Clinical availability and characteristics of multigene panel testing for recurrent/advanced gynecologic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Japan's health insurance covers multigene panel testing. This study aimed to determine the potential availability and utility of gene panel testing clinically in gynecologic oncology. METHODS: We analyzed the characteristics of patients with gynecologic cancer who underwent gene panel testing using FoundationOne® CDx or OncoGuide™ NCC Oncopanel between November 2019 and October 2022. RESULTS: Out of 102 patients analyzed, 32, 18, 43, 8, and 1 had cervical, endometrial, ovarian cancers, sarcoma, and vaginal cancer, respectively. Druggable gene alteration was found in 70 patients (68.6%; 21 with cervical cancer, 15 with endometrial cancer, 28 with ovarian cancer, 5 with sarcoma, and 1 with other). The most common druggable gene alteration was PIK3CA mutation (n = 21), followed by PTEN mutation (n = 12) and high tumor mutation burden (TMB-H) (n = 11). TMB-H was detected in 5 patients with cervical cancer, 5 with endometrial cancer, and 1 with endometrial stromal sarcoma. Eleven patients (10.8%) received molecularly targeted therapy according to their gene aberrations. Gene panel testing was mostly performed when the second-line treatment was ineffective. Of all 102 patients, 60 did not have recommended treatment, and 15 died or had worsened conditions before obtaining the test results. CONCLUSION: Through multigene panel testing, although many patients had druggable gene alterations, 10.8% of them received the recommended treatment. TMB-H was mainly observed in cervical/endometrial cancer, suggesting its potential as a therapeutic biomarker of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Furthermore, patients' prognosis and performance status should be considered before performing the test.

Best practices for the extraction of genomic DNA from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue for cancer genomic profiling tests.

Recently, two cancer genomic profiling tests have been approved in Japan and implemented in routine clinical practice: the FDA-approved FoundationOne CDx test, and the OncoGuide NCC Oncopanel test. The quality and quantity of DNA significantly affects the sequencing results; therefore, preparing a sufficient amount of high-quality DNA for clinical cancer genomic profiling tests is important. We examined the best practices for the extraction of cancer genomic DNA from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor tissues of pancreatic, lung and colon cancer specimens. We found that the quality of cancer genomic DNA extracted from 10-µm-thick FFPE samples improved significantly, compared with that from 4-µm-thick FFPE samples, suggesting that 10-µm-thick FFPE samples are preferable for clinical cancer genomic profiling tests. For convenience, we created a quick reference table for calculating the required number of FFPE slides.

Clinical practice guidance for next-generation sequencing in cancer diagnosis and treatment (edition 2.1).

BACKGROUND: To promote precision oncology in clinical practice, the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology, the Japanese Society of Clinical Oncology, and the Japanese Cancer Association, jointly published "Clinical practice guidance for next-generation sequencing in cancer diagnosis and treatment" in 2017. Since new information on cancer genomic medicine has emerged since the 1st edition of the guidance was released, including reimbursement for NGS-based multiplex gene panel tests in 2019, the guidance revision was made. METHODS: A working group was organized with 33 researchers from cancer genomic medicine designated core hospitals and other academic institutions. For an impartial evaluation of the draft version, eight committee members from each society conducted an external evaluation. Public comments were also made on the draft. The finalized Japanese version was published on the websites of the three societies in March 2020. RESULTS: The revised edition consists of two parts: an explanation of the cancer genomic profiling test (General Discussion) and clinical questions (CQs) that are of concern in clinical practice. Particularly, patient selection should be based on the expectation that the patient's post-test general condition and organ function will be able to tolerate drug therapy, and the optimal timing of test should be considered in consideration of subsequent treatment plans, not limited to treatment lines. CONCLUSION: We expect that the revised version will be used by healthcare professionals and will also need to be continually reviewed in line with future developments in cancer genome medicine.

Leveraging the variable natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to select optimal therapy.

PURPOSE: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-obligate precursor to invasive ductal carcinoma. The authors sought to discuss the evidence suggesting that not all DCIS will progress to invasive disease if left untreated. RESULTS: Four lines of evidence align to suggest that not all of this in-situ disease progresses to invasive cancer: its prevalence on screening mammography, studies of missed diagnoses, incidental findings in autopsy specimens, and large retrospective reviews of those treated with excision alone. CONCLUSION: A clearer understanding of the variable history of DCIS coupled with advances in genomic profiling of the disease holds the promise of reducing widespread over-treatment of this non-invasive cancer. Additionally, identification of higher risk of recurrence subsets may select patients for whom more aggressive treatment may be appropriate.

Is DCIS Overrated?

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), the noninvasive form of breast cancer (BC), comprises just over 20% of breast cancer cases diagnosed each year in the USA. Most patients are treated with local excision of the disease followed by whole breast radiation therapy. Total mastectomy is not an uncommon approach, and total mastectomy with a contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy has been on the rise in the past decade. In estrogen receptor-positive disease, patients are often offered endocrine ablative therapy with a selective estrogen receptor modulator or an aromatase inhibitor as both treatment and prevention. Local regional treatment options have no impact upon ultimate overall survival. Long-term survival rates are higher in patients with DCIS than with any other form of the disease. Are these strikingly high success rates a testament to effective treatment strategies or is there a significant subset of DCIS that was unlikely to ever progress to invasive ductal carcinoma? DCIS was not seen in the US prior to the advent of screening mammography. When compared to other countries, the USA has the highest utilization of screening mammography and the incidence rate of DCIS. Other lines of evidence include autopsy series examining the breast tissue of women who died of other causes, missed-diagnosis series and current retrospective reviews of DCIS, all align in support of the concept of DCIS as indolent in the majority of cases [3-14]. The evidence suggests that both patient and physician misconceptions about DCIS have led to overdiagnosis and over-treatment of DCIS. Recently, a gene expression profiling tool (12 gene assay, Oncotype DCIS) has emerged that shows considerable promise in predicting class in DCIS patients.

Analysis of quality metrics in comprehensive cancer genomic profiling using a dual DNA-RNA panel.

Background: The nucleic acid quality from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor vary among samples, resulting in substantial variability in the quality of comprehensive cancer genomic profiling tests. The objective of the study is to investigate how nucleic acid quality affects sequencing quality. We also examined the variations in nucleic acid quality among different hospitals or cancer types. Methods: Three nucleic acid quality metrics (ddCq, Q-value, and DV200) and five sequencing quality metrics (on-target rate, mean depth, coverage uniformity, target exon coverage, and coverage of the housekeeping gene) were examined using 585 samples from the Todai OncoPanel, a dual DNA-RNA panel. Results: In the DNA panel, ddCq served as an indicator of sequencing depth and Q-value reflected the uniformity of sequencing across different regions. It was essential to have favorable values not only for ddCq but also for Q-value to obtain ideal sequencing results. For the RNA panel, DV200 proved to be a valuable metric for assessing the coverage of the housekeeping genes. Significant inter-hospital differences were observed for DNA quality (ddCq and Q-value), but not for RNA quality (DV200). Differences were also observed among cancer types, with Q-value being the lowest in lung and the highest in cervix, while DV200 was the highest in lung and the lowest in bowel. Conclusions: We demonstrated distinct characteristics and high predictive performances of ddCq, Q-value, and DV200. Variations were observed in the nucleic acid quality across hospitals and cancer types. Further study is warranted on preanalytical factors in comprehensive cancer genomic profiling tests.

BRCA2-positive lung adenocarcinoma treated with olaparib: A case report.

A 66-year-old woman was found to have abnormal shadows on a chest radiograph at a previous hospital 4 years ago, which led to a diagnosis of lung adenocarcinoma, cT2aN1M1b stage IVA. First-line treatment included carboplatin and paclitaxel plus thoracic radiotherapy and stereotactic radiation therapy for brain metastases. The patient later underwent second-line pemetrexed treatment, followed by third-line nivolumab, fourth-line docetaxel and bevacizumab, fifth-line tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil, and sixth-line gemcitabine. Two years ago, after observing an increase in the primary lesion and carcinoembryonic antigen levels (104.0 ng/mL), a computed tomography-guided biopsy was performed from the primary site of lung cancer. A cancer genomic profiling test (FoundationOne® CDx cancer genome profile) revealed a breast cancer susceptibility (BRCA) 2 gene mutation. Therefore, she started taking olaparib. The treatment led to stable disease for approximately 2 years.

A Comprehensive Pan-Cancer Analysis Reveals Cyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor 2A Gene as a Potential Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarker in Colon Adenocarcinoma.

Introduction Cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A) is a suppressor carcinogenic gene that is upregulated across various types of cancer including breast, liver, thyroid, and bile duct cancer due to its crucial role in cell cycle regulation and cell division. Nevertheless, it is mostly investigated at the genetic level, but it is still poorly studied on pan-cancer analysis as a biomarker and this study shows its significant potential diagnostic and prognostic characteristics. However, this study aims to investigate the role of CDKN2A as a diagnostic and prognostic biomarker across various types of cancer focusing primarily on colon adenocarcinoma (COAD). Methods We investigated CDKN2A gene expression in a pan-cancer analysis across different types of cancer to show its diagnostic potential characteristics by using various bioinformatic tools, including Tumor Immune Estimation Resource (TIMER) 2.0, Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis (GEPIA), and University of Alabama at Birmingham Cancer Data Analysis Portal (UALCAN) database. TIMER was used to profile gene expression across 32 types of cancer composed of 10,000 RNA-seq samples obtained from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and to analyze the tumor-infiltrating immune cells. In addition, GEPIA and UALCAN were further used to analyze gene expression, in terms of gene regulation, pathological stages, and clinical parameters, including gender, age, and race. Therefore, we used GEPIA, UALCAN, and Kaplan-Meier plotter particularly across adenocarcinoma to investigate CDKN2A prognosis by studying its high expression association with the patient's overall survival rate to show the tumor progression. Then, we looked into the genetic alteration of CDKN2A by using the cBio Cancer Genomics Portal (cBioPortal), including 10 pan-cancer studies. We concluded the analysis with gene validation by using a public cohort in Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO). Results CDKN2A showed a trend of upregulation in most cancers and it was significantly upregulated in five cancers, which were commonly identifiable in three databases, including breast invasive carcinoma (p < 0.001), kidney chromophobe (p < 0.001), kidney renal clear cell carcinoma (p < 0.001), kidney renal papillary cell carcinoma (p < 0.001), and COAD (p < 0.001). The upregulation was significantly different in association with pathogenic stages II and III (pr(>F) = 0.00234) which was identifiable significantly in COAD more than in other cancers. The gene showed a high upregulation in association with poor prognosis of patient survival in three cancers, including COAD (log-rank p = 0.011), mesothelioma (log-rank p = 5.9e-07), and liver hepatocellular carcinoma (log-rank p = 0.0045). Therefore, COAD was the only comprehensively analyzed tumor to show a diagnostic and prognostic potential characteristic during high upregulation of CDKN2A. Furthermore, CDKN2A displayed a rare mutation in the form of deep deletion (9%) and revealed an upregulation associated with CD4+ T cells (p = 0.0108), macrophage (p = 0.0073), and neutrophils (p = 0.0272) as immune cells infiltrating COAD.  Conclusion Our study demonstrates the pan-cancer relevance of CDKN2A and revealed a novelty in showing CDKN2A underscores its potential as a diagnostic prognostic biomarker in COAD since CDKN2A is mostly studied at a genetic level across COAD.

Role of Tumor Molecular Profiling With FoundationOne®CDx in Advanced Solid Tumors: A Single-Centre Experience From Romania.

Background In the field of precision oncology, comprehensive genomic profiling tests play a very important role by providing a complex understanding of the molecular characteristics of malignant tumors. Therefore, next-generation sequencing (NGS) has become a valuable tool in various aspects of cancer care from diagnosis and monitoring to treatment selection and personalized cancer treatment. Our aim was to evaluate the role of tumor molecular profiling in tailored treatment selection. Methods In our study, we conducted a retrospective analysis to assess the practicality of utilizing NGS testing in patients with metastatic solid tumors. The genomic testing was performed on blood or tissue samples from a fresh biopsy, less than six months old, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1 was evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Results A total of 75 tests were performed on 66 patients between 2019 and 2022, with a success rate of 80%. The most common pathologies were gastro-intestinal tract cancer (26%), breast cancer (14%), non-small cell lung cancer (11%), and pancreatic cancer (11%). There were 9% liquid biopsies and 91% tissue biopsies. From all 66 patients tested, 55 had at least one genetic alteration. The most frequent genetic alteration found was TP53 (n=32) followed by KRAS (n=15) and BRCA1/2 (n=12) mutations. There were nine patients tested (14%) that presented a high tumor mutational burden, and only one patient presented high microsatellite instability. There were 37 patients (56%) with actionable alterations found from which 14 received matched therapy and four patients were enrolled in clinical trials. The NGS testing played a significant role in determining the next therapeutic strategy in 20 out of 66 patients (30.3%). Conclusion From all the patients included in our analysis, 83% had at least one mutation that is known to be of pathogenic significance but only 23% received treatment selected by the analysis of the tumor's genome, and only 6% were included in a clinical trial. This moderate success of personalized medicine using NGS testing highlights the importance of evaluating the factors that could lead to further improvement.

Utility of Precision Oncology Using Cancer Genomic Profiling for Head and Neck Malignancies.

BACKGROUND/AIM: In recent years, individual patient cancer genomic profiling (CGP) has become more accessible, allowing determination of therapeutic strategies using driver gene mutations in cancer therapy. However, this precision oncology approach, tailored to specific patients, remains experimental. In this study, we verified the feasibility and benefit of using CGP to guide treatment of malignant head and neck tumors. We aimed to evaluate the profiling and clinical courses of patients with head and neck malignancies who underwent CGP and determine the extent to which CGP for head and neck malignancies has resulted in beneficial drug administration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed CGP results, prognosis, and drug administration status in 27 patients. These patients had completed (or were expected to complete) standard therapy or had rare cancers without standard therapy. RESULTS: At least one somatic actionable gene alteration was seen in 25 (92.6%) patients, with a median number of actionable alterations per patient of 4 (range=0-11). Drugs in clinical trials were recommended to 22 (81.5%) patients, but none could participate. However, 3 patients (11.1%) could use approved drugs off-label based on CGP results. The most common genetic abnormality was TP53 (66.7%), with TP53 mutations leading to poor prognosis. CONCLUSION: CGP is clinically useful and serves as a bridge to increase the number of therapeutic options. However, candidate drugs confirmed using CGP may be ineffective when administered. Therefore, oncologists should not blindly accept CGP therapeutic recommendations but should make recommendations that lead to optimal therapies after proper verification.

Usefulness of on-site cytology of liver tumor biopsy in specimen sampling for cancer genomic profiling test.

AIM: Appropriate sample selection with a tumor fraction ≥20% without necrosis contamination is required for successful cancer genomic profiling (CGP). Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is performed to assess adequate sampling. METHOD: This retrospective study included 54 patients who underwent CGP using liver tumor biopsy specimen with ROSE. RESULT: The sampling success rate (98.1%) was higher than the previously reported 77.5%-88.9%. ROSE was performed once in 51 patients and twice in three patients; for those undergoing ROSE twice, the first ROSE was negative for malignancy, or showed few tumor cells with necrotic cell contamination, while the second ROSE obtained from another location showed abundant malignant cells. In these patients, the CGP was successful using the second specimen, though the first sample did not meet the required criteria for CGP test. CONCLUSION: Performing ROSE during liver tumor biopsy may be useful for CGP test sampling because ROSE prevents sampling errors and contributes to adequate sampling.

Effect of comprehensive cancer genomic profiling on therapeutic strategies and clinical outcomes in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: A prospective multicenter study.

Characterization of the genomic landscape of biliary tract cancer (BTC) may lead to applying genotype-matched therapy for patients with this disease. Evidence that comprehensive cancer genomic profiling (CGP) guides genotype-matched therapy to improve clinical outcomes is building. However, the significance of CGP in patients with BTC remains unclarified in clinical practice. Therefore, the purposes of this study were to assess the utility of CGP and identify associations between clinical outcomes and genomic alterations in patients with BTC. In this prospective analysis, detection rates for actionable genomic alterations and access rates for genotype-matched therapy were analyzed in 72 patients with advanced BTC who had undergone commercial CGP. Cox regression analyses assessed relationships between overall survival and genomic alterations detected with CGP. The most common genomic alterations detected were TP53 (41, 56.9%), followed by CDKN2A/B (24, 33.3%/20, 27.8%), and KRAS (20, 27.8%). Actionable genomic alterations were identified in 58.3% (42/72) of patients. Detection rates for FGFR2 fusions, IDH1 mutations, and BRAF V600E were low in this cohort. Eight (11.1%) patients received genotype-matched therapy. For patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), CDKN2A/B loss was associated with shorter overall survival. These real-world data demonstrate that CGP can identify therapeutic options in patients with advanced BTC. CDKN2A/B loss was identified as a poor prognostic factor in patients with ICC. Thus, this study provides a rationale for considering CGP in planning therapeutic strategies for advanced BTC.

Cancer Genomic Profiling in Colorectal Cancer: Current Challenges in Subtyping Colorectal Cancers Based on Somatic and Germline Variants.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a heterogeneous disease caused by the accumulation of multistep genetic alterations under the influence of genomic instability. Different backgrounds of genomic instability, such as chromosomal instability, microsatellite instability, hypermutated-single nucleotide variants, and genome stable-induced transformation in the colonic epithelium, can result in adenomas, adenocarcinomas, and metastatic tumors. Characterization of molecular subtypes and establishment of treatment policies based on each subtype will lead to better treatment outcomes and an improved selection of molecularly targeted agents. In Japan, cancer precision medicine has been introduced in the National Health Insurance program through the addition of the cancer genomic profiling (CGP) examination. It has also become possible to access a large amount of genomic information, including information on pathogenic somatic and germline variants, incomparable to conventional diagnostic tests. This information enables us to apply research data to clinical decision-making, benefiting patients and their healthy family members. In this article, we discuss the important molecules and signaling pathways presumed to be the driver genes of CRC progression and the signal transduction system in which they are involved. Molecular subtypes of CRC based on CGP examinations and gene expression profiles have been established in The Cancer Genome Atlas Network with the advent of next-generation sequencing technology. We will also discuss the recommended management of secondary/germline findings, pathogenic germline variants, and presumed germline pathogenic variants obtained from CGP examination and review the current challenges to better understand these data in a new era of cancer genomic medicine.

The Utility of Next-Generation Sequencing in the Treatment Decision-Making for Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a fast and relatively inexpensive method to sequence a large number of genes with crucial importance in cancer medicine. Nowadays, NGS is frequently used in diagnostic and therapeutic decisions in oncology; however, recently, it was demonstrated that only a few cancer sites actually benefit from this assessment. Moreover, the association of a mutant gene with a targeted drug is not always as predicted during in-vitro trials and is often not associated with tumor response. To predict the efficacy of such an association several classification systems have been developed. The present review aims to analyze the most important tumor agnostic treatment trials and assess how they shape selecting cancer patients for NGS. Moreover, it aims to determine how mutation-drug associations can be classified by their targetability and level of evidence of efficacy in non-small-cell lung cancer.