Multicenter Evaluation of the Fully Automated PCR-Based Idylla EGFR Mutation Assay on Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Tissue of Human Lung Cancer.

Before initiating treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (eg, erlotinib, gefitinib, osimertinib, and afatinib), which inhibit the catalytic activity of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), clinical guidelines require determining the EGFR mutational status for activating (EGFR exons 18, 19, 20, or 21) and resistance (EGFR exon 20) mutations. The EGFR resistance mutation T790M should be monitored at cancer progression. The Idylla EGFR Mutation Assay, performed on the Idylla molecular diagnostics platform, is a fully automated (<2.5 hours turnaround time) sample-to-result molecular test to qualitatively detect 51 EGFR oncogene point mutations, deletions, or insertions. In a 15-center evaluation, Idylla results on 449 archived formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue sections, originating from non-small-cell lung cancer biopsies and resection specimens, were compared with data obtained earlier with routine reference methods, including next-generation sequencing, Sanger sequencing, pyrosequencing, mass spectrometry, and PCR-based assays. When results were discordant, a third method of analysis was performed, when possible, to confirm test results. After confirmation testing and excluding invalids/errors and discordant results by design, a concordance of 97.6% was obtained between Idylla and routine test results. Even with <10 mm2 of tissue area, a valid Idylla result was obtained in 98.9% of the cases. The Idylla EGFR Mutation Assay enables sensitive detection of most relevant EGFR mutations in concordance with current guidelines, with minimal molecular expertise or infrastructure.

The Shift From Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Performed Either Before or After Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy in the Clinical Negative Nodes of Breast Cancer Patients. Results, and the Advantages and Disadvantages of Both Procedures.

BACKGROUND: In patients with breast cancer who are candidates for neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), the timing of when to perform sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) remains under discussion. The aim of this study was to compare the advantages and disadvantages of SLNB performed before and after NAT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred seventy-two patients, T1c to T3 and N0 (clinically and according to ultrasound) candidates for NAT were included. We compared the outcomes of 2 groups: (1) 122 patients of whom SLNB was performed before NAT (pre-NAT) from December 2006 to April 2014; and (2) 50 patients with SLNB performed after NAT (post-NAT) from May 2014 to July 2016. RESULTS: Both groups were homogeneous in baseline patient characteristics. The SLNB was positive in 50 patients [41.7%] (33 macrometastases [66%] and 17 micrometastases [34%]) versus 6 patients [12%] (5 macrometastases [83.3%] and 1 micrometastases [16.7%]) in pre- and post-NAT groups, respectively. The lymphadenectomy was performed in 34 patients [28.3%] versus 4 patients [8%], with an odds ratio of 3.48 (95% confidence interval, 1.3-9.3). The recurrences in the pre-NAT group after a median follow-up of 62 months were 12 systemic, 2 local and systemic, and none axillary. In the post-NAT group were no recurrences after a median follow-up of 16 months. Finally, SLNB after NAT reduces the delay in starting NAT from 24 to 14 days (medians; P < .001) and the identification of the SLNB was in 122 patients [100%] versus 49 patients [98%]. CONCLUSION: SLNB performed after NAT significantly reduces the rate of lymphadenectomies without any increase in recurrences at early follow-up. Furthermore, it allows systemic treatment to be started earlier without interfering in the SLNB identification rate.