Impact of Biomarker-Matched Therapies on Outcomes in Patients with Sarcoma Enrolled in Early-Phase Clinical Trials (SAMBA 101).

PURPOSE: Developing new therapeutics for any of the more than 100 sarcoma subtypes presents a challenge. After progression from standard therapies, patients with sarcoma may be referred for enrollment in early-phase trials. This study aimed to investigate whether enrollment in biomarker-matched early-phase clinical trials leads to better outcomes for patients with advanced sarcoma. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In this retrospective analysis, investigational treatment characteristics and longitudinal survival outcomes were analyzed in patients with biopsy-confirmed sarcoma enrolled in early-phase trials at MD Anderson Cancer Center from May 2006 to July 2021. RESULTS: Five hundred eighty-seven patients were included [405 soft tissue, 122 bone, 60 gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST); median of three prior lines of therapy]. Most common subtypes were leiomyosarcoma (17.2%), liposarcoma (14.0%), and GIST (10.2%). Molecular testing was available for 511 patients (87.1%); 221 patients (37.6%) were treated in matched trials. Overall response rate was 13.1% matched compared with 4.9% in unmatched (P < 0.001); the clinical benefit rate at 6 months was 43.9% vs. 19.9% (P < 0.001). Progression-free survival was longer for patients in matched trials (median, 5.5 vs. 2.4 months; P < 0.001), and overall survival was also superior for patients in matched trials (median, 21.5 vs. 12.3 months; P < 0.001). The benefit of enrollment in matched trials was maintained when patients with GIST were excluded from the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Enrollment in biomarker-matched early-phase trials is associated with improved outcomes in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic sarcoma. Molecular testing of tumors from patients with advanced sarcoma and enrollment in matched trials is a reasonable therapeutic strategy.

A phase 1/2a safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy study of the novel nucleoside analog FF-10502-01 for the treatment of advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: The nucleoside FF-10502-01, structurally similar to but with different biologic effects than gemcitabine, shows promising activity both alone and combined with cisplatin in preclinical gemcitabine-resistant tumor models. We conducted an open-label, single-arm, 3 + 3 first-in-human trial to explore the safety, tolerability, and antitumor activity of FF-10502-01 in patients with solid tumors. METHODS: Patients with inoperable metastatic tumors refractory to standard therapies were enrolled. Escalating intravenous FF-10502-01 doses (8-135 mg/m2 ) were administered weekly for 3 weeks in 28-day cycles until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity was observed. Three expansion cohorts were subsequently evaluated. RESULTS: A phase 2 dose of 90 mg/m2 was determined after evaluating 40 patients. Dose-limiting toxicities included hypotension and nausea. Phase 2a enrolled patients with cholangiocarcinoma (36), gallbladder cancer (10), and pancreatic/other tumors (20). Common adverse events were grade 1-2 rash, pruritus, fever, and fatigue. Grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicities were observed at low incidences, including thrombocytopenia (5.1%) and neutropenia (2%). Confirmed partial responses (PRs) occurred in five patients with gemcitabine-refractory tumors, including three with cholangiocarcinoma and one each with gallbladder and urothelial cancer. Median progression-free and overall survival rates in patients with cholangiocarcinoma were 24.7 and 39.1 weeks, respectively. Prolonged progression-free survival in patients with cholangiocarcinoma was associated with BAP1 and PBRM1 mutations. CONCLUSION: FF-10502-01 was well tolerated with manageable side effects and limited hematologic toxicity. Durable PRs and disease stabilizations were observed in heavily pretreated biliary tract patients who had received prior gemcitabine. FF-10502-01 is distinct from gemcitabine and may represent an effective therapy.

Natural History of Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Amplified and Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Wild-Type Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in US Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE: The molecular heterogeneity of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) presents a therapeutic challenge, with few trials focused on patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 amplification (HER2-Amp). Our limited understanding of real-world patterns and outcomes by HER2 status of treatment-refractory patients leaves treatment decisions with little contextual information. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to describe the natural disease history of patients with refractory mCRC using an electronic health record-derived database with oncogenomic information. METHODS: We included patients with stage IV or recurrent mCRC diagnosed from January 2011 through December 2019 from a deidentified clinicogenomic database. Patients with ≥ 2 documented clinic visits, ≥ 2 lines of therapy (LOT) after mCRC diagnosis, and comprehensive genomic profiling were eligible. Patient records defined by treatment-refractory LOT were allocated to the HER2-Amp or HER2 wild-type (WT) cohort on the basis of comprehensive genomic profiling. Index date was defined as the start of any treatment-refractory LOT (≥ 2 LOT; patients could contribute multiple records). Descriptive statistics included demographic and clinical characteristics, treatments, laboratory values, and biomarkers. Overall survival (OS) was calculated as time (in months) from the index date until death from any cause and analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methodology. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the primary findings. RESULTS: A total of 576 patients were included (1,339 records); 63 (158 records) were HER2-Amp, and 513 (1,181 records) were HER2-WT. Demographics, clinical characteristics, biomarkers, and laboratory values were comparable between HER2 cohorts. OS was similar, with an unadjusted median OS of 11.2 months (95% CI, 8.6 to 15.1) and 9.9 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 10.9) across LOT for HER2-Amp and HER2-WT cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study showed considerable treatment heterogeneity and poor outcomes among patients with treatment-refractory mCRC, emphasizing a substantial unmet therapeutic need.

Discovery of targeted expression data for novel antibody-based and chimeric antigen receptor-based therapeutics in soft tissue sarcomas using RNA-sequencing: clinical implications.

Recent failure of phase 3 trials and paucity of druggable oncogenic drivers hamper developmental therapeutics in sarcomas. Antibody-based therapeutics, like antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-based therapeutics, have emerged as promising strategies for anticancer drug delivery. The efficacy of these novel therapies is highly dependent on expression of the antibody target. We used RNA sequencing data from Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) to analyze expression of target antigens in sarcoma subtypes including dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS; n = 50), uterine leiomyosarcoma (ULMS; n = 27), leiomyosarcoma (STLMS; n = 53), undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS; n = 44), myxofibrosarcoma (MFS; n = 17), synovial sarcoma (SS; n = 10), and malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST; n = 5). We searched published literature and clinicaltrial.gov for ADC targets, bispecific antibodies, immunotoxins, radioimmunoconjugates, SPEAR T-cells, and CAR's that are in clinical trials. CD70 expression was significantly higher in DDLPS, UPS, and MFS than SS and STLMS. CDH3 expression was greater in LMS and ULMS than UPS (P < 0.001), MFS (P < 0.001), and DDLPS (P < 0.001). ERBB2 expression was low; however, it was overexpressed in MPNST when compared with UPS (P < 0.001), and MFS (P < 0.01). GPNMB was highly expressed in most sarcomas, with the exception of SS. LRRC15 also appeared to be a relevant target, especially in UPS. MSLN expression was relatively low except in SS and MPNST. PDGFRA was also highly expressed in most sarcomas with the exception of ULMS and STLMS. TNFRSF8 seems to be most appropriate in DDLPS, as well as MFS. AXL was expressed especially in MFS and STLMS. Sarcoma subtypes express multiple target genes relevant for ADCs, SPEAR T-cells and CAR's, warranting further clinical validation and evaluation.

Molecular Profiling Practices in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Academic vs Community Physicians.

Background: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is relatively rare but highly aggressive, with most patients diagnosed once they have metastatic or locally invasive disease. Molecular profiling is being explored as a tool for selecting patients for targeted therapy clinical trials and for assessing whether targeted therapies may be effective in PDAC. Whether molecular profiling is being performed at both academic and community oncology clinics has yet to be examined. Here, we characterized the molecular profiling practice patterns in patients with PDAC in academic versus community practices in Denver, Colorado. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed records of all patients with refractory, metastatic PDAC who were referred to a tertiary clinical trials drug development unit in Denver between 2014 and 2019. Results: Of 77 patients, 41 (55%) were men with a mean age of 65 years (SD, 9.3). Fifty-three patients (69%) were referred from the community and 20 (26%) from academic centers; 4 (5%) were self-referred. A total of 51% received profiling prior to referral; 29 of 50 (58%) were from the community and 10 of 21 (47%) from academic settings. Guardant was the most commonly ordered test (47 of 77; 61%); FoundationOne was the second most common (40 of 77; 52%). Twenty-three of 77 patients (30%) received both Guardant and FoundationOne testing, and 3 of 77 (4%) received Caris MI Profile. One patient received a Mocha assay and another received Ascend/Clarient fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Four patients were self-referred, 2 of whom underwent both Guardant and FoundationOne, 1 who underwent Guardant testing only, and 1 who did not receive any molecular profiling testing. Conclusions: This study characterizes molecular profiling practice patterns in individuals with advanced PDAC who were referred to a tertiary clinical trials drug development unit. Both academic and community physicians were found to order profiling about 50% of the time. Further research is needed to determine impact on clinical trial enrollment and detection of PDAC.

Characterization of Blood-Based Molecular Profiling in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

Background: Molecular profiling is being explored in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) as a tool to assist with early detection, prognosis, and patient selection in targeted therapy clinical trials. Due to the challenges and risks of traditional tissue biopsies in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, the utility of blood-based molecular profiling is now being explored more broadly. However, given its novelty, what value blood-based molecular profiling may provide to oncologists caring for individuals with PDAC remains unknown. Herein, we characterize the mutational landscape of metastatic PDAC using blood-based circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) collected in patients with refractory, metastatic PDAC who were referred to an oncology drug development unit in Denver, Colorado, between August 2014 and May 2019. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed results of blood-based molecular profiling that was performed on 77 consecutive patients with metastatic PDAC who underwent Guardant-360 testing for whom results were available. Results: In our data set, 55% of patients (41/77) were men, median (SD) age was 66 (9.3) years (range, 44-83). Of 77 patients, 34 (44%) had 1 or more somatic alterations. Variants reported as being of unknown significance were not included in the analyses. The total number of alterations were 119 (nonunique) and 96 (unique). The median number of alterations per patient was 3 and the median mutant allele frequency was 0.5%. TP53 was the most commonly altered gene (29 unique alterations), followed by KRAS (27 unique alterations). Of the patients with any alteration, 34% had 1 or more actionable alterations that could be potentially targeted in a clinical trial. Conclusions: Detection of genomic alterations in ctDNA from patients with metastatic PDAC is feasible and reveals a wide range of genomic alterations, the actionability of which is being explored in clinical trials. Further investigation is needed to determine the extent to which blood-based molecular profiling can provide clinical utility in helping to select patients into clinical trials and determine its impact on survival.

Barriers to Clinical Trial Enrollment in Patients With Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Eligible for Early-Phase Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Early-phase clinical trials are critical to the advancement of cancer care, especially in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, given its aggressive nature and limited available therapeutic options. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all patients with refractory or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, referred to the Sarah Cannon Research Institute at HealthONE between 2014 and 2019, were reviewed. Patients who completed genomic profiling and qualified for a phase 1 trial (primarily 1a but some 1b) were identified to assess barriers to trial enrollment. RESULTS: Of 74 identified patients, 54 patients (73%) qualified for at least 1 clinical trial based on eligibility criteria and alterations detected via molecular profiling. Up to 40 industry-sponsored clinical trials were available during this time for consideration. Of the 54, 28 patients (52%) enrolled in a clinical trial, while 26 (48%) did not enroll. The most frequently cited barriers to enrollment were concerns regarding time commitment (12%), prolonged wait time for enrollment (12%), and fear of adverse events (8%). Seven of the 26 patients (27%) were lost to follow-up or had no stated reason for declining enrollment; others did not go on trial due to death/transition to hospice (n=5; 19%) or progression of disease/declining functional status (n=4; 15%). There were few statistically significant differences between patients who chose to go on trial and those who declined. CONCLUSIONS: An understanding of why eligible patients elect not to participate in early-phase clinical trials provides insight into the patient experience and can help identify misperceptions and areas for improvement in education and the clinical trial enrollment process.

Screening for Phase 1 Clinical Trials: An Opportunity to Evaluate Psychological States and Reeducate Patients on Prognosis?

Disease progression or recurrence after a period of remission can be a challenging event for individuals seeking cancer treatment. Those referred for possible phase 1 trial enrollment are often motivated to participate in these studies with hope for a cure despite approximately 5% response rates in this setting. Addressing such commonly held misunderstandings during the initial evaluation for phase 1 trial eligibility could provide a valuable opportunity to improve physician communication by identifying signs of distress or psychiatric conditions, addressing underlying psychological biases, and encouraging adaptive coping strategies.

Dual inhibition of BRAF and mTOR in BRAFV600E -mutant pediatric, adolescent, and young adult brain tumors.

Although BRAF inhibition has demonstrated activity in BRAFV600 -mutated brain tumors, ultimately these cancers grow resistant to BRAF inhibitor monotherapy. Parallel activation of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-mammalian target of rapamycin pathway has been implicated as a mechanism of primary and secondary resistance to BRAF inhibition. Moreover, it has been shown specifically that mTOR signaling activation occurs in BRAF-mutant brain tumors. We therefore conducted phase 1 trials combining vemurafenib with everolimus, enrolling five pediatric and young adults with BRAFV600 -mutated brain tumors. None of the patients required treatment discontinuation as a result of adverse events. Overall, two patients (40%) had a partial response and one (20%) had 12 mo of stable disease as best response. Co-targeting BRAF and mTOR in molecularly selected brain cancers should be further investigated.

Histology-agnostic drug development - considering issues beyond the tissue.

With advances in tumour biology and immunology that continue to refine our understanding of cancer, therapies are now being developed to treat cancers on the basis of specific molecular alterations and markers of immune phenotypes that transcend specific tumour histologies. With the landmark approvals of pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients whose tumours have high microsatellite instability and larotrectinib and entrectinib for those harbouring NTRK fusions, a regulatory pathway has been created to facilitate the approval of histology-agnostic indications. Negative results presented in the past few years, however, highlight the intrinsic complexities faced by drug developers pursuing histology-agnostic therapeutic agents. When patient selection and statistical analysis involve multiple potentially heterogeneous histologies, guidance is needed to navigate the challenges posed by trial design. Additionally, as new therapeutic agents are tested and post-approval data become available, the regulatory framework for acting on these data requires further optimization. In this Review, we summarize the development and testing of approved histology-agnostic therapeutic agents and present data on other agents currently under development. Finally, we discuss the challenges intrinsic to histology-agnostic drug development in oncology, including biological, regulatory, design and statistical considerations.

Drug Development in Soft Tissue Sarcomas: Novel Targets and Recent Early Phase Trial Results.

Soft tissue sarcomas are a heterogeneous group of rare malignancies with few effective standard therapies. Our understanding of the underlying biology driving tumorigenesis in these mesenchymal tumors have led to a growth in drug development for soft tissue sarcomas. This review focuses on novel targets in soft tissue sarcomas, describes early clinical trial results of drugs directed at these targets, and discusses the data surrounding the use of these compounds in clinical practice and rationale for possible future US Food and Drug Administration approvals.

Unique Aberrations in Intimal Sarcoma Identified by Next-Generation Sequencing as Potential Therapy Targets.

Intimal sarcomas are rare and histologically heterogeneous tumors, commonly arising from the pulmonary arteries. They have remained challenging to treat. Few studies in the literature study the genomics of this cancer. Identifying targetable alterations is an important step in advancing the treatment of intimal sarcomas. Using data from the American Association for Cancer Research Project Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange (AACR GENIE) database, we cataloged genetic alterations and assessed their clinical utility from thirteen patients with intimal sarcoma. Notable copy number alterations included amplification in MDM2, CDK4, PDGFRA, and NOTCH2, as well as copy number losses in CDKN2A and CDKN2B. Actionable alterations included mutations in ATM/ATR, PTCH1, and PDGFRB. Moreover, genomic rearrangement events, specifically PDE4DIP-NOTCH2 and MRPS30-ARID2 fusions were identified. Co-occurring alterations included a NOTCH2 copy number gain in the PDE4DIP-NOTCH2 fusion positive tumor and PDGFRB mutations in both fusion-positive cases. Our study suggests that PDGFRB may be relevant in the tumorigenesis process. Including genomic profiling in the management of intimal sarcoma and potential enrollment in targeted therapy trials is warranted.

Molecular Profiling of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Circulating Cell-Free DNA.

PURPOSE: Molecular profiling has been used to select patients for targeted therapy and determine prognosis. Noninvasive strategies are critical to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) given the challenge of obtaining liver tissue biopsies. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We analyzed blood samples from 206 patients with HCC using comprehensive genomic testing (Guardant Health) of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). RESULTS: A total of 153/206 (74.3%) were men; median age, 62 years (range, 18-91 years). A total of 181/206 patients had ≥1 alteration. The total number of alterations was 680 (nonunique); median number of alterations/patient was three (range, 1-13); median mutant allele frequency (% cfDNA), 0.49% (range, 0.06%-55.03%). TP53 was the common altered gene [>120 alterations (non-unique)] followed by EGFR, MET, ARID1A, MYC, NF1, BRAF, and ERBB2 [20-38 alterations (nonunique)/gene]. Of the patients with alterations, 56.9% (103/181) had ≥1 actionable alterations, most commonly in MYC, EGFR, ERBB2, BRAF, CCNE1, MET, PIK3CA, ARID1A, CDK6, and KRAS. In these genes, amplifications occurred more frequently than mutations. Hepatitis B (HBV)-positive patients were more likely to have ERBB2 alterations, 35.7% (5/14) versus 8.8% HBV-negative (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the first large-scale analysis of blood-derived ctDNA in HCC in United States. The genomic distinction based on HCC risk factors and the high percentage of potentially actionable genomic alterations suggests potential clinical utility for this technology.

Phase I study of nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and bevacizumab in patients with advanced cancers.

BACKGROUND: We performed a phase I modified 3 + 3 dose escalation study to evaluate the safety and activity of bevacizumab plus gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: Patients were given fixed dose gemcitabine plus increasing doses of nab-paclitaxel and bevacizumab. Toxicity, response, and association with VEGF polymorphism was analysed. RESULTS: The study enrolled 110 patients who had undergone a median of 3 prior lines of therapy. The median age was 60 years (range, 17-85 years), and 55 patients (50%) had gemcitabine-refractory disease. We observed 3 dose-limiting toxicities during dose escalation and 3 DLTs in expansion cohorts. Dose escalation to 150 mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel and 15 mg/kg bevacizumab with 1000 mg/m2 of gemcitabine was well tolerated with no MTD. One patient with gemcitabine-refractory peritoneal papillary carcinoma had a complete response, 13 patients (13%) had partial responses, and 54 patients (52%) had stable disease ≥12 weeks. Exploratory VEGF single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) analysis was performed on 13 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, and bevacizumab is safe, well-tolerated, and has activity in advanced malignancies, including gemcitabine-refractory tumours. Based on this study, the recommended phase 2 dose is gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2, and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg. VEGF polymorphism data should be evaluated in future bevacizumab-based trials.

Development of a prognostic scoring system for patients with advanced cancer enrolled in immune checkpoint inhibitor phase 1 clinical trials.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.85.

Phase I Study of the BRAF Inhibitor Vemurafenib in Combination With the Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Inhibitor Everolimus in Patients With BRAF-Mutated Malignancies.

PURPOSE: Parallel activation of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-mammalian target of rapamycin pathway represents a mechanism of primary and acquired resistance to BRAF-targeted therapy, but the two pathways have yet to be cotargeted in humans. We performed a phase I study to evaluate the safety and activity of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib in combination with the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus in BRAF-mutated advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a 3+3 dose-escalation study with escalating doses of both oral (PO) vemurafenib administered twice a day and PO everolimus administered daily. RESULTS: Twenty patients with advanced cancers were enrolled. The median adult age was 64 years (range, 17 to 85 years); two pediatric patients were 10 and 13 years old. Patients were heavily pretreated with prior BRAF or MEK inhibitors (n = 11), phase I clinical trial therapy (n = 10), surgery (n = 18), radiation therapy (n = 11), and chemotherapy (n=13). One of the two pediatric patients initially experienced grade 3 rash, but after dermatologic intervention, the patient remains on trial with partial response and no dose reduction at time of analysis. Four dose-limiting toxicities (rash, n = 1; fatigue, n = 3) were observed at dose level 2. Therefore, dose level 1 (vemurafenib 720 mg PO twice a day and everolimus 5 mg PO daily) was the maximum-tolerated dose. Overall, four patients (22%) had a partial response and nine patients (50%) had stable disease as best response. One pediatric patient with pleomorphic xanthroastrocytoma remains on protocol with continued clinical response after 38 cycles. CONCLUSION: The combination of vemurafenib 720 mg PO twice a day and everolimus 5 mg PO daily is safe and well tolerated and has activity across histologies, with partial responses noted in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, melanoma, optic nerve glioma, and xanthroastrocytoma, including patients who previously experienced progression on BRAF and/or MEK inhibitor therapy. Further investigation in a larger cohort of molecularly matched patients is warranted.

Co-occurring Genomic Alterations and Association With Progression-Free Survival in BRAFV600-Mutated Nonmelanoma Tumors.

BRAFV600 mutations occur in multiple nonmelanoma tumors, but no US Food and Drug Administration-approved BRAF-targeted therapies exist for these cancers. BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib was recently found to demonstrate activity across various BRAF-mutated nonmelanoma cancer types. However, most tumors ultimately become resistant to BRAF-targeted monotherapy. To identify whether co-occurring genomic alterations drive resistance to BRAF-targeted therapies, we analyzed next-generation sequencing data from 30 advanced BRAF-mutated nonmelanoma cancers treated with BRAF inhibitor monotherapy. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression analysis were performed and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. All statistical tests were two-sided. We identified a strong association between co-occurring PI3K-mTOR pathway aberrations and primary resistance to BRAF-targeted therapy. PI3K-mTOR pathway aberrations were associated with a statistically significant reduction in progression-free survival (HR = 15.0, 95% CI = 3.6 to 63.0, P < .001) and overall survival (HR = 19.2, 95% CI = 3.7 to 100.0, P < .001). This suggests that co-occurring genomic alterations may predict response and resistance to BRAF inhibitor therapy and identify subgroups of BRAF-mutated nonmelanomas cancers.

Clinical genomic profiling to identify actionable alterations for investigational therapies in patients with diverse sarcomas.

BACKGROUND: There are currently no United States Food and Drug Administration approved molecularly matched therapies for sarcomas except gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Complicating this is the extreme diversity, heterogeneity, and rarity of these neoplasms. Few therapeutic options exist for relapsed and refractory sarcomas. In clinical practice many oncologists refer patients for genomic profiling hoping for guidance on treatment options after standard therapy. However, a systematic analysis of actionable mutations has yet to be completed. We analyzed genomic profiling results in patients referred to MD Anderson Cancer Center with advanced sarcomas to elucidate the frequency of potentially actionable genomic alterations in this population. METHODS: We reviewed charts of patients with advanced sarcoma who were referred to investigational cancer therapeutics department and had CLIA certified comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of 236 or 315 cancer genes in at least 50ng of DNA. Actionable alterations were defined as those identifying anti-cancer drugs on the market, in registered clinical trials, or in the Drug-Gene Interaction Database. RESULTS: Among the 102 patients analyzed median age was 45.5 years (range 8-76), M: F ratio 48:54. The most common subtypes seen in our study were leiomyosarcoma (18.6%), dedifferentiated liposarcoma (11%), osteosarcoma (11%), well-differentiated liposarcoma (7%), carcinosarcoma (6%), and rhabdomyosarcoma (6%). Ninety-five out of 102 patients (93%) had at least one genomic alteration identified with a mean of six mutations per patient. Of the 95 biopsy samples with identifiable genomic alterations, the most commonly affected genes were TP53 (31.4%), CDK4 (23.5%), MDM2 (21.6%), RB1 (18.6%), and CDKN2A/B (13.7%). Notable co-segregating amplifications included MDM2-CDK4 and FRS2-FGF. Sixteen percent of patients received targeted therapy based on CGP of which 50% had at least stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating CGP into sarcoma management may allow for more precise diagnosis and sub-classification of this diverse and rare disease, as well as personalized matching of patients to targeted therapies such as those available in basket clinical trials.