RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Personalized medicine poses great opportunities and challenges. While the therapeutic landscape markedly expands, descriptions about status, clinical implementation and real-world benefits of precision oncology and molecular tumor boards (MTB) remain sparse, particularly in the field of genitourinary (GU) cancer. Hence, this study characterized urological MTB cases to better understand the potential role of MTB in uro-oncology. METHODS: We analyzed patients with complete data sets being reviewed at an MTB from January 2019 to October 2022, focusing on results of molecular analysis and treatment recommendations. RESULTS: We evaluated 102 patients with GU cancer with a mean patient age of 61.7 years. Prostate cancer (PCa) was the most frequent entity with 52.9% (54/102), followed by bladder cancer (18.6%, 19/102) and renal cell carcinoma (14.7%, 15/102). On average, case presentation at MTB took place 54.9 months after initial diagnosis and after 2.7 previous lines of therapy. During the study period, 49.0% (50/102) of patients deceased. Additional MTB-based treatment recommendations were achieved in a majority of 68.6% (70/102) of patients, with a recommendation for targeted therapy in 64.3% (45/70) of these patients. Only 6.7% (3/45) of patients - due to different reasons - received the recommended MTB-based therapy though, with 33% (1/3) of patients reaching disease control. Throughout the MTB study period, GU cancer case presentations and treatment recommendations increased, while the time interval between initial presentation and final therapy recommendation were decreasing over time. CONCLUSION: Presentation of uro-oncological patients at the MTB is a highly valuable measure for clinical decision-making. Prospectively, earlier presentation of patients at the MTB and changing legislative issues regarding comprehensive molecular testing and targeted treatment approval might further improve patients' benefits from comprehensive molecular diagnostics.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Novel personalized therapeutic approaches are urgently needed for patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: We combined the development of a primary patient-derived ccRCC cell line with a phenotypic drug screen consisting of 101 approved anticancer compounds. RESULTS: We identified the MNNG HOS transforming gene (MET)-anaplastic lymphoma receptor tyrosine kinase (ALK) inhibitor crizotinib as the top hit of our drug screen, whereas compounds targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway showed no or only minor in vitro activity. Among the known major crizotinib targets MET, ALK, and ROS-1, only MET was expressed in our ccRCC cell line. Subsequent sequence analysis revealed a heterozygous R988C mutation of the MET gene and a VHL deletion in both the primary tumor and the tumor-derived ccRCC cell line. However, we were unable to show an activation of MET and, further, MET knockdown did not result in increased apoptosis or cytotoxicity. Therefore, our results suggest that MET R988C does not function as a major oncogenic driver mutation but rather represents a sequence variant. However, we provide evidence that the cytotoxic effect of crizotinib in our cell line model correlates with its ability to inhibit P-glycoprotein (ABCB1)-associated transport functions. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that a phenotypic screen of a patient-derived tumor cell line can identify compounds with antitumor activity but with an unexpected mode of action. Our results underscore that target validation and phenotype-genotype correlations remain a major experimental challenge. The implications of our findings for a personalized management of patients with cancer are discussed.