Plasma-based longitudinal mutation monitoring as a potential predictor of disease progression in subjects with adenocarcinoma in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Identifying and tracking somatic mutations in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) by next-generation sequencing (NGS) has the potential to transform the clinical management of subjects with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Baseline tumor tissue (n = 47) and longitudinal plasma (n = 445) were collected from 71 NSCLC subjects treated with chemotherapy. cfDNA was enriched using a targeted-capture NGS kit containing 197 genes. Clinical responses to treatment were determined using RECIST v1.1 and correlations between changes in plasma somatic variant allele frequencies and disease progression were assessed. RESULTS: Somatic variants were detected in 89.4% (42/47) of tissue and 91.5% (407/445) of plasma samples. The most commonly mutated genes in tissue were TP53 (42.6%), KRAS (25.5%), and KEAP1 (19.1%). In some subjects, the allele frequencies of mutations detected in plasma increased 3-5 months prior to disease progression. In other cases, the allele frequencies of detected mutations declined or decreased to undetectable levels, indicating clinical response. Subjects with circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) levels above background had significantly shorter progression-free survival (median: 5.6 vs 8.9 months, respectively; log-rank p = 0.0183). CONCLUSION: Longitudinal monitoring of mutational changes in plasma has the potential to predict disease progression early. The presence of ctDNA mutations during first-line treatment is a risk factor for earlier disease progression in advanced NSCLC.

Comparison of Results from Two Commercially Available In-House Tissue-Based Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Solutions: Research-Use Only AVENIO Tumor Tissue Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Kit and TruSight Oncology 500 Assay.

Increased adoption of personalized medicine has brought comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) to the forefront. However, differences in assay, bioinformatics, and reporting systems and lack of understanding of their complex interplay are a challenge for implementation and achieving uniformity in CGP testing. Two commercially available, tissue-based, in-house CGP assays were compared, in combination with a tertiary analysis solution in a research-use only (RUO) context: the AVENIO Tumor Tissue CGP RUO Kit paired with navify Mutation Profiler (RUO) software and the TruSight Oncology 500 RUO assay paired with PierianDx Clinical Genomics Workspace software. Agreements and differences between the assays were assessed for short variants, copy number alterations, rearrangements, tumor mutational burden, and microsatellite instability, including variant categorization and clinical trial-matching (CTM) recommendations. Results showed good overall agreement for short variant, known gene fusion, and microsatellite instability detection. Important differences were obtained in tumor mutational burden scoring, copy number alteration detection, and CTM. Differences in variant and biomarker detection could be explained by bioinformatic approaches to variant calling, filtering, tiering, and normalization; differences in CTM, by underlying reported variants and conceptual differences in system parameters. Thus, distinctions between different approaches may lead to inconsistent results. Complexities in calling, filtering, and interpreting variants illustrate key considerations for implementation of any high-quality CGP in the laboratory and bringing uniformity to genomic insight results.

Concordance of Genomic Alterations by Next-Generation Sequencing in Tumor Tissue versus Cell-Free DNA in Stage I-IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Molecular biomarkers hold promise for personalization of cancer treatment. However, a typical tumor biopsy may be difficult to acquire and may not capture genetic variations within or across tumors. Given these limitations, tumor genotyping using next-generation sequencing of plasma-derived circulating tumor (ct)-DNA has the potential to transform non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) management. Importantly, mutations detected in biopsied tissue must also be detected in plasma-derived ctDNA at different disease stages. Using the AVENIO ctDNA Surveillance kit (research use only), mutations in ctDNA from NSCLC subjects were compared with those identified in matched tumor tissue samples, retrospectively. Plasma and tissue samples were collected from 141 treatment-naïve NSCLC subjects (stage I, n = 48; stage II, n = 37; stage III, n = 33; stage IV, n = 23). In plasma samples, the median numbers of variants per subject were 4, 6, 8, and 9 in those with stage I, II, III, and IV disease, respectively. The corresponding values in tissue samples were 5, 5, 6, and 4. The overall tissue-plasma concordance of stage II through IV was 62.2% by AVENIO software call. On multivariate analysis, concordance was positively and significantly associated with tumor size and cancer stage. Next-generation sequencing-based analyses with the AVENIO ctDNA Surveillance kit could be an alternative approach to detecting genetic variations in plasma-derived ctDNA isolated from NSCLC subjects.

Asymmetries in the spatial distributions of enhancing lesions and black holes in relapsing-remitting MS.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most important paraclinical test in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) and for delineating its natural history. We investigate MRIs from a longitudinal study of 24 relapsing-remitting MS patients who had monthly MRI examinations for one year, and were not receiving active MS therapy during this period. We hypothesized that lesions occur randomly throughout the brain, and that patients are homogeneous with regard to spatial patterns of lesion presentation. We recorded the numbers and locations of enhancing lesions and hypointense lesions (black holes) in all scans, and found asymmetrical patterns of lesions about the mid-transaxial, mid-coronal, and mid-sagittal planes. Furthermore, in distinct subsets of patients, enhancing lesions and black holes tend to occur in the same locations. Clustering in lesion locations may be of functional significance, with consequent therapeutic implications.

Transcriptional census of 36 microdissected colorectal cancers yields a gene signature to distinguish UICC II and III.

UICC stage II and III colorectal cancers (CRC) differ fundamentally in prognosis and therapeutic concepts. To analyze differential gene expression between both stages and to establish a relationship between molecular background and clinical presentation, tumor material from 36 unselected consecutive patients presenting with sporadic CRC, 18 UICC stage II and 18 UICC stage III, were laser microdissected to separate epithelial tumor cells. Gene expression levels were measured using U133A Affymetrix gene arrays. Twelve CRC associated signal transduction pathways as well as all 22,000 probe sets were screened for differential gene expression. We identified a signature consisting of 45 probe sets that allowed discrimination between UICC stage II and stage III with a rate of correct classification of about 80%. The most distinctive elements in this signature were the gene GSTP-binding elongation factor (GSPT2) and the transcription factor HOXA9. Differential expression of these genes was confirmed by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (p(HOXA9) = 0.04, p(GSTP2) = 0.02). Despite the reliability of the presented data, there was no substantial differential expression of genes in cancer-related pathways. However, the comparison with recently published data corroborates the 45 gene signature showing structural agreement in the direction of fold changes of gene expression levels for our set of genes chosen to discriminate between both stages.

A randomized clinical trial of cisplatin/paclitaxel versus carboplatin/paclitaxel as first-line treatment of ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite considerable improvement in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer, the optimization of efficacy and tolerability remains an important issue. Therefore, we performed a randomized, phase III non-inferiority trial comparing paclitaxel plus cisplatin (PT) with paclitaxel plus carboplatin (TC) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. METHODS: A total of 798 patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IIB-IV were randomly assigned to receive six courses of either PT or TC at 3-week intervals. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients without progression at 2 years. Secondary endpoints included toxicity, response to treatment, quality of life, and overall and progression-free survival time. Quality of life was evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life questionnaire (QLQ)-C30, version 2.0. Survival curves were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and hazard ratios were estimated using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: The proportion of patients without progression at 2 years was not statistically significantly different between the two treatment arms (40.0% for PT versus 37.5% for TC, difference = 2.5%, one-sided 95% confidence interval [CI] = - infinity to 8.2%). Median progression-free survival time in the TC arm (17.2 months, 95% CI = 15.2 to 19.3 months) and the PT arm (19.1 months, 95% CI = 16.7 to 21.5 months) were also not statistically significantly different; the same was true of median overall survival time (43.3 months, 95% CI = 37.2 to 47.8 months versus 44.1 months, 95% CI = 40.2 to 49.4 months, for the TC and PT arms, respectively). The TC regimen was associated with a higher frequency of hematologic toxicity, but a lower frequency of gastrointestinal and neurologic toxicity, than the PT regimen. Mean global quality-of-life scores at the end of treatment were statistically significantly better in the TC arm than in the PT arm (65.25 versus 51.97, respectively; difference = -13.28, 95% CI = -18.88 to -7.68). CONCLUSION: The TC regimen achieved comparable efficacy to the PT regimen but was associated with better tolerability and quality of life, and should, therefore, be considered as an important alternative for standard first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.