Molecular analysis for refractory rare cancers: Sequencing battle continues - learnings for the MOSCATO-01 study

The French multicentric molecular analysis platforms and personalized medicine trials MOST, MOST Plus and MEGAMOST

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In this manuscript we describe the academic French multicentric molecular analysis platforms including PROFILER, promoted by Centre Léon Berard, and the multicentric personalized medicine trials MOST, MOST Plus and MEGAMOST.

PATIENTS/MATERIAL AND METHODS

MOST, MOST Plus and MEGAMOST comprise 14 cohorts with different targeted agents and immunotherapies.

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION

PROFILER has recruited 5,991 patients in 10 years, MOST and MOST Plus 875 patients since 2014 and MEGAMOST 172 patients since 2020, and are still ongoing. We provide a description of the local, national and international implications of these initiatives, and we review the results of the sorafenib and olaparib cohorts.

Agnostic Administration of Targeted Anticancer Drugs: Looking for a Balance between Hype and Caution

Many tumors have well-defined vulnerabilities, thus potentially allowing highly specific and effective treatment. There is a spectrum of actionable genetic alterations which are shared across various tumor types and, therefore, can be targeted by a given drug irrespective of tumor histology. Several agnostic drug-target matches have already been approved for clinical use, e.g., immune therapy for tumors with microsatellite instability (MSI) and/or high tumor mutation burden (TMB), NTRK1-3 and RET inhibitors for cancers carrying rearrangements in these kinases, and dabrafenib plus trametinib for BRAF V600E mutated malignancies. Multiple lines of evidence suggest that this histology-independent approach is also reasonable for tumors carrying ALK and ROS1 translocations, biallelic BRCA1/2 inactivation and/or homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), strong HER2 amplification/overexpression coupled with the absence of other MAPK pathway-activating mutations, etc. On the other hand, some well-known targets are not agnostic: for example, PD-L1 expression is predictive for the efficacy of PD-L1/PD1 inhibitors only in some but not all cancer types. Unfortunately, the individual probability of finding a druggable target in a given tumor is relatively low, even with the use of comprehensive next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays. Nevertheless, the rapidly growing utilization of NGS will significantly increase the number of patients with highly unusual or exceptionally rare tumor-target combinations. Clinical trials may provide only a framework for treatment attitudes, while the decisions for individual patients usually require case-by-case consideration of the probability of deriving benefit from agnostic versus standard therapy, drug availability, associated costs, and other circumstances. The existing format of data dissemination may not be optimal for agnostic cancer medicine, as conventional scientific journals are understandably biased towards the publication of positive findings and usually discourage the submission of case reports. Despite all the limitations and concerns, histology-independent drug-target matching is certainly feasible and, therefore, will be increasingly utilized in the future.

Patients' selection and trial matching in early-phase oncology clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Early-phase clinical trials (EPCT) represent an important part of innovations in medical oncology and a valuable therapeutic option for patients with metastatic cancers, particularly in the era of precision medicine. Nevertheless, adult patients' participation in oncology clinical trials is low, ranging from 2% to 8% worldwide, with unequal access, and up to 40% risk of early discontinuation in EPCT, mostly due to cancer-related complications.

DESIGN

We review the tools and initiatives to increase patients' orientation and access to early phase cancer clinical trials, and to limit early discontinuation.

RESULTS

New approaches to optimize the early-phase clinical trial referring process in oncology include automatic trial matching, tools to facilitate the estimation of patients' prognostic and/or to better predict patients' eligibility to clinical trials. Classical and innovative approaches should be associated to double patient recruitment, improve clinical trial enrollment experience and reduce early discontinuation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas EPCT are essential for patients to access the latest medical innovations in oncology, offering the appropriate trial when it is relevant for patients should increase by organizational and technological innovations. The oncologic community will need to closely monitor their performance, portability and simplicity for implementation in daily clinical practice.

Platform trial for off-label oncology drugs using comprehensive genomic profiling under the universal public healthcare system: the BELIEVE trial

BACKGROUND

Precision medicine has transformed cancer treatment by focusing on personalized approaches based on genomic abnormalities. However, comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) and access to targeted therapies are limited in Japan. This study investigates the BELIEVE trial, which aims to improve drug accessibility for patients with actionable genetic abnormalities through off-label drug administration.

METHODS

The BELIEVE trial is a platform trial with a single master protocol, conducted under the Clinical Trials Act and the patient-proposed health services (PPHS) scheme. Eligible patients with solid tumors exhibiting actionable alterations were enrolled, and CGP tests covered by national health insurance were employed. Treatment selection, study drugs from collaborating pharmaceutical companies, and treatment schedules adhered to predefined protocols. Primary and secondary endpoints were evaluated, and statistical analysis was conducted based on patient response rates.

RESULTS

The BELIEVE trial offered treatment opportunities for patients with relapse/refractory disease who lacked standard therapies or clinical trial options. This study addresses unmet medical needs and contributes to the establishment of precision medicine systems. Similar trials like NCI-MATCH and TAPUR are being conducted globally. The BELIEVE trial provides a platform for off-label drug administration, collects essential clinical data, and contributes to drug approval applications.

CONCLUSION

The BELIEVE trial provides hope for patients with actionable genetic abnormalities by facilitating access to targeted therapies through off-label drug administration. It establishes a regulatory framework and promotes collaboration between industry and academia by expanding organ-specific and cross-organ biomarker-based treatments.

Actionable molecular alterations in newly diagnosed and recurrent IDH1/2 wild-type glioblastoma patients and therapeutic implications: a large mono-institutional experience using extensive next-generation sequencing analysis

BACKGROUND

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels enable the identification of alterations in cancer-related genes. This may guide a molecularly targeted strategy for the treatment of glioblastoma (GBM).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively analysed data obtained using FoundationOne®CDx in a large cohort of IDH1/2 wild-type GBM. We aimed to 1) identify potentially actionable molecular alterations at diagnosis and/or recurrence based on ESMO Scale for Clinical Actionability of Molecular Targets (ESCAT) defined categories of targetability, 2) understand the clinical implications of NGS in terms of access to and activity of targeted therapies.

RESULTS

In 442 samples, an NGS profile was available in 98.2%. The median time from diagnosis to NGS profiling was 7.4 months (interquartile range (IQR): 3.4-13.2). Although about half of the patients had at least one actionable molecular alteration, only 3.4% of them were classified as ESCAT IB-IC and 6.7% as ESCAT IIB. Only 36 patients (10.5%) received personalised treatment in clinical trials or as off-label/compassionate use from second-line (median line 3). Most patients did not receive targeted therapy due to clinical deterioration/death (49.6%). Patients treated with dabrafenib/trametinib (9 patients) had the highest disease control rate of 77% and an objective response rate of 22%, with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.2 months. No complete/partial responses were seen with the other regimens. 4/9 (44.4%) patients on anti-BRAF/anti-MEK, 2/4 patients (50%) on erdafitinib and 1/1 patient on capmatinib had a PFS ratio > 1.3. One recurrent GBM patient with ROS1-GOCP fusion maintained a complete response for 11.3 months on entrectinib.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated the feasibility of NGS in GBM samples. As the number of clinically relevant targets was limited and only a small group of GBM patients were treated with targeted therapy, NGS testing should be performed in the context of clinical trials. Our results support the activity of anti-BRAF/anti-MEK, while for the other agents prospective study results are needed to draw solid conclusions.

Usefulness and real-world outcomes of next generation sequencing testing in patients with cancer: an observational study on the impact of selection based on clinical judgement

Background

Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) panels are increasingly used in advanced patients with cancer to guide therapy. There is, however, controversy about when should these panels be used, and about their impact on the clinical course.

Methods

In an observational study of 139 patients with cancer having an NGS test [from January 1st, 2017 to December 30th, 2020, in two hospitals (Hospital Universitario de La Princesa and Hospital Universitario Quironsalud Madrid) from Spain], we evaluated whether the clinical course (progression-free survival, PFS) was influenced by drug-based criteria [druggable alterations, receiving a recommended drug, having a favourable ESCAT category (ESMO Scale for Clinical Actionability of molecular Targets)] or clinical judgement criteria.

Findings

In 111 of 139 cases that were successfully profiled, PFS was not significantly influenced by either having druggable alterations [median PFS for patients with druggable alterations was 170 (95% C.I.: 139-200) days compared to 299 (95% C.I.: 114-483) for those without; p = 0.37], receiving a proposed matching agent [median PFS for patients receiving a genomics-informed drug was 195 days (95% C.I.: 144-245), compared with 156 days for those that did not (95% C.I.: 85-226); p = 0.50], or having favourable ESCAT categories [median PFS for patients with ESCAT I-III was 183 days (95% C.I.: 104-261), compared with 180 (95% C.I.:144-215) for patients with ESCAT IV-X; p = 0.87]. In contrast, NGS testing performed within clinical judgement showed a significantly improved PFS [median PFS for patients that were profiled under the recommended scenarios was 319 days (95% C.I.: 0-658), compared to 123 days (95% C.I.: 89-156) in the non-recommended categories; p = 0.0020].

Interpretation

According to our data, real-world outcomes after NGS testing provide evidence of the benefit of clinical judgement in patients with either advanced cancers that routinely need multiple genetic markers, patients with advanced rare cancers, or patients that are screened for molecular clinical trials. By contrast, NGS does not seem to be valuable when performed in cases with a poor PS, rapidly progressing cancer, short expected lifetime, or cases with no standard therapeutic options.

Funding

RC, NR-L and MQF are recipients of the PMP22/00032 grant, funded by the ISCIII and co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The study also received funds from the CRIS Contra el Cancer Foundation.