQ Discovery® database with stage IA-IIIC NSCLC (diagnosed between 2014 and 2018) were screened; a curated cohort of 14,452 records was identified for further analysis. Results: Of 3121 (21.6%) patients who had EGFR testing, 493 (15.8%) were EGFR-mutation positive. Of 974 patients who underwent surgical resection, 513 (52.7%) received adjuvant therapy. A quarter of patients with EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC received targeted adjuvant therapy. Conclusion: Approximately a fifth of patients underwent EGFR testing; biomarker testing is important to ensure optimal outcomes for patients with stage I-III NSCLC.

A study investigating how many patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) had mutations in a protein called EGFR and which treatments they received in routine clinical practice: The treatment recommended by medical experts for stage IA­IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is surgical removal of the growth (tumor). Patients with stage II or III, and some with stage IB disease, are recommended to receive treatment with medications such as chemotherapy or oral cancer treatments after surgery (adjuvant treatment). In some lung cancers, there are mutations in a protein called EGFR. Osimertinib, a drug that blocks the activity of mutated EGFR on cancer cells, reducing their growth and spread, is recommended as an adjuvant treatment for patients with EGFR-mutated, stage IB­IIIA NSCLC. This study aimed to understand how many patients with stage I­III NSCLC have tumors with EGFR mutations, and which treatments patients received in everyday clinical practice, before new medicines such as osimertinib (that treat EGFR-mutated NSCLC) were recommended. We looked at anonymous data from 14,452 patients with stage I­III NSCLC treated at cancer clinics in the USA between 2014 and 2018. We found that 3121 (21.6%) patients had an EGFR mutation test and 493 (15.8%) had EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC. Of patients who had surgery to remove the tumor, 55% received adjuvant therapy (treatment after surgery). It is important to perform EGFR mutation testing in patients with stage IB­IIIA NSCLC so that patients with EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC can receive appropriate treatment.

Regional differences in predictive biomarker testing rates for patients with metastatic NSCLC in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Predictive biomarker testing has a key role in the treatment decision-making for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and is mandated by (inter)national guidelines. The aim of this study was to establish guideline-adherent biomarker testing rates in the Netherlands in 2019 and to examine associations of demographical, clinical, and environmental factors with guideline-adherent testing. METHODS: This study involved the integration of clinical data of the Netherlands Cancer Registry with pathology reports of the Dutch Nationwide Pathology Databank. Data extracted from these reports included sample type, diagnosis, and molecular testing status of predictive biomarkers. The study population comprised all patients diagnosed with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC in the Netherlands in 2019. RESULTS: In the cohort of 3877 patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC under investigation, overall molecular testing rates for non-fusion predictive biomarkers (EGFR, KRAS, BRAF, ERBB2, MET) ranged from 73.9 to 89.0 %, while molecular testing for fusion-drivers (ALK, ROS1, RET, NTRK) ranged from 12.6 % to 63.9 %. Guideline-adherent testing of EGFR, KRAS, and ALK was performed in 85.2 % of patients, with regional rates spanning from 76.0 % to 90.8 %. Demographical and clinical factors associated with guideline-adherent biomarker testing included lower age (OR = 1.05 per one year decrease; p < 0.001), female sex (OR = 1.36; p = 0.002), diagnosis of adenocarcinoma (OR = 2.48; p < 0.001), availability of histological tumor material (OR = 2.46; p < 0.001), and clinical stage of metastatic disease (p = 0.002). Other factors associated with guideline-adherent biomarker testing included diagnosis at academic center (OR = 1.87; p = 0.002) and patient's region of residence (p < 0∙001). CONCLUSION: Optimization of the chain-of-care of predictive biomarker testing in patients with NSCLC in the Netherlands is needed to provide adequate care for these patients.

Healthcare disparities, screening, and molecular testing in the changing landscape of non-small cell lung cancer in the United States: a review.

Inequitable access to care continues to hinder improvements in diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. This review describes healthcare disparities in the changing landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the United States, focusing on racial, ethnic, sex-based, and socioeconomic trends. Furthermore, strategies to address disparities, overcome challenges, and improve patient outcomes are proposed. Barriers exist across lung cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment regimens, varying by sex, age, race and ethnicity, geography, and socioeconomic status. Incidence and mortality rates of lung cancer are higher among Black men than White men, and incidences in young women are substantially greater than in young men. Disparities may be attributed to geographic differences in screening access, with correlating higher incidence and mortality rates in rural versus urban areas. Lower socioeconomic status is also linked to lower survival rates. Several strategies could help reduce disparities and improve outcomes. Current guidelines could improve screening eligibility by incorporating sex, race, and socioeconomic status variables. Patient and clinician education on screening guidelines and patient-level barriers to care are key, and biomarker testing is critical since ~ 70% of patients with NSCLC have an actionable biomarker. Timely diagnosis, staging, and comprehensive biomarker testing, including cell-free DNA liquid biopsy, may provide valuable treatment guidance for patients with NSCLC. Efforts to improve lung cancer screening and biomarker testing access, decrease bias, and improve education about screening and testing are needed to reduce healthcare disparities in NSCLC.

Assessing the role of Chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 14 in AKI: a European consensus meeting.

BACKGROUND: Urinary Chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 14 (CCL14) is a biomarker associated with persistent severe acute kidney injury (AKI). There is limited data to support the implementation of this AKI biomarker to guide therapeutic actions. METHODS: Sixteen AKI experts with clinical CCL14 experience participated in a Delphi-based method to reach consensus on when and how to potentially use CCL14. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% agreement (participants answered with 'Yes', or three to four points on a five-point Likert Scale). RESULTS: Key consensus areas for CCL14 test implementation were: identifying challenges and mitigations, developing a comprehensive protocol and pairing it with a treatment plan, and defining the target population. The majority agreed that CCL14 results can help to prioritize AKI management decisions. CCL14 levels above the high cutoff (> 13 ng/mL) significantly changed the level of concern for modifying the AKI treatment plan (p < 0.001). The highest level of concern to modify the treatment plan was for discussions on renal replacement therapy (RRT) initiation for CCL14 levels > 13 ng/mL. The level of concern for discussion on RRT initiation between High and Low, and between Medium and Low CCL14 levels, showed significant differences. CONCLUSION: Real world urinary CCL14 use appears to provide improved care options to patients at risk for persistent severe AKI. Experts believe there is a role for CCL14 in AKI management and it may potentially reduce AKI-disease burden. There is, however, an urgent need for evidence on treatment decisions and adjustments based on CCL14 results.

Barriers and Unequal Access to Timely Molecular Testing Results: Addressing the Inequities in Cancer Care Delays across Canada.

Genomic medicine is a powerful tool to improve diagnosis and outcomes for cancer patients by facilitating the delivery of the right drug at the right dose at the right time for the right patient. In 2023, a Canadian conference brought together leaders with expertise in different tumor types. The objective was to identify challenges and opportunities for change in terms of equitable and timely access to biomarker testing and reporting at the education, delivery, laboratory, patient, and health-system levels in Canada. Challenges identified included: limited patient and clinician awareness of genomic medicine options with need for formal education strategies; failure by clinicians to discuss genomic medicine with patients; delays in or no access to hereditary testing; lack of timely reporting of results; intra- and inter-provincial disparities in access; lack of funding for patients to access testing and for laboratories to provide testing; lack of standardized testing; and impact of social determinants of health. Canada must standardize its approach to biomarker testing across the country, with a view to addressing current inequities, and prioritize access to advanced molecular testing to ensure systems are in place to quickly bring innovation and evidence-based treatments to Canadian cancer patients, regardless of their place of residence or socioeconomic status.

The Importance of Biomarker Testing in the Treatment of Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Podcast.

The identification of actionable biomarkers and development of targeted therapies have revolutionized the field of lung cancer treatment. In patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), biomarker testing can inform selection of effective targeted therapies as well as avoid therapies that are less likely to be effective in certain populations. A growing number of actionable targets, including those involving EGFR, ALK, ROS1, BRAF, MET, KRAS, NTRK, RET, HER2, and PD-L1, can be identified with biomarker testing. More than half of patients with advanced NSCLC have tumors that harbor genetic alterations that can be targeted. When these patients are treated with targeted therapy, survival and quality of life may be significantly improved. In addition, broad-based molecular testing may detect alterations identifying patients who are potentially eligible for current or future clinical trials. Comprehensive biomarker testing rates in communities are often low, and turnaround times for results can be unacceptably long. There is an unmet need for widespread, efficient, and routine testing of all biomarkers recommended by clinical guidelines. New testing techniques and technologies can make this an attainable goal. Panel-based sequencing platforms are becoming more accessible, and molecular biomarker analysis of circulating tumor DNA is becoming more common. In this podcast, we discuss the importance of biomarker testing in advanced NSCLC and explore topics such as testing methodologies, effect of biomarker testing on patient outcomes, emerging technologies, and strategies for improving testing rates in the United States. Supplementary file1 (MP4 121301 KB).

Biomarker Testing, Targeted Therapy and Clinical Trial Participation by Race Among Patients With Lung Cancer: A Real-World Medicaid Database Study.

Introduction: Biomarker testing in oncology is fundamental for targeted therapy use and clinical trial participation. Factors contributing to previously identified racial disparities in biomarker testing remain unclear. This study investigated biomarker testing, clinical trial participation, and targeted therapy by race among patients with metastatic lung cancer with Medicaid coverage in the United States. Methods: The Merative MarketScan Medicaid claims database was used for this study to identify patients diagnosed with having metastatic lung cancer between 2017 and 2019 with at least 121 days of follow-up. Racial differences in biomarker testing, clinical trial enrollment, and targeted therapy use were analyzed using chi-square/t tests followed by logistic regression for confounding covariates. Results: A total of 3845 patients were eligible. A total of 970 (25.2%) patients included in this study were Black. Biomarker testing was observed among 57.0%, targeted therapy among 4.6%, and 2.6% of the study cohort had evidence of clinical trial participation. No significant disparities between Black and White races were identified. Younger age and metastatic disease at initial diagnosis were the strongest independent factors associated with increased biomarker testing. Biomarker testing was positively associated with targeted therapy use (OR = 1.69, p = 0.005). Conclusions: Patients with metastatic lung cancer with Medicaid coverage were found to have exceedingly low biomarker testing rates; only 57% had evidence of any biomarker testing. Although no consistent differences between Black and White races were identified, this study calls attention to care experienced by socioeconomically disadvantaged patients with metastatic lung cancer in the United States.

Developments in predictive biomarker testing and targeted therapy in advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer and their application across European countries.

In the past two decades, the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), has undergone significant changes due to the introduction of targeted therapies and immunotherapy. These advancements have led to the need for predictive molecular tests to identify patients eligible for targeted therapy. This review provides an overview of the development and current application of targeted therapies and predictive biomarker testing in European patients with advanced stage NSCLC. Using data from eleven European countries, we conclude that recommendations for predictive testing are incorporated in national guidelines across Europe, although there are differences in their comprehensiveness. Moreover, the availability of recently EMA-approved targeted therapies varies between European countries. Unfortunately, routine assessment of national/regional molecular testing rates is limited. As a result, it remains uncertain which proportion of patients with metastatic NSCLC in Europe receive adequate predictive biomarker testing. Lastly, Molecular Tumor Boards (MTBs) for discussion of molecular test results are widely implemented, but national guidelines for their composition and functioning are lacking. The establishment of MTB guidelines can provide a framework for interpreting rare or complex mutations, facilitating appropriate treatment decision-making, and ensuring quality control.

Future perspective for the application of predictive biomarker testing in advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer.

For patients with advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), treatment strategies have changed significantly due to the introduction of targeted therapies and immunotherapy. In the last few years, we have seen an explosive growth of newly introduced targeted therapies in oncology and this development is expected to continue in the future. Besides primary targetable aberrations, emerging diagnostic biomarkers also include relevant co-occurring mutations and resistance mechanisms involved in disease progression, that have impact on optimal treatment management. To accommodate testing of pending biomarkers, it is necessary to establish routine large-panel next-generation sequencing (NGS) for all patients with advanced stage NSCLC. For cost-effectiveness and accessibility, it is recommended to implement predictive molecular testing using large-panel NGS in a dedicated, centralized expert laboratory within a regional oncology network. The central molecular testing center should host a regional Molecular Tumor Board and function as a hub for interpretation of rare and complex testing results and clinical decision-making.

Cost of genetic testing, delayed care, and suboptimal treatment associated with polymerase chain reaction versus next-generation sequencing biomarker testing for genomic alterations in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

AIMS: To assess US payers' per-patient cost of testing associated with next-generation sequencing (NGS) versus polymerase chain reaction (PCR) biomarker testing strategies among patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), including costs of testing, delayed care, and suboptimal treatment initiation. METHODS: A decision tree model considered biomarker testing for genomic alterations using either NGS, sequential PCR testing, or hotspot panel PCR testing. Literature-based model inputs included time-to-test results, costs for testing/medical care, costs of delaying care, costs of immunotherapy [IO]/chemotherapy [CTX] initiation prior to receiving test results, and costs of suboptimal treatment initiation after test results (i.e. costs of first-line IO/CTX in patients with actionable mutations that were undetected by PCR that would have been identified with NGS). The proportion of patients testing positive for a targetable alteration, time to appropriate therapy initiation, and per-patient costs were estimated for NGS and PCR strategies combined. RESULTS: In a modeled cohort of 1,000,000 members (25% Medicare, 75% commercial), an estimated 1,119 had mNSCLC and received testing. The proportion of patients testing positive for a targetable alteration was 45.9% for NGS and 40.0% for PCR testing. Mean per-patient costs were lowest for NGS ($8,866) compared to PCR ($18,246), with lower delayed care costs of $1,301 for NGS compared to $3,228 for PCR, and lower costs of IO/CTX initiation prior to receiving test results (NGS: $2,298; PCR:$5,991). Cost savings, reaching $10,496,220 at the 1,000,000-member plan level, were driven by more rapid treatment with appropriate therapy for patients tested with NGS (2.1 weeks) compared to PCR strategies (5.2 weeks). LIMITATIONS: Model inputs/assumptions were based on published literature or expert opinion. CONCLUSIONS: NGS testing was associated with greater cost savings versus PCR, driven by more rapid results, shorter time to appropriate therapy initiation, and minimized use of inappropriate therapies while awaiting and after test results.

Modeling health outcomes associated with BRCA testing and treatment strategies for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Germline BRCA mutations (gBRCAm) occur in 4%-8% patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC); guidelines recommend platinum-based chemotherapies and olaparib maintenance in this population. We evaluated, through modeling, the role of treatments and gBRCA testing on health outcomes of mPC patients. METHODS: A decision tree/partitioned survival model was developed to assess lifetime health outcomes for four strategies: 1) no testing; 2) early testing/no olaparib maintenance; 3) early testing (i.e., before 1L treatment)/olaparib maintenance; and 4) late testing/olaparib maintenance. Treatment patterns were assumed to follow current practice in the United States. Overall survival and progression-free survival curves were extrapolated from pivotal trials, including POLO trial for outcomes from olaparib maintenance after at least 16 weeks of platinum-based chemotherapy. RESULTS: Among patients with gBRCAm, almost twice as many patients received platinum-based regimens in strategies involving early testing compared to when early testing was not employed (78.7 % vs 40.2 %). Health outcomes were highest in the strategy with early testing and available olaparib treatment whether considering progression-free life years (PF LYs, 1.27 vs 0.55-0.87), LYs (1.82 vs 0.95-1.27) or quality adjusted life years (QALYs, 1.15 vs 0.73-0.92 for others). Consistent patterns of results were observed in the overall cohort of mPC patients (i.e., irrespective of gBRCAm). CONCLUSION: Patients with mPC achieved longest health outcomes (as measured by mean PF LYs, LYs and QALYs) with a scenario of early gBRCA testing and availability of olaparib maintenance. The results were primarily driven by improved health outcomes associated with higher efficacy of platinum-based chemotherapies and olaparib used in gBRCAm patients.

A review of the directly sampled endometrial cytology on LBC samples: Classification, microscopic criteria and beyond.

The Yokohama System for Reporting Endometrial Cytology (TYS) has been proposed by an expert meeting under the auspices of the International Academy of Cytology (IAC) in May 2016 at the IAC in Yokohama. Since its introduction, the TYS has been receiving worldwide acceptance, and this review aims to assess its global impact. The adoption of endometrial cytology as a diagnostic procedure has been hampered in the past by difficulties arising in interpreting the cellular findings due to a number of factors (such as excess blood, cellular overlapping and the complex physiology of endometrium). Recently, the use of liquid-based cytology (LBC), with its ability to remove blood and mucus and to distribute cells uniformly in a thin layer on the slide, has provided an opportunity to re-evaluate the role of endometrial cytology. LBC is a useful tool in the cytologic diagnosis and follow-up of endometrial abnormalities, which remains complementary to the emerging molecular diagnostic cytopathology. The study of LBC from endometrial cytology could be challenging since it is affected by numerous look-alikes and diagnostic pitfalls. This review discusses these various entities and takes into consideration the ancillary techniques that may be useful in the diagnostic procedure. In conclusion, our review of the published data suggests that the TYS is a valid classification scheme that has been widely accepted by cytopathologists globally, is highly reproducible and makes a valuable contribution to clinical therapeutic management. At present, molecular cytopathology is a rapidly evolving field of modern cytopathology, which underlines the effective interplay between genomics and cytology. This review aims to provide a comprehensive review of the drawbacks of endometrial cytopathology, particularly in terms of endometrial cancer diagnosis and molecular testing.

Diagnosis, testing, treatment, and outcomes among patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Characteristics of patients in clinical trials may differ from those of real-world patients. Our objective was to describe biomarker testing and outcomes among patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) in a real-world setting. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients ≥18 years old, diagnosed with stage IIIB/C or IV NSCLC, and in the TEMPUS oncology dataset from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2020. Patient characteristics associated with biomarker testing were evaluated in patients with positive biomarkers using univariate logistic regression models. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate median survival. RESULTS: Of 9540 patients included, 41.7% had biomarker testing, and 2158 had a positive biomarker result. Men (vs women; odds ratio [OR], 0.82; 95% CI: 0.74-0.91), Black patients (vs White; OR, 0.83; 95% CI: 0.72-0.97), patients with squamous (OR, 0.22; 95% CI: 0.19-0.25) or unknown histology (OR, 0.53; 95% CI: 0.45-0.61) (vs non-squamous histology), and patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 2+ (OR, 0.69; 95% CI: 0.57-0.84) or missing (OR, 0.56; 95% CI: 0.48-0.66) (vs ECOG PS of 0) were less likely to undergo biomarker testing. Patients with positive biomarkers who received NCCN-recommended treatment options (55.7%) had significantly longer median overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI: 0.75-0.95) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) (HR, 0.68; 95% CI: 0.62-0.75). CONCLUSION: More than 50% of patients were untested for biomarkers. Patients who were less likely to be tested included men, Black patients, current smokers, patients with squamous aNSCLC, and patients with an ECOG PS of 2+. Patients with positive biomarkers who received NCCN-recommended treatment options had significantly longer OS and PFS.

Current and Emerging Treatment Options for Patients with Metastatic EGFR-Mutated Non-small Cell Lung Cancer After Progression on Osimertinib and Platinum-Based Chemotherapy: A Podcast Discussion.

Patients with metastatic epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are widely treated with osimertinib, the preferred first-line treatment option. However, disease progression inevitably occurs, driven by EGFR-dependent or EGFR-independent mechanisms of resistance. Platinum-based chemotherapy is the recommended treatment following progression with osimertinib but responses to platinum-based chemotherapy are transient. Salvage therapies, which are used after progression on platinum-based chemotherapy, have poor clinical outcomes in addition to substantial toxicity. In this podcast, we discuss the current treatment landscape and emerging therapeutic options for patients with metastatic EGFR-mutated NSCLC whose disease has progressed following treatment with osimertinib and platinum-based chemotherapy.Podcast audio available for this article.

Biomarker Testing Trends in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Who Live in Rural Areas and Urban Clusters in the US.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on biomarker testing rates in rural populations with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). To assess biomarker testing practices, oncologists in rural areas and urban clusters in the US were surveyed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A web-based survey was administered to oncologists spending ≥40% of their time practicing in rural areas or urban clusters and who had treated ≥2 patients with stage IV mCRC in the prior month. RESULTS: Ninety-nine oncologists completed the quantitative survey and 17 the qualitative interview. Among respondents, 97% reported ordering biomarker tests. Oncologists reported testing for KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, HER2, and mismatch repair deficiency/microsatellite instability in 72%, 65%, 63%, 56%, and 66% of patients with metastatic disease, respectively. Forty-one percent reported performing reflex testing. The most cited testing barriers were lack of insurance coverage, insufficient tissue samples, and long turnaround times. CONCLUSION: Further assessment of rural testing practices is needed.

Current communication practices for biomarker testing in non-small cell lung cancer: Exploring patient and clinician perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: We qualitatively explored patient and clinician experiences with biomarker testing in one academic health system to identify current communication practices and unmet testing information needs. METHODS: We conducted 1:1 in-depth interviews with 15 clinicians (i.e., nurses, oncologists, pathologists) and 12 patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer between January and May 2022. Participants described experiences with biomarker testing as well as associated communication practices and needs. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Analysis was informed by the Framework Method. RESULTS: Patients described challenges retaining information early in their patient journey. While patients were generally aware of biomarkers and their effect on treatment options, they expressed limited knowledge of expected time delays between testing and receiving results. Additionally, many did not know their testing results. Clinicians and patients both noted no standard education material on biomarker testing is currently available. They suggested such materials could support patient knowledge and decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Communication between patients and clinicians about biomarker testing is largely delivered through verbal counseling at a time when patients may be cognitively compromised. All participants supported the idea of delivering standard, tangible education materials on biomarker testing to patients. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Education materials may enhance counseling efforts and patient knowledge.