Quantifying the Expanding Landscape of Clinical Actionability for Patients with Cancer.

There is a continuing debate about the proportion of cancer patients that benefit from precision oncology, attributable in part to conflicting views as to which molecular alterations are clinically actionable. To quantify the expansion of clinical actionability since 2017, we annotated 47,271 solid tumors sequenced with the MSK-IMPACT clinical assay using two temporally distinct versions of the OncoKB knowledge base deployed 5 years apart. Between 2017 and 2022, we observed an increase from 8.9% to 31.6% in the fraction of tumors harboring a standard care (level 1 or 2) predictive biomarker of therapy response and an almost halving of tumors carrying nonactionable drivers (44.2% to 22.8%). In tumors with limited or no clinical actionability, TP53 (43.2%), KRAS (19.2%), and CDKN2A (12.2%) were the most frequently altered genes. SIGNIFICANCE: Although clear progress has been made in expanding the availability of precision oncology-based treatment paradigms, our results suggest a continued unmet need for innovative therapeutic strategies, particularly for cancers with currently undruggable oncogenic drivers. See related commentary by Horak and Fröhling, p. 18. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 5.

Correlation Between Surrogate End Points and Overall Survival in a Multi-institutional Clinicogenomic Cohort of Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung or Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: Contemporary observational cancer research requires associating genomic biomarkers with reproducible end points; overall survival (OS) is a key end point, but interpretation can be challenging when multiple lines of therapy and prolonged survival are common. Progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), and time to next treatment (TTNT) are alternative end points, but their utility as surrogates for OS in real-world clinicogenomic data sets has not been well characterized. Objective: To measure correlations between candidate surrogate end points and OS in a multi-institutional clinicogenomic data set. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or colorectal cancer (CRC) whose tumors were genotyped at 4 academic centers from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2017, and who initiated systemic therapy for advanced disease. Patients were followed up through August 31, 2020 (NSCLC), and October 31, 2020 (CRC). Statistical analyses were conducted on January 5, 2021. Exposures: Candidate surrogate end points included TTD; TTNT; PFS based on imaging reports only; PFS based on medical oncologist ascertainment only; PFS based on either imaging or medical oncologist ascertainment, whichever came first; and PFS defined by a requirement that both imaging and medical oncologist ascertainment have indicated progression. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the correlation between candidate surrogate end points and OS. Results: There were 1161 patients with NSCLC (648 women [55.8%]; mean [SD] age, 63 [11] years) and 1150 with CRC (647 men [56.3%]; mean [SD] age, 54 [12] years) identified for analysis. Progression-free survival based on both imaging and medical oncologist documentation was most correlated with OS (NSCLC: ρ = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.73-0.79; CRC: ρ = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.69-0.75). Time to treatment discontinuation was least associated with OS (NSCLC: ρ = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.40-0.50; CRC: ρ = 0.13; 95% CI, 0.06-0.19). Time to next treatment was modestly associated with OS (NSCLC: ρ = 0.60; 0.55-0.64; CRC: ρ = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.32-0.46). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study suggests that PFS based on both a radiologist and a treating oncologist determining that a progression event has occurred was the surrogate end point most highly correlated with OS for analysis of observational clinicogenomic data.

OncoKB: A Precision Oncology Knowledge Base.

PURPOSE: With prospective clinical sequencing of tumors emerging as a mainstay in cancer care, there is an urgent need for a clinical support tool that distills the clinical implications associated with specific mutation events into a standardized and easily interpretable format. To this end, we developed OncoKB, an expert-guided precision oncology knowledge base. METHODS: OncoKB annotates the biological and oncogenic effect and the prognostic and predictive significance of somatic molecular alterations. Potential treatment implications are stratified by the level of evidence that a specific molecular alteration is predictive of drug response based on US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeling, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, disease-focused expert group recommendations and the scientific literature. RESULTS: To date, over 3000 unique mutations, fusions, and copy number alterations in 418 cancer-associated genes have been annotated. To test the utility of OncoKB, we annotated all genomic events in 5983 primary tumor samples in 19 cancer types. Forty-one percent of samples harbored at least one potentially actionable alteration, of which 7.5% were predictive of clinical benefit from a standard treatment. OncoKB annotations are available through a public web resource (http://oncokb.org/) and are also incorporated into the cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics to facilitate the interpretation of genomic alterations by physicians and researchers. CONCLUSION: OncoKB, a comprehensive and curated precision oncology knowledge base, offers oncologists detailed, evidence-based information about individual somatic mutations and structural alterations present in patient tumors with the goal of supporting optimal treatment decisions.