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.

Precision Oncology: 2023 in Review.

SUMMARY: This article presents a review of recent major advances in precision oncology and the future implications of these advances, specifying the iterative progress achieved from the end of 2022 through 2023. We discuss the different classes of precision oncology drugs and associated biomarkers as well as the improvements in clinical trial design that have enabled the efficient testing of these drugs.

Enhanced clinical assessment of hematologic malignancies through routine paired tumor and normal sequencing.

Genomic profiling of hematologic malignancies has augmented our understanding of variants that contribute to disease pathogenesis and supported development of prognostic models that inform disease management in the clinic. Tumor only sequencing assays are limited in their ability to identify definitive somatic variants, which can lead to ambiguity in clinical reporting and patient management. Here, we describe the MSK-IMPACT Heme cohort, a comprehensive data set of somatic alterations from paired tumor and normal DNA using a hybridization capture-based next generation sequencing platform. We highlight patterns of mutations, copy number alterations, and mutation signatures in a broad set of myeloid and lymphoid neoplasms. We also demonstrate the power of appropriate matching to make definitive somatic calls, including in patients who have undergone allogeneic stem cell transplant. We expect that this resource will further spur research into the pathobiology and clinical utility of clinical sequencing for patients with hematologic neoplasms.

Pancreas cancer and BRCA: A critical subset of patients with improving therapeutic outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with germline/somatic BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations (g/sBRCA1/2) comprise a distinct biologic subgroup of pancreas ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: Institutional databases were queried to identify patients who had PDAC with g/sBRCA1/2. Demographics, clinicopathologic details, genomic data (annotation sBRCA1/2 according to a precision oncology knowledge base for somatic mutations), zygosity, and outcomes were abstracted. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: In total, 136 patients with g/sBRCA1/2 were identified between January 2011 and June 2020. Germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2) mutation was identified in 116 patients (85%). Oncogenic somatic BRCA1/2 (sBRCA1/2) mutation was present in 20 patients (15%). Seventy-seven patients had biallelic BRCA1/2 mutations (83%), and 16 (17%) had heterozygous mutations. Sixty-five patients with stage IV disease received frontline platinum therapy, and 52 (80%) had a partial response. The median OS for entire cohort was 27.6 months (95% CI, 24.9-34.5 months), and the median OS for patients who had stage IV disease was 23 months (95% CI, 19-26 months). Seventy-one patients received a poly(adenosine diphosphate ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor (PARPi), and 52 received PARPi monotherapy. For maintenance PARPi, 10 patients (36%) had a partial response, 12 (43%) had stable disease, and 6 (21%) had progression of disease as their best response. Six patients (21%) received maintenance PARPi for >2 years. For those with stage IV disease who received frontline platinum, the median OS was 26 months (95% CI, 20-52 months) for biallelic patients (n = 39) and 8.66 months (95% CI, 6.2 months to not reached) for heterozygous patients (n = 4). The median OS for those who received PARPi therapy was 26.5 months (95% CI, 24-53 months) for biallelic patients (n = 25) and 8.66 months (95% CI, 7.23 months to not reached) for heterozygous patients (n = 2). CONCLUSIONS: g/sBRCA1/2 mutations did not appear to have different actionable utility. Platinum and PARPi therapies offer therapeutic benefit, and very durable outcomes are observed in a subset of patients who have g/sBRCA1/2 mutations with biallelic status.