The impact of a fourteen-gene molecular assay on physician treatment decisions in non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Five-year survival in early-stage, non-squamous, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains poor compared with other solid tumors, even after complete resection. Post-operative management depends on prognostic staging to identify individuals at highest risk for death, and therefore with the greatest need for further intervention. A 14-gene quantitative RT-PCR test successfully differentiates stage I-III NSCLC patients who are at high-, intermediate-, or low-risk for 5-year mortality. This study assesses the impact of the assay's prognostic information on physician decisions regarding adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: We invited 115 physicians who ordered the test to participate in an on-line survey. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with different pre- and post-test chemotherapy recommendations. RESULTS: Fifty-eight physicians (50 %) completed the survey on 120 stage I or II NSCLC patients. Ninety-one patients (76 %) had stage I lung cancer; 27 (23 %), 39 (33 %), and 54 (45 %) patients had low-, intermediate-, and high-risk scores, respectively. Physicians' chemotherapy recommendations were changed post-testing in 37 patients (30.8 %, 95 % CI 22.7-39.9 %). High-risk patients were more likely to have a change in treatment recommendation (44.4 %, 95 % CI 30.9-58.6 %) than low risk patients (3.7 %, 95 % CI 0.1-19.0 %); a substantial number of changes were observed in both stage I (33.0 %, 95 % CI 23.5-43.6 %) and stage II (24.1 %, 95 % CI 10.3-43.5 %). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that the assay resulted in a significant impact on physician treatment decisions in early-stage NSCLC, and that the nature of treatment changes generally correlated with the test's assessment of risk.

Cost-effectiveness of a 14-gene risk score assay to target adjuvant chemotherapy in early stage non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.

Life Technologies has developed a 14-gene molecular assay that provides information about the risk of death in early stage non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer patients after surgery. The assay can be used to identify patients at highest risk of mortality, informing subsequent treatments. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of this novel assay. Patients and Methods. We developed a Markov model to estimate life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs for testing versus standard care. Risk-group classification was based on assay-validation studies, and chemotherapy uptake was based on pre- and post-testing recommendations from a study of 58 physicians. We evaluated three chemotherapy-benefit scenarios: moderately predictive (base case), nonpredictive (i.e., the same benefit for each risk group), and strongly predictive. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and performed one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results. In the base case, testing and standard-care strategies resulted in 6.81 and 6.66 life years, 3.76 and 3.68 QALYs, and $122,400 and $118,800 in costs, respectively. The ICER was $23,200 per QALY (stage I: $29,200 per QALY; stage II: $12,200 per QALY). The ICER ranged from "dominant" to $92,100 per QALY in the strongly predictive and nonpredictive scenarios. The model was most sensitive to the proportion of high-risk patients receiving chemotherapy and the high-risk hazard ratio. The 14-gene risk score assay strategy was cost-effective in 68% of simulations. Conclusion. Our results suggest that the 14-gene risk score assay may be a cost-effective alternative to standard guideline-based adjuvant chemotherapy decision making in early stage non-small cell lung cancer.

Recommendations for the Equitable and Widespread Implementation of Liquid Biopsy for Cancer Care.

Liquid biopsies-tests that detect circulating tumor cellular components in the bloodstream-have the potential to transform cancer by reducing health inequities in screening, diagnostics, and monitoring. Today, liquid biopsies are being used to guide treatment choices for patients and monitor for cancer recurrence, and promising work in multi-cancer early detection is ongoing. However, without awareness of the barriers to adoption of this new technology and a willingness to build mitigation efforts into the implementation of widespread liquid biopsy testing, the communities that could most benefit may be the last to access and use them. In this work, we review the challenges likely to affect the accessibility of liquid biopsies in both the general population and underserved populations, and recommend specific actions to facilitate equitable access for all patients.

Compromised Outcomes in Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Actionable Mutations Initially Treated Without Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: A Retrospective Analysis of Real-World Data.

PURPOSE: Identification and targeting of actionable oncogenic drivers (AODs) in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has dramatically improved outcomes. However, genomic testing uptake is variable and hampered by factors including slow turnaround time, frequently resulting in initial non-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment. We investigate how this behavior affects outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of real-world, deidentified data from the Integra Connect Database included adults with stage IV NSCLC newly diagnosed from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020, with mutations of EGFR, ALK, ROS1, BRAF, MET, RET, ERBB2, or NTRK. Outcomes were reported as time to next treatment or death (TTNT) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Five hundred ten patients harboring AODs were identified and grouped as follows: group A (n = 379) were treated after the AOD was reported and served as the comparator. One hundred thirty-one patients treated before their AOD report were divided into group B (n = 47) who were initially started on chemotherapy and/or checkpoint inhibitor but switched to appropriate TKI within 35 days and group C (n = 84) who were also started empirically on non-TKI and did not switch within 35 days. Survival (OS) was significantly superior in group A compared with group C; TTNT was significantly superior in group A compared with groups B and C. CONCLUSION: For patients harboring AODs in advanced NSCLC, initial treatment before receipt of genomic test results yields significantly inferior outcomes and should be avoided. Molecular profiling panels with rapid turnaround times are essential to optimize patient outcomes and should be standard of care.

Cancer patient management: Current use of next-generation sequencing in the EU TOP4.

BACKGROUND: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is recognised by a growing audience of medical professionals as a functional diagnostic tool in oncology. However, adoption in clinical routine proceeds haphazardly in Europe. METHODS: A semi-structured interview survey was administered to 68 cancer care professionals in four EU countries between June-August and November-December 2021. Pre-screening questionnaires assessed sufficient NGS expertise, diverse geographical distribution, and professional roles. RESULTS: Our findings provide a better understanding of current clinical, regulatory, and reimbursement practices for NGS in four EU countries. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the impending European In-vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Regulation (IVDR), tortuous national guidelines implementations and limping reimbursement policies are common traits across surveyed countries and produce disparity in access to advanced healthcare services amid regional distinctions. POLICY SUMMARY: The evident information gap between involved parties and demand for consistent national guidelines could be filled by health economics analyses tailored to local specifics to provide factual leverage for a structured adoption of NGS testing.

Clinical and Economic Value of Genetic Sequencing for Personalized Therapy in Non-small-cell Lung Cancer.

Two recent studies examining the clinical and economic value of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based diagnostic testing (multi-gene panel examining ≥ 30 genes) for non-small-cell lung cancer therapy compared with single gene ALK, EGFR testing to select therapy demonstrated statistically insignificant improvement in population-level overall survival and only a moderate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with the NGS testing approach. The data, however, revealed a key practice gap: many patients with actionable mutations did not receive targeted therapies. This gap is attributed, in part, to limitations in the availability and interpretation of NGS results, sample processing constraints, limited access to targeted therapies, and lagging awareness of the rapidly evolving field of personalized medicine, all of which result in "clinical inertia," (ie, suboptimal use of targeted therapy against an actionable driver alteration identified by NGS testing). Additional analysis estimated that cost-effectiveness would improve significantly if a higher percentage of patients received testing and if all patients who were eligible for targeted therapies received them. Strategies to address implementation barriers will help to realize the full value of NGS testing in cancer care.