In vitro and in vivo drug screens of tumor cells identify novel therapies for high-risk child cancer.

Biomarkers which better match anticancer drugs with cancer driver genes hold the promise of improved clinical responses and cure rates. We developed a precision medicine platform of rapid high-throughput drug screening (HTS) and patient-derived xenografting (PDX) of primary tumor tissue, and evaluated its potential for treatment identification among 56 consecutively enrolled high-risk pediatric cancer patients, compared with conventional molecular genomics and transcriptomics. Drug hits were seen in the majority of HTS and PDX screens, which identified therapeutic options for 10 patients for whom no targetable molecular lesions could be found. Screens also provided orthogonal proof of drug efficacy suggested by molecular analyses and negative results for some molecular findings. We identified treatment options across the whole testing platform for 70% of patients. Only molecular therapeutic recommendations were provided to treating oncologists and led to a change in therapy in 53% of patients, of whom 29% had clinical benefit. These data indicate that in vitro and in vivo drug screening of tumor cells could increase therapeutic options and improve clinical outcomes for high-risk pediatric cancer patients.

The important role of routine cytopathology in pediatric precision oncology.

BACKGROUND: The development of high-throughput drug screening (HTS) using primary cultures provides a promising, clinically translatable approach to tailoring treatment strategies for patients with cancer. However, this has been challenging for solid tumors because of often limited amounts of tissue available. In most cases, in vitro expansion is required before HTS, which may lead to overgrowth and contamination by non-neoplastic cells. METHODS: In this study, hematoxylin and eosin staining and immunohistochemical staining were performed on 129 cytopathology cases from 95 patients. These cytopathology cases comprised cell block preparations derived from primary tumor specimens or patient-derived xenografts as part of a pediatric precision oncology trial. Cytopathology cases were compared with the morphology and immunohistochemical staining profile of the original tumor. Cases were reported as tumor cells present, equivocal, or tumor cells absent. The HTS results from cytopathologically validated cultures were incorporated into a multidisciplinary tumor board report issued to the treating clinician to guide clinical decision making. RESULTS: On cytopathologic examination, tumor cells were present in 77 of 129 cases (60%) and were absent in 38 of 129 cases (29%), whereas 14 of 129 cases (11%) were equivocal. Cultures that contained tumor cells resembled the tumors from which they were derived. CONCLUSIONS: Cytopathologic examination of tumor cell block preparations is feasible and provides detailed morphologic characterization. Cytopathologic examination is essential for ensuring that samples submitted for HTS contain representative tumor cells and that in vitro drug sensitivity data are clinically translatable.

Whole genome, transcriptome and methylome profiling enhances actionable target discovery in high-risk pediatric cancer.

The Zero Childhood Cancer Program is a precision medicine program to benefit children with poor-outcome, rare, relapsed or refractory cancer. Using tumor and germline whole genome sequencing (WGS) and RNA sequencing (RNAseq) across 252 tumors from high-risk pediatric patients with cancer, we identified 968 reportable molecular aberrations (39.9% in WGS and RNAseq, 35.1% in WGS only and 25.0% in RNAseq only). Of these patients, 93.7% had at least one germline or somatic aberration, 71.4% had therapeutic targets and 5.2% had a change in diagnosis. WGS identified pathogenic cancer-predisposing variants in 16.2% of patients. In 76 central nervous system tumors, methylome analysis confirmed diagnosis in 71.1% of patients and contributed to a change of diagnosis in two patients (2.6%). To date, 43 patients have received a recommended therapy, 38 of whom could be evaluated, with 31% showing objective evidence of clinical benefit. Comprehensive molecular profiling resolved the molecular basis of virtually all high-risk cancers, leading to clinical benefit in some patients.