Insights of Clinical Significance From 109 695 Solid Tumor Tissue-Based Comprehensive Genomic Profiles.

BACKGROUND: FoundationOneCDx is approved in the US and Japan as a companion diagnostic test to identify patients with cancer who may benefit from treatment with 30 drug therapies in the US and 23 in Japan. Tumor profiling with FoundationOneCDx also detects genomic findings with evidence of clinical significance that may inform clinical care decisions beyond companion diagnostic claims. This observational study reports the breadth and impact of clinical decision insights from FoundationOneCDx solid tumor profiles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive test result reports for patients with solid tumor diagnoses (n = 109 695) were retrospectively analyzed for clinically significant predictive, prognostic, and diagnostic genomic alterations and signatures, determined in accordance with professional guidelines. Interventional clinical trials with targeted therapies or immune checkpoint inhibitors were matched to tumor profiles based on evidence that the genomic finding may be an actionable, investigational, or hypothetical target in the patient's tumor type. RESULTS: In 14 predefined cancer types (80.7% of analyzed solid tumors), predictive, prognostic, and diagnostic markers were reported in 47.6%, 13.2%, and 4.5% of samples, respectively, accounting for a total of 51.2% of tumor profiles. Pan-cancer predictive markers of tumor mutational burden (TMB) of 10 or more mutations per megabase, high microsatellite instability (MSI), or NTRK1/2/3 fusions were observed in 15.6%, 2.0%, and 0.1% of solid tumors, respectively. Most solid tumor profiles (89.2%) had genomic results that could theoretically inform decisions on the selection of immunotherapy and targeted therapy clinical trials. CONCLUSION: For this real-world population of patients with FoundationOneCDx solid tumor profiles in the routine course of clinical care, clinically significant findings were reported for approximately half of patients with genomic results.

A Retrospective Genomic Landscape of 661 Young Adult Glioblastomas Diagnosed Using 2016 WHO Guidelines for Central Nervous System Tumors.

The authors present a cohort of 661 young adult glioblastomas diagnosed using 2016 WHO World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System, utilizing comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) to explore their genomic landscape and assess their relationship to currently defined disease entities. This analysis explored variants with evidence of pathogenic function, common copy number variants (CNVs), and several novel fusion events not described in literature. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) mutational signatures, anatomic location, and tumor recurrence are further explored. Using data collected from CGP, unsupervised machine-learning techniques were leveraged to identify 10 genomic classes in previously assigned young adult glioblastomas. The authors relate these molecular classes to current World Health Organization guidelines and reference current literature to give therapeutic and prognostic descriptions where possible.

Clinicopathologic and Genomic Landscape of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Brain Metastases.

BACKGROUND: In patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), 10%-40% will eventually develop brain metastases. We present the clinicopathologic, genomic, and biomarker landscape of a large cohort of NSCLC brain metastases (NSCLC-BM) samples. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 3035 NSCLC-BM tested with comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) during routine clinical care. In addition, we compared the NSCLC-BM to a separate cohort of 7277 primary NSCLC (pNSCLC) specimens. Finally, we present data on 67 paired patients with NSCLC-BM and pNSCLC. RESULTS: Comprehensive genomic profiling analysis of the 3035 NSCLC-BMs found that the most frequent genomic alterations (GAs) were in the TP53, KRAS, CDKN2A, STK11, CDKN2B, EGFR, NKX2-1, RB1, MYC, and KEAP1 genes. In the NSCLC-BM cohort, there were significantly higher rates of several targetable GAs compared with pNSCLC, including ALK fusions, KRAS G12C mutations, and MET amplifications; and decreased frequency of MET exon14 skipping mutations (all P < .05). In the subset of NSCLC-BM (n = 1063) where concurrent PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed, 54.7% of the patients with NSCLC-BM were eligible for pembrolizumab based on PD-L1 IHC (TPS ≥ 1), and 56.9% were eligible for pembrolizumab based on TMB-High status. In addition, in a series 67 paired pNSCLC and NSCLC-BM samples, 85.1% (57/67) had at least one additional GA discovered in the NSCLC-BM sample when compared with the pNSCLC sample. CONCLUSIONS: Herein, we defined the clinicopathologic, genomic, and biomarker landscape of a large cohort of patients with NSCLC-BM which can help inform study design of future clinical studies for patients with NSCLC with BM. In certain clinical situations, metastatic NSCLC brain tissue or cerebral spinal fluid specimens may be needed to fully optimize personalized treatment.

Clinicopathologic and Genomic Characterization of PD-L1 Positive Urothelial Carcinomas.

INTRODUCTION: Pembrolizumab was approved with an accompanying companion diagnostic (CDx) assay (PD-L1 DAKO 22C3) for urothelial carcinoma (UC). In this study, we further characterize the clinicopathologic and genomic features of UC that are programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) positive. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cohort of this study consisted of a total of 528 consecutive UC patients with PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) and comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). All PD-L1 IHC testing was performed using the DAKO 22C3 CDx assay for UC. PD-L1 positivity was determined at a combined positive score ≥ 10. RESULTS: A total of 44.5% (235/528) patients with UC were PD-L1positive . A lower PD-L1 positivity rate was detected in primary (42.3%, 148/350) versus metastatic sites (48.9%, 87/178). PD-L1 positivity was dependent on the location of the metastatic sites. CGP revealed PD-L1positive patients had more frequent genomic alterations (GAs) in TP53 (p = .006) and RB1 (p = .003) and less frequent GAs in FGFR3 (p = .001) and MTAP (p = .028). The APOBEC mutational signature and tumor mutational burden (TMB)-high were more common in PD-L1positive patients. By testing patients with UC with CGP, in addition to PD-L1 IHC, an additional 97 patients (18.4%) in the total cohort were eligible for immunotherapy based on TMB status. CONCLUSION: PD-L1positive and PD-L1negative urothelial carcinomas are genomically different. Also, our study provides the framework for future clinical investigation with regard to specimen site selection for PD-L1 testing as well as candidate biomarker genomic alterations that may predict for better response or lack of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In this study, a higher prevalence of TP53 and RB1 alterations and APOBEC mutational signatures in the PD-L1positive urothelial carcinoma disease subset and enrichment of FGFR3 alterations in the PD-L1negative disease subset were found. These data provide the basis for future investigation into the role of these genomic changes as positive and negative predictors of immunotherapy response. Also, differences wer seen in PD-L1 positivity based on the collection site of the sample, which can provide a framework for future clinical trial design and could influence sample selection for PD-L1 testing in patients with urothelial carcinoma when multiple samples are available.

Clinicopathologic and Genomic Landscape of Breast Carcinoma Brain Metastases.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with breast carcinoma who have metastatic disease, 15%-30% will eventually develop brain metastases. We examined the genomic landscape of a large cohort of patients with breast carcinoma brain metastases (BCBMs) and compared it with a cohort of patients with primary breast carcinomas (BCs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 733 BCBMs tested with comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) and compared them with 10,772 primary breast carcinomas (not-paired) specimens. For a subset of 16 triple-negative breast carcinoma (TNBC)-brain metastasis samples, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed concurrently. RESULTS: A total of 733 consecutive BCBMs were analyzed. Compared with primary BCs, BCBMs were enriched for genomic alterations in TP53 (72.0%, 528/733), ERBB2 (25.6%, 188/733), RAD21 (14.1%, 103/733), NF1 (9.0%, 66/733), BRCA1 (7.8%, 57/733), and ESR1 (6.3%,46/733) (p < .05 for all comparisons). Immune checkpoint inhibitor biomarkers such as high tumor mutational burden (TMB-high; 16.2%, 119/733); high microsatellite instability (1.9%, 14/733); CD274 amplification (3.6%, 27/733); and apolipoprotein B mRNA editing enzyme, catalytic polypeptide-like mutational signature (5.9%, 43/733) were significantly higher in the BCBM cohort compared with the primary BC cohort (p < .05 for all comparisons). When using both CGP and PD-L1 IHC, 37.5% (6/16) of patients with TNBC brain metastasis were eligible for atezolizumab based on PD-L1 IHC, and 18.8% (3/16) were eligible for pembrolizumab based on TMB-high status. CONCLUSION: We found a high prevalence of clinically relevant genomic alterations in patients with BCBM, suggesting that tissue acquisition (surgery) and/or cerebrospinal fluid for CGP in addition to CGP of the primary tumor may be clinically warranted. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study found a high prevalence of clinically relevant genomic alterations in patients with breast carcinoma brain metastasis (BCBM), suggesting that tissue acquisition (surgery) and/or cerebrospinal fluid for comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) in addition to CGP of the primary tumor may be clinically warranted. In addition, this study identified higher positive rates for FDA-approved immunotherapy biomarkers detected by CGP in patients with BCBM, opening a possibility of new on-label treatments. Last, this study noted limited correlation between tumor mutational burden and PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC), which shows the importance of testing patients with triple-negative BCBM for immune checkpoint inhibitor eligibility with both PD-L1 IHC and CGP.

Stakeholders' expectations of precision medicine: A qualitative study to identify areas of (mis)alignment.

Background and Aims: To sustainably address challenges in implementing precision medicine (PM), coordinated efforts of different stakeholders are required. Understanding their expectations represents a first key step toward aligning on future actions and strategies. Here, we aimed to explore the expectations of different stakeholders from themselves and each other regarding PM. Methods: This collaborative qualitative study was initiated by the global multistakeholder consortium From Testing to Targeted Treatments (FT3). Structured interviews were conducted with participants from five stakeholder groups: patients/patient advocates, healthcare providers (HCPs), researchers, policymakers/regulators/payers and industry representatives. A broad reach across geography, roles, experiences, and disease areas was sought. Results were analyzed by grounded theory methodology. Results: All stakeholders stated that optimal implementation of PM can only be achieved through collaboration; industry representatives were the biggest promoters of collaboration. Stakeholders agreed that PM should be implemented focusing on the patient's best interest; HCPs were seen as important gatekeepers for PM by interacting directly with patients, and policymakers/payers were perceived as the most important drivers of access to PM. Areas of misalignment included the role of industry in clinical trial design and in access to PM (perceived as important by patients, HCPs and policymakers but not by industry representatives), and the stakeholders responsible for elaborating guidelines on PM use (patients indicated policymakers, while researchers indicated themselves). Priorities for optimal PM implementation and suggested actions included the need for enhancing high-level policy focus, improving genomic literacy, optimizing the health technology assessment for PM, advocating for equitable access, promoting collaboration between industry and other stakeholder groups and development of reliable research standards. Conclusion: Stakeholder expectations revealed in this study suggested that no stakeholder group can drive change on its own; a global, multistakeholder collaborative approach that brings together current programs and best practices to support universal access to PM is needed.

Real-world Validation of TMB and Microsatellite Instability as Predictive Biomarkers of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Effectiveness in Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer.

Patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer (mEG) and tumor mutational burden ≥10 mut/Mb (TMB ≥ 10) have more favorable outcomes on immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICPI) monotherapy compared with chemotherapy in subgroup analyses of randomized controlled trials. We sought to evaluate the robustness of these associations in real-world settings where patients and practices are more diverse. A total of 362 2 L and 692 1 L patients, respectively received ICPI (n = 99, 33) or chemotherapy (n = 263, 659) across approximately 280 U.S. academic or community-based cancer clinics March 2014-July 2021. Deidentified data were captured into a real-world clinico-genomic database. All patients underwent Foundation Medicine testing. Time to next treatment (TTNT) and overall survival (OS) comparing ICPI versus chemotherapy were adjusted for treatment assignment imbalances using propensity scores. 2L: TMB ≥ 10 had more favorable TTNT [median 24 vs. 4.1 months; HR: 0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.09-0.44; P = 0.0001] and OS (median 43.1 vs. 6.2 months; HR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.011-0.54; P = 0.0005), TMB < 10 did not (P > 0.05). 1L: TMB ≥ 10 had more favorable TTNT (not reached vs. median 4.1 months; HR: 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03-0.48; P = 0.0024) and OS (not reached vs. median 17.1 months; HR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.08-1.14; P = 0.078), TMB < 10 had less favorable TTNT (median 2.8 vs. 6.5 months; HR: 2.36; 95% CI: 1.25-4.45; P = 0.008) and OS (median 4.5 vs. 13.1 months; HR: 1.82, 95% CI: 0.87-3.81; P = 0.11). TMB ≥ 10 robustly identifies patients with mEG with more favorable outcomes on 2 L ICPI monotherapy versus chemotherapy. 1 L data are more limited, but effects are consistent with 2L. Significance: Using real-world data, we sought to evaluate robustness of these clinical associations using the same assay platform and biomarker cut-off point used in both clinical trials and pan-tumor CDx approvals for later treatment lines. TMB ≥ 10 robustly identified patients with mEG with more favorable outcomes on ICPI monotherapy versus chemotherapy and suggests this subset of patients could be targeted for further trial development.

The Pan-Tumor Landscape of Targetable Kinase Fusions in Circulating Tumor DNA.

PURPOSE: Oncogenic kinase fusions are targetable with approved and investigational therapies and can also mediate acquired resistance (AR) to targeted therapy. We aimed to understand the clinical validity of liquid biopsy comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) to detect kinase fusions pan tumor. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: CGP was performed on plasma and tissue samples during clinical care. All exons plus selected introns of 16 kinases involved in oncogenic fusions (ALK, BRAF, EGFR, ERBB2, FGFR1/2/3, MET, NTRK1/2/3, PDGFRA/B, RAF1, RET, and ROS1) were sequenced to capture fusions, including well-characterized and novel breakpoints. Plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) fraction was estimated to inform sensitivity. RESULTS: Of 36,916 plasma cases, 32,492 (88%) had detectable ctDNA. Kinase fusions were detected in 1.8% of ctDNA-positive cases (571/32,492) and were most prevalent in patients with cholangiocarcinoma (4.2%), bladder cancer (3.6%), and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; 3.1%). Of the 63 paired patient samples that had tissue and ctDNA specimens collected within 1 year and with estimated plasma ctDNA fraction >1%, fusions were detected in 47 of 51 (92%) liquid specimens with a fusion in the tissue sample. In 32 patients with fusions detected in liquid but not in tissue, 21 (66%) had evidence of putative acquired resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Targetable kinase fusions are identified in ctDNA across cancer types. In pairs with tissue-identified fusions, fusion detection in ctDNA is reliable with elevated ctDNA fraction. These data support the validity of CGP to enable ctDNA-based fusion detection for informing clinical care in patients with advanced cancer.

Tumor Mutational Burden as a Predictor of First-Line Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Versus Carboplatin Benefit in Cisplatin-Unfit Patients With Urothelial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: In real-world settings, patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) are often more frail than clinical trials, underscoring an unmet need to identify patients who might be spared first-line chemotherapy. We sought to determine whether tumor mutational burden (TMB) identifies patients with comparable or superior clinical benefit of first-line single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPI) in real-world patients deemed cisplatin-unfit. METHODS: Patients with mUC treated in first-line advanced setting (N = 401) received ICPI (n = 245) or carboplatin regiment without ICPI (n = 156) at physician's discretion in standard-of-care settings across approximately 280 US academic or community-based cancer clinics between March 2014 and July 2021. Deidentified data were captured into a real-world clinicogenomic database. All patients underwent testing using Foundation Medicine assays. Progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) comparing ICPI versus chemotherapy were adjusted for known treatment assignment imbalances using propensity scores. RESULTS: TMB ≥ 10 was detected in 122 of 401 (30.4%) patients. Among patients receiving ICPI, those with TMB ≥ 10 had more favorable PFS (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.85), TTNT (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.83), and OS (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.68). Comparing ICPI versus carboplatin, adjusting for imbalances, patients with TMB ≥ 10 had more favorable PFS (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.82), TTNT (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.91), and OS (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.29 to 1.08) on ICPI versus chemotherapy, but not TMB < 10. Comparisons unadjusted for imbalances had similar associations. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world settings, mUC patients with TMB ≥ 10 have more favorable outcomes on first-line single-agent ICPI than carboplatin, adding clinical validity to TMB assessed by an existing US Food and Drug Administration-approved platform.

Comparative Effectiveness of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors vs Chemotherapy by Tumor Mutational Burden in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Importance: The most useful biomarkers for clinical decision-making identify patients likely to have improved outcomes with one treatment vs another. Objective: To evaluate treatment class-specific outcomes of patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) vs taxane chemotherapy by tumor mutational burden (TMB). Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness analysis of clinical variables and outcomes used prospectively defined biomarker-stratified genomic data from a deidentified clinicogenomic database. Data included men with previously treated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) receiving ICI or single-agent taxane chemotherapy from January 2011 to April 2021 at approximately 280 US academic or community-based cancer clinics (approximately 800 sites of care). Data were analyzed from July to August 2021. Exposures: Single-agent ICI or single-agent taxanes. Treatments were assigned at discretion of physician and patient without randomization. Imbalances of known factors between treatment groups were adjusted with propensity weighting. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, time to next therapy (TTNT), and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 741 men (median [IQR], 70 [64-76] years) with mCRPC received comprehensive genomic profiling and were treated with ICI or single-agent taxane therapy. At baseline, the median (IQR) PSA level was 79.4 (19.0-254) ng/mL, 108 men (18.8%) had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status scores of 2 or greater, and 644 men (86.9%) had received prior systemic treatments for mCRPC. A total of 45 patients (6.1%) received ICI therapy and 696 patients (93.9%) received taxane therapy. Among patients with TMB of fewer than 10 mutations per megabase (mt/Mb) receiving ICI, compared with those receiving taxanes, had worse TTNT (median [IQR], 2.4 [1.1-3.2] months vs 4.1 [2.2-6.3] months; hazard ratio [HR], 2.65; 95% CI, 1.78-3.95; P < .001). In contrast, for patients with TMB of 10 mt/Mb or greater, use of ICIs, compared with use taxanes, was associated with more favorable TTNT (median [IQR], 8.0 [3.4 to unknown] months vs 2.4 [2.4-7.3] months; HR, 0.37, 95% CI, 0.15-0.87; P = .02) and OS (median 19.9 [8.06 to unknown] months vs 4.2 [2.69 - 6.12] months; HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.10-0.57; P = .001). Among all 741 patients, 44 (5.9%) had TMB of 10 mt/Mb or greater, 22 (3.0%) had high microsatellite instability, and 20 (2.7%) had both. Treatment interactions with TMB of 10 mt/Mb or greater (TTNT: HR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.32-0.31; P < .001; OS: HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.076-0.81; P = .02) were stronger than high microsatellite instability alone (TTNT: HR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03-0.51; P = .004; OS: HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.13-1.12; P = .08). Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study, ICIs were more effective than taxanes in patients with mCRPC when TMB was 10 mt/Mb or greater but not when TMB was fewer than 10 mt/Mb. The results add validity to the existing TMB cutoff of 10 mt/Mb for ICI use in later lines of therapy, and suggest that ICIs may be a viable alternative to taxane chemotherapy for patients with mCRPC with high TMB.

Predictive Genomic Biomarkers of Hormonal Therapy Versus Chemotherapy Benefit in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers predicting second-generation novel hormonal therapy (NHT) benefit relative to taxanes are critical for optimized treatment decisions for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. These associations have not been reported simultaneously for common mCRPC genomic biomarkers. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate predictive associations of common genomic aberrations in mCRPC using an established comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) system. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort study used data from a deidentified US-based clinicogenomic database comprising patients treated in routine clinical practice between 2011 and 2020, evaluated with Foundation Medicine CGP in tissue biopsies obtained around the time of treatment decision. The main cohort included 180 NHT and 179 taxane lines of therapy (LOTs) from 308 unique patients. The sequential cohort comprised a subset of the main cohort NHT LOTs immediately followed by taxane from 55 unique patients. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Main cohort analyses were adjusted for known treatment assignment biases via inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) in treatment interaction models. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In the main cohort, patients with AR amplification (ARamp) or PTEN aberrations (PTENalt) had worse relative PSA response on NHT versus taxanes compared with patients without. Patients with ARamp, PTENalt, or RB1 aberrations (RB1alt) also had worse relative TTNT and OS on NHT but not on taxanes. In multivariable models for TTNT and OS adjusted via IPTW, ARamp, PTENalt, and RB1alt were shown as poor prognostic factors overall and demonstrated significant treatment interactions, indicating reduced hazards of therapy switch and death on taxanes versus NHT. Consistent associations favoring increased benefit from subsequent taxane despite prior NHT treatment line were observed only for ARamp in the sequential cohort, in which very few patients had RB1alt for assessment. CONCLUSIONS: ARamp status is a candidate biomarker to predict poor effectiveness of NHT relative to taxanes in mCRPC in scenarios where both options are considered. PATIENT SUMMARY: Specific alterations in the DNA of tumors may assist in choosing between novel oral hormonal therapies and standard chemotherapy in advanced prostate cancer patients.

Clinical and analytical validation of FoundationOne®CDx, a comprehensive genomic profiling assay for solid tumors.

FoundationOne®CDx (F1CDx) is a United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved companion diagnostic test to identify patients who may benefit from treatment in accordance with the approved therapeutic product labeling for 28 drug therapies. F1CDx utilizes next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) technology to examine 324 cancer genes in solid tumors. F1CDx reports known and likely pathogenic short variants (SVs), copy number alterations (CNAs), and select rearrangements, as well as complex biomarkers including tumor mutational burden (TMB) and microsatellite instability (MSI), in addition to genomic loss of heterozygosity (gLOH) in ovarian cancer. CGP services can reduce the complexity of biomarker testing, enabling precision medicine to improve treatment decision-making and outcomes for cancer patients, but only if test results are reliable, accurate, and validated clinically and analytically to the highest standard available. The analyses presented herein demonstrate the extensive analytical and clinical validation supporting the F1CDx initial and subsequent FDA approvals to ensure high sensitivity, specificity, and reliability of the data reported. The analytical validation included several in-depth evaluations of F1CDx assay performance including limit of detection (LoD), limit of blank (LoB), precision, and orthogonal concordance for SVs (including base substitutions [SUBs] and insertions/deletions [INDELs]), CNAs (including amplifications and homozygous deletions), genomic rearrangements, and select complex biomarkers. The assay validation of >30,000 test results comprises a considerable and increasing body of evidence that supports the clinical utility of F1CDx to match patients with solid tumors to targeted therapies or immunotherapies based on their tumor's genomic alterations and biomarkers. F1CDx meets the clinical needs of providers and patients to receive guideline-based biomarker testing, helping them keep pace with a rapidly evolving field of medicine.

Pan-cancer landscape of CD274 (PD-L1) rearrangements in 283,050 patient samples, its correlation with PD-L1 protein expression, and immunotherapy response.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) benefit patients with multiple cancer types, however, additional predictive biomarkers of response are needed. CD274 (programmed cell death ligand-1, PD-L1) gene rearrangements are positively associated with PD-L1 expression and may confer benefit to ICI, thus a pan-cancer characterization of these alterations is needed. METHODS: We analyzed 283,050 patient samples across multiple tumor types that underwent comprehensive genomic profiling for activating CD274 rearrangements and other alterations. The DAKO 22C3 Tumor Proportion Scoring (TPS) method was used for PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) testing in a small subset with available data (n=55,423). A retrospective deidentified real-world clinico-genomic database (CGDB) was examined for ICI treatment outcomes. We also report a detailed case of CD274-rearranged metastatic rectal adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: We identified 145 samples with functional rearrangements in CD274. There were significant enrichments for PIK3CA, JAK2, PDCD1LG2, CREBBP, and PBRM1 co-mutations (ORs=2.1, 16.7, 17.8, 3.6, and 3.4, respectively, p<0.01). Genomic human papillomavirus (HPV)-16, Epstein-Barr virus, and mismatch repair genes also co-occurred (OR=6.2, 8.4, and 4.3, respectively, p<0.05). Median tumor mutational burden (TMB) was higher compared with CD274 wild-type samples (7.0 vs 3.5 mutations/Mb, p=1.7e-11), with disease-specific TMB enrichment in non-small cell lung, colorectal, unknown primary, and stomach cancers. PD-L1 IHC skewed toward positivity (N=39/43 samples with ≥1% positivity). Of eight patients from the CGDB, three remained on ICI treatment after 6 months. Separately, one patient with metastatic rectal adenocarcinoma experienced a pathologic complete response on chemoimmunotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: CD274 gene rearrangements are associated with increased PD-L1 IHC scores, higher TMB, and potential clinical benefit in ICI-treated patients with cancer.

Pan-cancer analysis of CD274 (PD-L1) mutations in 314,631 patient samples and subset correlation with PD-L1 protein expression.

BACKGROUND: The effects of non-amplification short variant (SV) mutations in CD274 (programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)) on PD-L1 protein expression and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) therapy are unknown. Here, we present a retrospective analysis of CD274 mutations detected by comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) and correlate these results with tumor-cell PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC)-based expression assessment to better understand the relationship between mutations and protein expression of PD-L1. METHODS: CGP was performed on hybridization-captured, adaptor ligation-based libraries using DNA and/or RNA extracted from 314,631 tumor samples that were sequenced for up to 406 cancer-related genes and select gene rearrangements. PD-L1 IHC was performed on a subset of cases (n=58,341) using the DAKO 22C3 PD-L1 IHC assay and scored with the tumor proportion score (TPS). RESULTS: Overall, the prevalence of CD274 SV mutations was low (0.3%, 1081/314,631) with 577 unique variants. The most common CD274 SV mutations were R260H (n=51), R260C (n=18), R125Q (n=12), C272fs*13 (n=11), R86W (n=10), and R113H (n=10). The prevalence of CD274 mutations varied depending on tumor type with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (1.9%, 19/997), cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (1.6%, 14/868), endometrial adenocarcinoma (1.0%, 36/3740), unknown primary melanoma (0.9%, 33/3679), and cutaneous melanoma (0.8%, 32/3874) having the highest frequency of mutations. Of the R260H cases concurrently tested with PD-L1 IHC, most (81.8%, 9/11) had no PD-L1 expression, which contrasts to the five E237K cases where most (80%, 4/5) had PD-L1 expression. In addition, we saw a significantly lower level of PD-L1 expression in samples with a clonal truncating variant (nonsense or frameshift indel) when compared with samples with a subclonal truncating variants (mean: TPS=1 vs TPS=38; p<0.001), and also in clonal versus subclonal missense mutations (mean: TPS=11 vs TPS=22, respectively; p=0.049) CONCLUSIONS: We defined the landscape of CD274 mutations in a large cohort of tumor types that can be used as a reference for examining CD274 mutations as potential resistance biomarkers for ICPI. Furthermore, we presented novel data on the correlation of CD274 mutations and PD-L1 protein expression, providing important new information on the potential functionality of these mutations and can serve as a basis for future research.

Identification and Utilization of Biomarkers to Predict Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPI) have revolutionized cancer therapy and provided clinical benefit to thousands of patients. Despite durable responses in many tumor types, the majority of patients either fail to respond at all or develop resistance to the ICPI. Furthermore, ICPI treatment can be accompanied by serious adverse effects. There is an urgent need for identification of patient populations that will benefit from ICPI as single agents and when used in combinations. As ICPI have achieved regulatory approvals, accompanying biomarkers including PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) and tumor mutational burden (TMB) have also received approvals for some indications. The ICPI pembrolizumab was the first example of a tissue-agnostic FDA approval based on tumor microsatellite instability (MSI)/deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) biomarker status, rather than on tumor histology assessment. Several other ICPI-associated biomarkers are in the exploratory stage, including quantification of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), gene expression profiling (GEP) of an inflamed microenvironment, and neoantigen prediction. TMB and PD-L1 expression can predict a subset of responses, but they fail to predict all responses to checkpoint blockade. While a single biomarker is currently limited in its ability to fully capture the complexity of the tumor-immune microenvironment, a combination of biomarkers is emerging as a method to improve predictive power. Here we review the steadily growing impact of comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) for development and utilization of predictive biomarkers by simultaneously capturing TMB, MSI, and the status of genomic targets that confer sensitivity or resistance to immunotherapy, as well as detecting inflammation through RNA expression signatures.

Genomic Profiling of Circulating Tumor DNA From Cerebrospinal Fluid to Guide Clinical Decision Making for Patients With Primary and Metastatic Brain Tumors.

Despite advances in systemic therapies for solid tumors, the development of brain metastases remains a significant contributor to overall cancer mortality and requires improved methods for diagnosing and treating these lesions. Similarly, the prognosis for malignant primary brain tumors remains poor with little improvement in overall survival over the last several decades. In both primary and metastatic central nervous system (CNS) tumors, the challenge from a clinical perspective centers on detecting CNS dissemination early and understanding how CNS lesions differ from the primary tumor, in order to determine potential treatment strategies. Acquiring tissue from CNS tumors has historically been accomplished through invasive neurosurgical procedures, which restricts the number of patients to those who can safely undergo a surgical procedure, and for which such interventions will add meaningful value to the care of the patient. In this review we discuss the potential of analyzing cell free DNA shed from tumor cells that is contained within the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) as a sensitive and minimally invasive method to detect and characterize primary and metastatic tumors in the CNS.

Are there financial savings associated with supplementing current diagnostic practice for preeclampsia with a novel test? Learnings from a modeling analysis from a German payer perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the financial impact of adding a novel serum test to the current diagnostic toolkit for preeclampsia (PE) detection in Germany. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was created to quantify the economic impact of adding a recently developed novel diagnostic test for PE (Roche Diagnostics, Rotkreuz, Switzerland) to current diagnostic practice in Germany. The model simulated a cohort of 1000 pregnant patients receiving obstetric care and quantified the budget impact of adding the novel test to current German PE detection and management practices. RESULTS: The model estimates that the costs associated with managing a typical pregnancy in Germany are €941 when the novel test is used versus €1579 with standard practice. This represents savings of €637 per pregnant woman, even when the test is used as a supplementary diagnostic tool. The savings are attributed to the novel test's ability to better classify patients relative to current practice, specifically, its ability to reduce false negatives by 67% and false positives by 71%. CONCLUSION: The novel PE test has the potential to provide substantial cost savings to German healthcare payers, even when used as an addition to standard practice. Better classification of patients at risk for developing PE and declassification of those that are not compared to current practice leads to economic savings for the healthcare system. Furthermore, by reducing the rates of false-positive and false-negative classification relative to current standard of care, the test helps better target healthcare spending and lowers overall costs associated with PE care.

Building bridges to the future of medicine: recommendations for boosting development of novel and companion diagnostics.

Evaluating the prospects for 'personalized healthcare' has become topical at the 10-year anniversary of the first results from the Human Genome Project. The coincidence of this milestone with a period of global financial difficulty is unfortunate, but industry has signaled its willingness to invest in this new medical paradigm in order to address the problems of high drug candidate attrition as well as escalating healthcare and R&D costs. For diagnostics manufacturers, justifying the ever-growing costs of development without an appropriate framework to provide reasonable return on investment is extremely challenging. Regulators have made good progress in defining what will satisfy current regulatory mandates, but there is still far to go to create conditions that would stimulate investment. My personal perspective is that personalized healthcare represents a solution rather than a problem and herein I describe the bottlenecks slowing development of novel diagnostics from the perspective of a willing commercial stakeholder.

Serum tests for colorectal cancer screening.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) persists as one of the most significant causes of cancer death worldwide. Recent progress in reducing cancer mortality can largely be attributed to the implementation of screening programs. However, screening programs have not realized their full potential for the reduction of CRC mortality, because of poor adherence rates among patients. Serum biomarker screening tests offer the potential for improved patient adherence to CRC screening programs. In this review, we assess the literature regarding serum biomarkers for use as CRC screening tests for colorectal cancer and adenomas. A systematic review was performed of Medline-indexed articles pertaining to serum biomarkers for CRC screening published within the past 4 years. In addition, we searched non-Medline sources for information pertaining to screening guidelines and practice patterns for CRC. We identified 51 articles from Medline pertaining to serum biomarkers as screening tests for CRC. Non-Medline sources yielded an additional 12 articles, for a total of 63 publications reviewed. We conclude that serum tests that involve simple blood draws during routine check-ups hold significant promise for improving patient acceptance and adherence to CRC screening.