Genetic Testing of Breast Cancer Patients with Very Early-Onset Breast Cancer (≤30 Years) Yields a High Rate of Germline Pathogenic Variants, Mainly in the BRCA1, TP53, and BRCA2 Genes.

Early-onset breast cancer constitutes a major criterion for genetic testing referral. Nevertheless, studies focusing on breast cancer patients (≤30 years) are limited. We investigated the contribution and spectrum of known breast-cancer-associated genes in 267 Greek women with breast cancer ≤30 years while monitoring their clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes. In this cohort, a significant proportion (39.7%) carried germline pathogenic variants (PVs) distributed in 8 genes. The majority, namely 36.7%, involved BRCA1, TP53, and BRCA2. PVs in BRCA1 were the most prevalent (28.1%), followed by TP53 (4.5%) and BRCA2 (4.1%) PVs. The contribution of PVs in CHEK2, ATM, PALB2, PTEN, and RAD51C was limited to 3%. In the patient group ≤26 years, TP53 PVs were significantly higher compared to the group 26-30 years (p = 0.0023). A total of 74.8% of TP53 carriers did not report a family history of cancer. Carriers of PVs receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy showed an improved event-free survival (p < 0.0001) compared to non-carriers. Overall, many women with early-onset breast cancer carry clinically actionable variants, mainly in the BRCA1/2 and TP53 genes. The inclusion of timely testing of TP53 in these patients provides essential information for appropriate clinical management. This is important for countries where reimbursement involves the cost of genetic analysis of BRCA1/2 only.

Nationwide Real-World Data of Microsatellite Instability and/or Mismatch Repair Deficiency in Cancer: Prevalence and Testing Patterns.

Determination of microsatellite instability (MSI)/mismatch repair (MMR) status in cancer has several clinical implications. Our aim was to integrate MSI/MMR status from patients tested in Greece to assess the prevalence of MSI-high (MSI-H)/deficient MMR (dMMR) per tumor type, testing patterns over time and concordance between MSI and MMR status. We retrospectively recorded MSI/MMR testing data of patients with diverse tumor types performed in pathology and molecular diagnostics laboratories across Greece. Overall, 18 of 22 pathology and/or molecular diagnostics laboratories accepted our invitation to participate. In the 18 laboratories located across the country, 7916 tumor samples were evaluated for MSI/MMR status. MSI/MMR testing significantly increased in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and other tumor types overtime (p < 0.05). The highest prevalence was reported in endometrial cancer (47 of 225 patients, 20.9%). MSI-H/dMMR was observed in most tumor types, even in low proportions. Among 904 tumors assessed both for MSI and MMR status, 21 had discordant results (overall discordance rate, 2.3%). We reported MSI-H/dMMR prevalence rates in patients with diverse cancers, while demonstrating increasing referral patterns from medical oncologists in the country overtime. The anticipated high rate of concordance between MSI and MMR status in paired analysis was confirmed.

Clinical trials in older patients with cancer - typical challenges, possible solutions, and a paradigm of study design in breast cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: While the prevalence of older breast cancer patients is rapidly increasing, these patients are greatly underrepresented in clinical trials. We discuss barriers to recruitment of older patients to clinical trials and propose solutions on how to mitigate these challenges and design optimal clinical trials through the paradigm of IMPORTANT trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a narrative review of the current literature evaluating barriers to including older breast cancer patients in clinical trials and how mitigating strategies can be implemented in a pragmatic clinical trial. RESULTS: The recognized barriers can be roughly divided into trial design-related (e.g. the adoption of strict inclusion criteria, the lack of pre-specified age-specific analysis), patient-related (e.g. lack of knowledge, valuation of the quality-of-life instead of survival, transportation issues), or physician-related (e.g. concern for toxicity). Several strategies to mitigate barriers have been identified and should be considered when designing a clinical trial dedicated to older patients with cancer. The pragmatic, de-centralized IMPORTANT trial focusing on dose optimization of CDK4/6 -inhibitors in older breast cancer patients is a paradigm of a study design where different mitigating strategies have been adopted. INTERPRETATION: Because of the existing barriers, older adults in clinical trials are considerably healthier than the average older patients treated in clinical practice. Thus, the study results cannot be generalized to the older population seen in daily clinical practice. Broader inclusion/exclusion criteria, offering telehealth visits, and inclusion of patient-reported, instead of physician-reported outcomes may increase older patient participation in clinical trials.

Tumor-agnostic baskets to N-of-1 platform trials and real-world data: Transforming precision oncology clinical trial design.

Choosing the right drug(s) for the right patient via advanced genomic sequencing and multi-omic interrogation is the sine qua non of precision cancer medicine. Traditional cancer clinical trial designs follow well-defined protocols to evaluate the efficacy of new therapies in patient groups, usually identified by their histology/tissue of origin of their malignancy. In contrast, precision medicine seeks to optimize benefit in individual patients, i.e., to define who benefits rather than determine whether the overall group benefits. Since cancer is a disease driven by molecular alterations, innovative trial designs, including biomarker-defined tumor-agnostic basket trials, are driving ground-breaking regulatory approvals and deployment of gene- and immune-targeted drugs. Molecular interrogation further reveals the disruptive reality that advanced cancers are extraordinarily complex and individually distinct. Therefore, optimized treatment often requires drug combinations and N-of-1 customization, addressed by a new generation of N-of-1 trials. Real-world data and structured master registry trials are also providing massive datasets that are further fueling a transformation in oncology. Finally, machine learning is facilitating rapid discovery, and it is plausible that high-throughput computing, in silico modeling, and 3-dimensional printing may be exploitable in the near future to discover and design customized drugs in real time.

CONTACT-01: A Randomized Phase III Trial of Atezolizumab + Cabozantinib Versus Docetaxel for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After a Checkpoint Inhibitor and Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Although checkpoint inhibitors have improved first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a therapeutic need remains for patients whose disease does not respond or who experience disease progression after anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy. CONTACT-01 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04471428) evaluated atezolizumab plus cabozantinib versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic NSCLC who developed disease progression after concurrent or sequential treatment with anti-PD-L1/PD-1 and platinum-containing chemotherapy. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, phase III trial randomly assigned patients 1:1 to atezolizumab 1,200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks (q3w) plus cabozantinib 40 mg orally once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One hundred eighty-six patients were assigned atezolizumab plus cabozantinib, and 180 docetaxel. Minimum OS follow-up was 10.9 months. Median OS was 10.7 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 12.3) with atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 10.5 months (95% CI, 8.6 to 13.0) with docetaxel (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.16]; P = .3668). Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 5.6) and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.1 to 4.4), respectively (stratified HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92]). Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71 (38.4%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 73 (39.5%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 5 AEs occurred in 14 (7.6%) and 10 (6.0%) patients in the atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and docetaxel arms, respectively (treatment-related in four [2.2%] and one [0.6%], respectively). CONCLUSION: Atezolizumab plus cabozantinib after disease progression following anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy and platinum-containing chemotherapy for metastatic NSCLC did not improve OS compared with docetaxel. Safety was consistent with known profiles of these agents.

Microsatellite Instability Is Insufficiently Used as a Biomarker for Lynch Syndrome Testing in Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE: The pan-cancer presence of microsatellite instability (MSI)-positive tumors demonstrates its clinical utility as an agnostic biomarker for identifying immunotherapy-eligible patients. Additionally, MSI is a hallmark of Lynch syndrome (LS), the most prevalent cancer susceptibility syndrome among patients with colorectal and endometrial cancer. Therefore, MSI-high results should inform germline genetic testing for cancer-predisposing genes. However, in clinical practice, such analysis is frequently disregarded. METHODS: A next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based technique was used for MSI analysis in 4,553 patients with various tumor types. Upon request, somatic BRAF gene analysis was conducted. In addition, hereditary testing of cancer-associated genes was performed in MSI-high cases using a capture-based NGS protocol. MLH1 promoter methylation analysis was conducted retrospectively in patients with colorectal and endometrial cancer to further investigate the origin of MSI at the tumor level. RESULTS: The MSI positivity rate for the entire cohort was 5.27%. Endometrial, gastric, colorectal, urinary tract, and prostate cancers showed the highest proportion of MSI-high cases (15.69%, 8.54%, 7.40%, 4.55%, and 3.19%, respectively). A minority of 45 patients (22.73%) among the MSI-high cases underwent germline testing to determine whether the mismatch repair pathway deficiency was inherited. 24.44% of those who performed the genetic test carried a pathogenic variant in an LS-associated gene. Three MSI-high individuals had non-LS gene alterations, including BRCA1, BRCA2, and CDKN2A pathogenic variants, indicating the presence of non-LS-associated gene alterations among MSI-high patients. CONCLUSION: Although MSI analysis is routinely performed in clinical practice, as many as 77% of MSI-high patients do not undergo LS genetic testing, despite international guidelines strongly recommending it. BRAF and MLH1 methylation analysis could shed light on the somatic origin of MSI in 42.50% of the MSI-high patients; however, MLH1 analysis is barely ever requested in clinical practice.