Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Geriatric Oncology.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This manuscript will update prior reviews of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in light of basic science, translational, and clinical discoveries in the field of cancer immunology and aging. RECENT FINDINGS: ICIs have led to significant advancements in the treatment of cancer. Landmark trials of ICIs have cited the efficacy and toxicity experienced by older patients, but most trials are not specifically designed to address outcomes in older patients. Underlying mechanisms of aging, like cellular senescence, affect the immune system and may ultimately alter the host's response to ICIs. Validated tools are currently used to identify older adults who may be at greater risk of developing complications from their cancer treatment. We review changes in the aging immune system that may alter responses to ICIs, report outcomes and toxicities in older adults from recent ICI clinical trials, and discuss clinical tools specific to older patients with cancer.

Cost-Effectiveness of Tumor Genomic Profiling to Guide First-Line Targeted Therapy Selection in Patients With Metastatic Lung Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of 10 oncogenes, targeted gene panel testing (TGPT) of 4 oncogenes, and no tumor profiling over the lifetime for patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' perspective was conducted. METHODS: A decision analytic model used 10 000 hypothetical Medicare beneficiaries with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma to simulate outcomes associated with CGP (ALK, BRAF, EGFR, ERBB2, MET, NTRK1, NTRK2, NTRK3, RET, ROS1), TGPT (ALK, BRAF, EGFR, ROS1), and no tumor profiling (no genes tested). First-line targeted cancer-directed therapies were assigned if actionable gene variants were detected; otherwise, nontargeted cancer-directed therapies were assigned. Model inputs were derived from randomized trials (progression-free survival, adverse events), the Veterans Health Administration and Medicare (drug costs), published studies (nondrug cancer-related management costs, health state utilities), and published databases (actionable variant prevalences). Costs (2019 US$) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were discounted at 3% per year. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses used 1000 Monte Carlo simulations. RESULTS: No tumor profiling was the least costly/person ($122 613 vs $184 063 for TGPT and $188 425 for CGP) and yielded the least QALYs/person (0.53 vs 0.73 for TGPT and 0.74 for CGP). The costs per QALY gained and corresponding 95% confidence interval were $310 735 ($278 323-$347 952) for TGPT vs no tumor profiling and $445 545 ($322 297-$572 084) for CGP vs TGPT. All probabilistic sensitivity analysis simulations for both comparisons surpassed the willingness-to-pay threshold ($150 000 per QALY gained). CONCLUSION: Compared with no tumor profiling in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma, tumor profiling (TGPT, CGP) improves quality-adjusted survival but is not cost-effective.

Mutational profiles of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas based upon human papillomavirus status in the Veterans Affairs National Precision Oncology Program.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) demonstrate favorable clinical outcomes compared to patients bearing HPV-negative HNSCC. We sought to characterize the association between HPV status and mutational profiles among patients served by the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all Veterans with primary HNSCC tumors who underwent next-generation sequencing (NGS) through the VHA's National Precision Oncology Program between July 2016 and February 2019. HPV status was determined by clinical pathology reports of p16 immunohistochemical staining; gene variant pathogenicity was classified using OncoKB, an online precision oncology knowledge database, and mutation frequencies were compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: A total of 79 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 48 (60.8%) had p16-positive tumors. Patients with p16-negative HNSCC were more likely to have mutations in TP53 (p < 0.0001), and a trend towards increased mutation frequency was observed within NOTCH1 (p = 0.032) and within the composite CDK/Rb pathway (p = 0.065). Mutations in KRAS, NRAS, HRAS, and FBXW7 were exclusively identified within p16-positive tumors, and a trend towards increased frequency was observed within the PI3K pathway (p = 0.051). No difference in overall mutational burden was observed between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In accordance with the previous studies, no clear molecular basis for improved prognosis among patients harboring HPV-positive disease has been elucidated. Though no targeted therapies are approved based upon HPV-status, current efforts to trial PI3K inhibitors and mTOR inhibitors across patients with HPV-positive disease bear genomic rationale based upon the current findings.

Barriers to Prescribing Targeted Therapies for Patients With NSCLC With Highly Actionable Gene Variants in the Veterans Affairs National Precision Oncology Program.

PURPOSE: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) gene panels are frequently completed for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with highly actionable gene variants have improved outcomes and reduced toxicities with the use of corresponding targeted agents. We sought to identify barriers to targeted agent use within the Veterans Health Affairs' National Precision Oncology Program (NPOP). METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of patients with NSCLC who underwent NGS multigene panels through NPOP between July 2015 and February 2019 was conducted. Patients who were assigned level 1 or 2A evidence for oncogenic gene variants by an artificial intelligence offering (IBM Watson for Genomics [WfG]) and NPOP staff were selected. Antineoplastic drug prescriptions and provider notes were reviewed. Reasons for withholding targeted treatments were categorized. RESULTS: Of 1,749 patients with NSCLC who successfully underwent NGS gene panel testing, 112 (6.4%) patients were assigned level 1 and/or 2A evidence for available targeted treatments by WfG and NPOP staff. All highly actionable gene variants were within ALK, BRAF, EGFR, ERBB2, MET, RET, and ROS1. Of these, 36 (32.1%) patients were not prescribed targeted agents. The three most common reasons were (1) patient did not carry a diagnosis of metastatic disease (33.3%), (2) treating provider did not comment on the NGS results (25.0%), and (3) provider felt that patient could not tolerate therapy (19.4%). No patients were denied access to level 1 or 2A targeted drugs because of rejection of a nonformulary drug request. CONCLUSION: A substantial minority of patients with NSCLC bearing highly actionable gene variants are not prescribed targeted agents. Further provider- and pathologist-directed educational efforts and implementation of health informatics systems to provide real-time decision support for test ordering and interpretation are needed.

Medical oncologists' perspectives of the Veterans Affairs National Precision Oncology Program.

BACKGROUND: To support the rising need for testing and to standardize tumor DNA sequencing practices within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)'s Veterans Health Administration (VHA), the National Precision Oncology Program (NPOP) was launched in 2016. We sought to assess oncologists' practices, concerns, and perceptions regarding Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) and the NPOP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a purposive total sampling approach, oncologists who had previously ordered NGS for at least one tumor sample through the NPOP were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Questions assessed the following: expectations for the NPOP, procedural requirements, applicability of testing results, and the summative utility of the NPOP. Interviews were assessed using an open coding approach. Thematic analysis was conducted to evaluate the completed codebook. Themes were defined deductively by reviewing the direct responses to interview questions as well as inductively by identifying emerging patterns of data. RESULTS: Of the 105 medical oncologists who were invited to participate, 20 (19%) were interviewed from 19 different VA medical centers in 14 states. Five recurrent themes were observed: (1) Educational Efforts Regarding Tumor DNA Sequencing Should be Undertaken, (2) Pathology Departments Share a Critical Role in Facilitating Test Completion, (3) Tumor DNA Sequencing via NGS Serves as the Most Comprehensive Testing Modality within Precision Oncology, (4) The Availability of the NPOP Has Expanded Options for Select Patients, and (5) The Completion of Tumor DNA Sequencing through the NPOP Could Help Improve Research Efforts within VHA Oncology Practices. CONCLUSION: Medical oncologists believe that the availability of tumor DNA sequencing through the NPOP could potentially lead to an improvement in outcomes for veterans with metastatic solid tumors. Efforts should be directed toward improving oncologists' understanding of sequencing, strengthening collaborative relationships between oncologists and pathologists, and assessing the role of comprehensive NGS panels within the battery of precision tests.

Genomic Analysis of Metastatic Solid Tumors in Veterans: Findings From the VHA National Precision Oncology Program.

PURPOSE: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is the largest cancer care provider in the United States, with the added challenge of serving more than twice the percentage of patients with cancer in rural areas than the national average. The VHA established the National Precision Oncology Program in 2016 to implement and standardize the practice of precision oncology across the diverse VHA system. METHODS: Tumor or peripheral blood specimens from veterans with advanced solid tumors who were eligible for treatment were submitted for next-generation sequencing (NGS) at two commercial laboratories. Annotated results were generated by the laboratories and independently using IBM Watson for Genomics. Levels-of-evidence treatment recommendations were based on OncoKB criteria. RESULTS: From July 2016 to June 2018, 3,698 samples from 72 VHA facilities were submitted for NGS testing, of which 3,182 samples (86%) were successfully sequenced. Most samples came from men with lung, prostate, and colorectal cancers. Thirty-four percent of samples were from patients who lived in a rural area. TP53, ATM, and KRAS were among the most commonly mutated genes. Approximately 70% of samples had at least one actionable mutation, with clinical trials identified as the recommended option in more than 50%. Mutations in genes associated with a neuroendocrine prostate cancer phenotype were expressed at increased frequency among veterans than in the general population. The most frequent therapies prescribed in response to NGS testing were immune checkpoint inhibitors, EGFR kinase inhibitors, and PARP inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Clinical implementation of precision oncology is feasible across the VHA health care system, including rural sites. Veterans have unique occupational exposures that might inform the nature of the mutational signatures identified here. Importantly, these results underscore the importance of increasing clinical trial availability to veterans.