Molecular profiling of advanced malignancies guides first-line N-of-1 treatments in the I-PREDICT treatment-naïve study

Factors for a broad technology assessment of comprehensive genomic profiling in advanced cancer, a systematic review

Comprehensive Genomic Profiling (CGP) allows for the identification of many targets. Reimbursement decision-making is, however, challenging because besides the health benefits of on-label treatments and costs, other factors related to diagnostic and treatment pathways may also play a role. The aim of this study was to identify which other factors are relevant for the technology assessment of CGP and to summarize the available evidence for these factors. After a scoping search and two expert sessions, five factors were identified: feasibility, test journey, wider implications of diagnostic results, organisation of laboratories, and "scientific spillover". Subsequently, a systematic search identified 83 studies collecting mainly evidence for the factors "test journey" and "wider implications of diagnostic results". Its nature was, however, of limited value for decision-making. We recommend the use of comparative strategies, uniformity in outcome definitions, and the inclusion of a comprehensive set of factors in future evidence generation.

Unlocking the potential of Molecular Tumor Boards: from cutting-edge data interpretation to innovative clinical pathways

The emerging era of precision medicine is characterized by an increasing availability of targeted anticancer therapies and by the parallel development of techniques to obtain more refined molecular data, whose interpretation may not always be straightforward. Molecular tumor boards gather various professional figures, in order to leverage the analysis of molecular data and provide prognostic and predictive insights for clinicians. In addition to healthcare development, they could also become a tool to promote knowledge and research spreading. A growing body of evidence on the application of molecular tumor boards to clinical practice is forming and positive signals are emerging, although a certain degree of heterogeneity exists. This work analyzes molecular tumor boards' potential workflows, figures involved, data sources, sample matrices and eligible patients, as well as available evidence and learning examples. The emerging concept of multi-institutional, disease-specific molecular tumor boards is also considered by presenting two ongoing nationwide experiences.

Tumor-Agnostic Therapy-The Final Step Forward in the Cure for Human Neoplasms?

Cancer accounted for 10 million deaths in 2020, nearly one in every six deaths annually. Despite advancements, the contemporary clinical management of human neoplasms faces a number of challenges. Surgical removal of tumor tissues is often not possible technically, while radiation and chemotherapy pose the risk of damaging healthy cells, tissues, and organs, presenting complex clinical challenges. These require a paradigm shift in developing new therapeutic modalities moving towards a more personalized and targeted approach. The tumor-agnostic philosophy, one of these new modalities, focuses on characteristic molecular signatures of transformed cells independently of their traditional histopathological classification. These include commonly occurring DNA aberrations in cancer cells, shared metabolic features of their homeostasis or immune evasion measures of the tumor tissues. The first dedicated, FDA-approved tumor-agnostic agent's profound progression-free survival of 78% in mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer paved the way for the accelerated FDA approvals of novel tumor-agnostic therapeutic compounds. Here, we review the historical background, current status, and future perspectives of this new era of clinical oncology.

[The collaborative project "Personalized medicine for oncology" (PM4Onco) as part of the Medical Informatics Initiative (MII)]

The collaborative project Personalized Medicine for Oncology (PM4Onco) was launched in 2023 as part of the National Decade against Cancer (NKD) and is executed within the Medical Informatics Initiative (MII). Its aim is to establish a sustainable infrastructure for the integration and use of data from clinical and biomedical research and therefore combines the experience and preliminary work of all four consortia of the MII and the leading oncology centers in Germany. The data provided by PM4Onco will be prepared in a suitable form to support decision making in molecular tumor boards. This concept and infrastructure will be extended to 23 participating partner sites and thus improve access to targeted therapies based on clinical information and analysis of molecular genetic alterations in tumors at different stages of the disease. This will help to improve the treatment and prognosis of tumor diseases.Clinical cancer registries are involved in the project to improve data quality through standardized documentation routines. Clinical experts advise on the expansion of the core datasets for personalized medicine (PM). Information on quality of life and treatment outcomes reported by patients in questionnaires, which is rarely collected outside of clinical trials, will make a significant contribution. Patient representatives are involved from the onset to ensure that the important perspective of patients is taken into account in the decision-making process. PM4Onco thus creates an alliance between the MII, oncological centers of excellence, clinical cancer registries, young scientists, patients, and citizens to strengthen and advance PM in cancer therapy.

Omics-based molecular classifications empowering in precision oncology

BACKGROUND

In the past decades, cancer enigmatical heterogeneity at distinct expression levels could interpret disparities in therapeutic response and prognosis. It built hindrances to precision medicine, a tactic to tailor customized treatment informed by the tumors' molecular profile. Single-omics analysis dissected the biological features associated with carcinogenesis to some extent but still failed to revolutionize cancer treatment as expected. Integrated omics analysis incorporated tumor biological networks from diverse layers and deciphered a holistic overview of cancer behaviors, yielding precise molecular classification to facilitate the evolution and refinement of precision medicine.

CONCLUSION

This review outlined the biomarkers at multiple expression layers to tutor molecular classification and pinpoint tumor diagnosis, and explored the paradigm shift in precision therapy: from single- to multi-omics-based subtyping to optimize therapeutic regimens. Ultimately, we firmly believe that by parsing molecular characteristics, omics-based typing will be a powerful assistant for precision oncology.

[Personalized medicine in oncology]

Due to the considerable technological progress in molecular and genetic diagnostics as well as increasing insights into the molecular pathogenesis of diseases, there has been a fundamental paradigm shift in the past two decades from a "one-size-fits-all approach" to personalized, molecularly informed treatment strategies. Personalized medicine or precision medicine focuses on the genetic, physiological, molecular, and biochemical differences between individuals and considers their effects on the development, prevention, and treatment of diseases. As a pioneer of personalized medicine, the field of oncology is particularly noteworthy, where personalized diagnostics and treatment have led to lasting change in the treatment of cancer patients in recent years. In this article, the significant change towards personalized treatment concepts, especially in the field of personalized oncology, will be discussed and examined in more detail.

Tumor mutational burden in colorectal cancer: Implications for treatment

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment of several advanced solid cancers, in colorectal cancer, the transformative benefit of these innovative medicines is currently limited to those with deficient mismatch repair or high microsatellite instability. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) has emerged as a potential predictor of immunotherapy benefit, but the lack of standardization in its assessment and reporting has hindered the introduction of this biomarker in routine clinical practice. Here, we compiled 45 colorectal cancer studies utilizing numerical thresholds for high-TMB. In this group of studies, TMB cut-offs ranged from 6.88 to 41 mut/Mb and were most often set at 10, 17, or 20 mut/Mb. Additionally, we observed divergent TMB definitions and inconsistent disclosure of specific methodological details, which collectively emphasize the substantial lack of harmonization within the field. Ongoing efforts to harmonize TMB assessment will be critical to validate TMB as a predictive marker of immunotherapy response.

High indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase transcript levels predict better outcome after front-line cancer immunotherapy

Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1), which catabolizes tryptophan, is a potential target to unlock the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. Correlations between IDO1 and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) efficacy remain unclear. Herein, we investigated IDO1 transcript expression across cancers and clinical outcome correlations. High IDO1 transcripts were more frequent in uterine (54.2%) and ovarian cancer (37.2%) but varied between and within malignancies. High IDO1 RNA expression was associated with high expression of PD-L1 (immune checkpoint ligand), CXCL10 (an effector T cell recruitment chemokine), and STAT1 (a component of the JAK-STAT pathway) (all multivariable p < 0.05). PIK3CA and CTCF alterations were more frequent in the high IDO1 group. High IDO1 expression was an independent predictor of progression-free survival (adjusted HR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.20-0.99, p = 0.049) and overall survival (adjusted HR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.87, p = 0.026) after front-line ICIs. IDO1 expression warrants further exploration as a predictive biomarker for immunotherapy. Moreover, co-expressed immunoregulatory molecules merit exploration for co-targeting.

Navigating uncharted territory: a case report and literature review on the remarkable response to personalized crizotinib containing combinational therapy in a pazopanib refractory patient with novel alterations

This paper presents a patient with a novel Ig-like-III domain fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR2) alteration (W290_P307>C) along with CDKN2A/B alterations and a cadherin 1 (CDH1) alteration. Initial responsiveness to pazopanib monotherapy was encouraging, yet progression occurred after 7.5 months. Following progression, the molecular tumor board recommended a combination therapy approach comprising pazopanib, crizotinib, and palbociclib to target all of the changed pathways at the same time. Pazopanib was chosen to specifically target the FGFR2 alteration, while crizotinib was selected due to its potential synthetic lethality with the CDH1 alteration. In addition, the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib was administered to address the CDKN2A/B alterations. The patient exhibited a remarkable and sustained response to this innovative combination. This case not only underscores the potential of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, exemplified by pazopanib, as a viable alternative for patients without access to pan-FGFR inhibitors, but it also emphasizes their efficacy beyond commonly detected point mutations and rearrangements. Notably, the outstanding response to combination therapy, including crizotinib, in a patient with a CDH1 alteration, further substantiates the preclinical evidence of synthetic lethality between crizotinib and CDH1 alterations. To our knowledge, this represents the first clinical evidence demonstrating the efficacy of crizotinib in a patient with a CDH1 alteration. Through careful dosage adjustments and consideration of individualized genomic information, this case exemplifies the power of personalized medicine in achieving favorable treatment outcomes.

Precision Oncology in Pediatric Cancer Surgery

Pediatric precision oncology has provided a greater understanding of the wide range of molecular alterations in difficult-to-treat or rare tumors with the aims of increasing survival as well as decreasing toxicity and morbidity from current cytotoxic therapies. In this article, the authors discuss the current state of pediatric precision oncology which has increased access to novel targeted therapies while also providing a framework for clinical implementation in this unique population. The authors evaluate the targetable mutations currently under investigation-with a focus on pediatric solid tumors-and discuss the key surgical implications associated with novel targeted therapies.

Evolution of Precision Oncology, Personalized Medicine, and Molecular Tumor Boards

With multiple molecular targeted therapies available for patients with cancer that correspond to a specific genetic alteration, the selection of the best treatment is essential to ensure therapeutic efficacy. Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) play a key role in this process to deliver personalized medicine to patients with cancer in a multidisciplinary manner. Historically, personalized medicine has been offered to patients with advanced cancer, but the incorporation of molecular targeted therapies and immunotherapy into the perioperative setting requires clinicians to understand the role of the MTB. Evidence is accumulating to support feasibility and survival benefit in patients treated with matched therapy.

Viewing the immune checkpoint VISTA: landscape and outcomes across cancers

BACKGROUND

Optimizing immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy may require identification of co-targetable checkpoint pathways via immune profiling. Herein, we analyzed the transcriptomic expression and clinical correlates of V-domain immunoglobulin suppressor of T-cell activation (VISTA), a promising targetable checkpoint.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

RNA sequencing was carried out on 514 tissues reflecting diverse advanced/metastatic cancers. Expression of eight immune checkpoint markers [lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3), tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily 14 (TNFRSF14), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), programmed death-ligand 2 (PD-L2), B- and T-lymphocyte attenuator (BTLA), T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain-containing protein 3 (TIM-3), cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4)], in addition to VISTA, was analyzed, along with clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

High VISTA RNA expression was observed in 32% of tumors (66/514) and was the most common highly expressed checkpoint among the nine assessed. High VISTA expression was independently correlated with high BTLA, TIM-3, and TNFRSF14, and with a diagnosis of pancreatic, small intestine, and stomach cancer. VISTA transcript levels did not correlate with overall survival (OS) from metastatic/advanced disease in the pan-cancer cohort or with immunotherapy outcome (progression-free survival and OS from the start of ICI) in 217 ICI-treated patients. However, in ICI-treated pancreatic cancer patients (n = 16), median OS was significantly shorter (from immunotherapy initiation) for the high- versus not-high-VISTA groups (0.28 versus 1.21 years) (P = 0.047); in contrast, VISTA levels were not correlated with OS in 36 pancreatic cancer patients who did not receive ICI.

CONCLUSION

High VISTA expression correlates with high BTLA, TIM-3, and TNFRSF14 checkpoint-related molecules and with poorer post-immunotherapy survival in pancreatic cancer, consistent with prior literature indicating that VISTA is prominently expressed on CD68+ macrophages in pancreatic cancers and requiring validation in larger prospective studies. Immunomic analysis may be important for individualized precision immunotherapy.

Tumor-agnostic baskets to N-of-1 platform trials and real-world data: Transforming precision oncology clinical trial design

Choosing the right drug(s) for the right patient via advanced genomic sequencing and multi-omic interrogation is the sine qua non of precision cancer medicine. Traditional cancer clinical trial designs follow well-defined protocols to evaluate the efficacy of new therapies in patient groups, usually identified by their histology/tissue of origin of their malignancy. In contrast, precision medicine seeks to optimize benefit in individual patients, i.e., to define who benefits rather than determine whether the overall group benefits. Since cancer is a disease driven by molecular alterations, innovative trial designs, including biomarker-defined tumor-agnostic basket trials, are driving ground-breaking regulatory approvals and deployment of gene- and immune-targeted drugs. Molecular interrogation further reveals the disruptive reality that advanced cancers are extraordinarily complex and individually distinct. Therefore, optimized treatment often requires drug combinations and N-of-1 customization, addressed by a new generation of N-of-1 trials. Real-world data and structured master registry trials are also providing massive datasets that are further fueling a transformation in oncology. Finally, machine learning is facilitating rapid discovery, and it is plausible that high-throughput computing, in silico modeling, and 3-dimensional printing may be exploitable in the near future to discover and design customized drugs in real time.

If it's a target, it's a pan-cancer target: Tissue is not the issue

Cancer is traditionally diagnosed and treated on the basis of its organ of origin (e.g., lung or colon cancer). However, organ-of-origin diagnostics does not reveal the underlying oncogenic drivers. Fortunately, molecular diagnostics have advanced at a breathtaking pace, and it is increasingly apparent that cancer is a disease of the genome. Hence, we now have multiple genomic biomarker-based, tissue-agnostic Food and Drug Administration approvals for both gene- and immune-targeted therapies (larotrectinib/entrectinib, for NTRK fusions; selpercatinib, RET fusions; dabrafenib plus trametinib, BRAFV600E mutations; pembrolizumab/dostarlimab, microsatellite instability; and pembrolizumab for high tumor mutational burden; pemigatinib is also approved for FGFR1-rearranged myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms). There are emerging targets as well, including but not limited to ALK, BRCA and/or homologous repair deficiency, ERBB2 (HER2), IDH1/2, KIT, KRASG12C, NRG1, and VHL. Many tissue-agnostic approvals center on rare/ultra-rare biomarkers (often < 1 % of cancers), necessitating screening hundreds of tumors to find a single one harboring the cognate molecular alteration. Approval has generally been based on small single-arm studies (<30-100 patients) with high response rates (>30 % to > 75 %) of remarkable durability. Because of biomarker rarity, single-gene testing is not practical; next generation sequencing of hundreds of genes must be performed to obtain timely answers. Resistance to biomarker-driven therapeutics is often due to secondary mutations or co-driver gene defects; studies are now addressing the need for customized drug combinations matched to the complex molecular alteration portfolio in each tumor. Future investigation should expand tissue-agnostic therapeutics to encompass both hematologic and solid malignancies and include biomarkers beyond those that are DNA-based.

Adaptive Darwinian off-target resistance mechanisms to selective RET inhibition in RET driven cancer

Patients treated with RET protein tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) selpercatinib or pralsetinib develop RET TKI resistance by secondary RET mutations or alterative oncogenes, of which alterative oncogenes pose a greater challenge for disease management because of multiple potential mechanisms and the unclear tolerability of drug combinations. A patient with metastatic medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC) harboring a RET activation loop D898_E901del mutation was treated with selpercatinib. Molecular alterations were monitored with tissue biopsies and cfDNA during the treatment. The selpercatinib-responsive MTC progressed with an acquired ETV6::NTRK3 fusion, which was controlled by selpercatinib plus the NTRK inhibitor larotrectinib. Subsequently, tumor progressed with an acquired EML4::ALK fusion. Combination of selpercatinib with the dual NTRK/ALK inhibitor entrectinib reduced the tumor burden, which was followed by appearance of NTRK3 solvent-front G623R mutation. Preclinical experiments validated selpercatinib plus larotrectinib or entrectinib inhibited RET/NTRK3 dependent cells, whereas selpercatinib plus entrectinib was necessary to inhibit cells with RET/NTRK3/ALK triple alterations or a mixture of cell population carrying these genetic alterations. Thus, RET-altered MTC adapted to selpercatinib and larotrectinib with acquisition of ETV6::NTRK3 and EML4::ALK oncogenes can be managed by combination of selpercatinib and entrectinib providing proof-of-concept of urgency of incorporating molecular profiling in real-time and personalized N-of-1 care transcending one-size-fits-all approach.

[Precision medicine in oncology]

Personalized oncology according to current practice is primarily based on tumor biology, which is translated into genomic biomarkers. Mutations in oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes are targeted by rationally designed drugs and, conversely, are used to inform tailored treatment strategies. Faster and cheaper technologies for DNA sequencing enable genomic medicine in a clinical routine setting. Genomic features, tumor biology and clinical implications are integrated into individual therapy recommendations by molecular tumor boards, which have been established at many cancer centers in Germany and worldwide throughout recent years. This article discusses the promises and limitations of genomics-centered precision oncology and highlights future avenues and alternative approaches to individualize cancer treatment.

Pan-cancer analysis of TIM-3 transcriptomic expression reveals high levels in pancreatic cancer and interpatient heterogeneity

BACKGROUND

T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain-containing protein 3 (TIM-3), an immune checkpoint receptor, dampens immune function. TIM-3 antagonists have entered the clinic.

METHODS

We analyzed TIM-3 transcriptomic expression in 514 diverse cancers. Transcript abundance was normalized to internal housekeeping genes and ranked (0-100 percentile) to a reference population (735 tumors; 35 histologies [high≥75 percentile rank]). Ninety tumors (17.5%) demonstrated high TIM-3 expression.

RESULTS

TIM-3 expression varied between and within tumor types. However, high TIM-3 expression was more common in pancreatic cancer (20/55 tumors, 36.4%; odds ratio, 95% confidence interval (pancreatic vs. other tumors) = 3.176 (1.733-5.818; p < 0.001, multivariate]). High TIM-3 also significantly and independently correlated with high PD-L1 (p = 0.014) and high CTLA-4 (p < 0.001) transcriptomic expression (multivariate).

CONCLUSIONS

These observations indicate that TIM-3 RNA expression is heterogeneous, but more common in pancreatic cancer and in tumors exploiting PD-L1 and CTLA-4 checkpoints. Clinical trials with patient selection for matched immune-targeted combinations may be warranted.

Home-run trials for rare cancers: giving the right drug(s) to the right patients at the right time and in the right place

In oncology clinical trials, many patients spend their final months at a central clinical trial facility far from home for "mandatory" protocol visits/diagnostic testing. Studies suggest that the travel strain may be greatest among patients living in low-income areas and/or participating in early-phase studies. In this regard, rare cancers constitute a special unmet need with limited therapeutic options and few trials. Though individually uncommon, rare cancers as a group constitute ~22% of the cancer burden; the portion of cancer burden may even be greater if biomarker-defined rare subsets of either a single cancer type or a tissue-agnostic subgroup are included. Exacerbating the access issue is the fact that, in addition to the paucity of trials, many centers will not activate existing single-arm trials, often due to accrual concerns, which may further disadvantage this patient group and also jeopardize trial completion. Decentralized clinical trials may resolve some of these challenges by allowing patients to participate from close to home. Decentralized clinical trials can take the form of being site-less, with the coordinating body working remotely and care provided by the home oncologist, or by taking the tack of National Cancer Institute/cooperative groups (e.g., NCI-MATCH genomics matching trial or SWOG1609 [NCI] DART immunotherapy rare cancer trial) using a platform design with multiple cohorts and opening at >1000 sites. Decentralized trials now also have supportive FDA guidance. Importantly, home-run trials permit clinical trial access to underserved groups, including those in rural areas and patients financially unable to travel to a central facility.

Overcoming Immune Checkpoint Therapy Resistance with SHP2 Inhibition in Cancer and Immune Cells: A Review of the Literature and Novel Combinatorial Approaches

SHP2 (Src Homology 2 Domain-Containing Phosphatase 2) is a protein tyrosine phosphatase widely expressed in various cell types. SHP2 plays a crucial role in different cellular processes, such as cell proliferation, differentiation, and survival. Aberrant activation of SHP2 has been implicated in multiple human cancers and is considered a promising therapeutic target for treating these malignancies. The PTPN11 gene and functions encode SHP2 as a critical signal transduction regulator that interacts with key signaling molecules in both the RAS/ERK and PD-1/PD-L1 pathways; SHP2 is also implicated in T-cell signaling. SHP2 may be inhibited by molecules that cause allosteric (bind to sites other than the active site and attenuate activation) or orthosteric (bind to the active site and stop activation) inhibition or via potent SHP2 degraders. These inhibitors have anti-proliferative effects in cancer cells and suppress tumor growth in preclinical models. In addition, several SHP2 inhibitors are currently in clinical trials for cancer treatment. This review aims to provide an overview of the current research on SHP2 inhibitors, including their mechanism of action, structure-activity relationships, and clinical development, focusing on immune modulation effects and novel therapeutic strategies in the immune-oncology field.

Cancer-Immunity Marker RNA Expression Levels across Gynecologic Cancers: Implications for Immunotherapy

Our objective was to characterize cancer-immunity marker expression in gynecologic cancers and compare immune landscapes between gynecologic tumor subtypes and with nongynecologic solid tumors. RNA expression levels of 51 cancer-immunity markers were analyzed in patients with gynecologic cancers versus nongynecologic cancers, and normalized to a reference population of 735 control cancers, ranked from 0 to 100, and categorized as low (0-24), moderate (25-74), or high (75-100) percentile rank. Of the 72 patients studied, 43 (60%) had ovarian, 24 (33%) uterine, and 5 (7%) cervical cancer. No two immune profiles were identical according to expression rank (0-100) or rank level (low, moderate, or high). Patients with cervical cancer had significantly higher expression level ranks of immune activating, proinflammatory, tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte markers, and checkpoints than patients with uterine or ovarian cancer (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). However, there were no significant differences in immune marker expression between uterine and ovarian cancers. Tumors with PD-L1 tumor proportional score (TPS) ≥1% versus 0% had significantly higher expression levels of proinflammatory markers (58 vs. 49%, P = 0.0004). Compared to patients with nongynecologic cancers, more patients with gynecologic cancers express high levels of IDO-1 (44 vs. 13%, P < 0.001), LAG3 (35 vs. 21%, P = 0.008), and IL10 (31 vs. 15%, P = 0.002.) Patients with gynecologic cancers have complex and heterogeneous immune landscapes that are distinct from patient to patient and from other solid tumors. High levels of IDO1 and LAG3 suggest that clinical trials with IDO1 inhibitors or LAG3 inhibitors, respectively, may be warranted in gynecologic cancers.

At the right dose: personalised (N-of-1) dosing for precision oncology

The objective of oncology therapeutics, especially in the age of precision medicine, is to give the right drug(s) to the right patient at the right time. Yet, a major challenge is finding the right dose for each patient. Determining safe and efficacious doses of oncology treatments, especially for novel combination therapies, can be challenging. Moreover, traditionally, dosing cancer drugs is based on giving each patient the same dose (a flat dose) or a dose based on surface area/weight. But patients' ability to tolerate drugs is influenced by additional factors including, but not limited to age, gender, race, comorbidities, organ function, and metabolism. Herein, we present evidence that, in the era of targeted drugs, individualised drug dosing determined by starting at reduced doses and using intrapatient dose escalation can yield safe and effective personalised dosing of novel combinations of approved drugs that have not previously undergone formal phase I trials and can also optimise dosing of tested drug regimens.

Cancer Care by Committee to be Superseded by Personal Physician-Patient Partnership Informed by Artificial Intelligence

Multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) have become the reference standard of cancer management, founded upon randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence-based guidelines. The inordinate delays inherent in awaiting formal regulatory agency approvals of novel therapeutic agents, and the rigidities and nongeneralizability of this regimented approach, often deny cancer patients timely access to effective innovative treatment. Reluctance of MTBs to accept theranostic care of patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer resulted in decades of delay in the incorporation of 177Lu-octreotate and 177Lu-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) into routine clinical oncology practice. Recent developments in immunotherapy and molecular targeted precision therapy, based on N-of-One individual multifactorial genome analyses, have greatly increased the complexity of decision-making. Burgeoning specialist workload and tight time frames now threaten to overwhelm the logistically, and emotionally, demanding MTB system. It is hypothesized that the advent of advanced artificial intelligence technology and Chatbot natural language algorithms will shift the cancer care paradigm from a MTB management model toward a personal physician-patient shared-care partnership for real-world practice of precision individualized holistic oncology.

ALK fusions in the pan-cancer setting: another tumor-agnostic target?

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) alterations (activating mutations, amplifications, and fusions/rearrangements) occur in ~3.3% of cancers. ALK fusions/rearrangements are discerned in >50% of inflammatory myofibroblastic tumors (IMTs) and anaplastic large cell lymphomas (ALCLs), but only in ~0.2% of other cancers outside of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a rate that may be below the viability threshold of even large-scale treatment trials. Five ALK inhibitors -alectinib, brigatinib, ceritinb, crizotinib, and lorlatinib-are FDA approved for ALK-aberrant NSCLCs, and crizotinib is also approved for ALK-aberrant IMTs and ALCL, including in children. Herein, we review the pharmacologic tractability of ALK alterations, focusing beyond NSCLC. Importantly, the hallmark of approved indications is the presence of ALK fusions/rearrangements, and response rates of ~50-85%. Moreover, there are numerous reports of ALK inhibitor activity in multiple solid and hematologic tumors (e.g., histiocytosis, leiomyosarcoma, lymphoma, myeloma, and colorectal, neuroendocrine, ovarian, pancreatic, renal, and thyroid cancer) bearing ALK fusions/rearrangements. Many reports used crizotinib or alectinib, but each of the approved ALK inhibitors have shown activity. ALK inhibitor activity is also seen in neuroblastoma, which bear ALK mutations (rather than fusions/rearrangements), but response rates are lower (~10-20%). Current data suggests that ALK inhibitors have tissue-agnostic activity in neoplasms bearing ALK fusions/rearrangements.

Travel Time and Distance and Participation in Precision Oncology Trials at the National Cancer Center Hospital

Importance

Genotype-matched trials, which are becoming increasingly important in the precision oncology era, require referrals from institutions providing comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) testing to those conducting these trials, and the travel burden for trial participation is significant. However, it remains unknown whether travel time or distance are associated with genotype-matched trial participation.

Objective

To assess whether travel time or distance are associated with disparities in genotype-matched trial participation following CGP testing.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study from June 2020 to June 2022 included patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors referred to the National Cancer Center Hospital for participation in genotype-matched trials following CGP testing and discussion by molecular tumor boards. Data were analyzed from June to October 2022.

Exposures

Travel time and distance.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary and secondary outcomes were enrollment in genotype-matched trials and all-cancer clinical trials, respectively.

Results

Of 1127 patients (mean [range] age, 62 [16-85] years; 584 women [52%]; all residents of Japan), 127 (11%) and 241 (21%) were enrolled in genotype-matched trials and all-cancer clinical trials, respectively. The overall median (IQR) travel distance and time were 38 (21-107) km and 55 (35-110) minutes, respectively. On multivariable regression with 23 covariates, travel distance (≥100 km vs <100 km) was not associated with the likelihood of genotype-matched trial participation (26 of 310 patients [8%] vs 101 of 807 patients [12%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.40-1.02), whereas in patients with travel time of 120 minutes or more, the likelihood of genotype-matched trial participation was significantly lower than those with travel time less than 120 minutes (19 of 276 patients [7%] vs 108 of 851 patients [13%]; OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.29-0.84). The likelihood of genotype-matched trial participation decreased as travel time increased from less than 40 (38 of 283 patients [13%]) to 40 to 120 (70 of 568 patients [12%]) and 120 or more (19 of 276 patients [7%]) minutes (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.48-1.17; OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.74, respectively). Neither travel time nor distance were associated with the likelihood of all-cancer clinical trial participation.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of patients undergoing CGP testing, an increased travel time was associated with a decreased likelihood of genotype-matched trial participation. This warrants further research on interventions, such as decentralization of clinical trials to mitigate travel burden.

Combination Therapy With MDM2 and MEK Inhibitors Is Effective in Patient-Derived Models of Lung Adenocarcinoma With Concurrent Oncogenic Drivers and MDM2 Amplification

INTRODUCTION

Although targeted therapies have revolutionized the therapeutic landscape of lung adenocarcinomas (LUADs), disease progression on single-agent targeted therapy against known oncogenic drivers is common, and therapeutic options after disease progression are limited. In patients with MDM2 amplification (MDM2amp) and a concurrent oncogenic driver alteration, we hypothesized that targeting of the tumor-suppressor pathway (by means of restoration of p53 using MDM2 inhibition) and simultaneous targeting of co-occurring MAPK oncogenic pathway might represent a more durably effective therapeutic strategy.

METHODS

We evaluated genomic next-generation sequencing data using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets platform to nominate potential targets for combination therapy in LUAD. We investigated the small molecule MDM2 inhibitor milademetan in cell lines and patient-derived xenografts of LUAD with a known driver alteration and MDM2amp.

RESULTS

Of 10,587 patient samples from 7121 patients with LUAD profiled by next-generation sequencing, 6% (410 of 7121) harbored MDM2amp. MDM2amp was significantly enriched among tumors with driver alterations in METex14 (36%, p < 0.001), EGFR (8%, p < 0.001), RET (12%, p < 0.01), and ALK (10%, p < 0.01). The combination of milademetan and the MEK inhibitor trametinib was synergistic in growth inhibition of ECLC5-GLx (TRIM33-RET/MDM2amp), LUAD12c (METex14/KRASG12S/MDM2amp), SW1573 (KRASG12C, TP53 wild type), and A549 (KRASG12S) cells and in increasing expression of proapoptotic proteins PUMA and BIM. Treatment of ECLC5-GLx and LUAD12c with single-agent milademetan increased ERK phosphorylation, consistent with previous data on ERK activation with MDM2 inhibition. This ERK activation was effectively suppressed by concomitant administration of trametinib. In contrast, ERK phosphorylation induced by milademetan was not suppressed by concurrent RET inhibition using selpercatinib (in ECLC5-GLx) or MET inhibition using capmatinib (in LUAD12c). In vivo, combination milademetan and trametinib was more effective than either agent alone in ECLC5-GLx, LX-285 (EGFRex19del/MDM2amp), L13BS1 (METex14/MDM2amp), and A549 (KRASG12S, TP53 wild type).

CONCLUSIONS

Combined MDM2/MEK inhibition was found to have efficacy across multiple patient-derived LUAD models harboring MDM2amp and concurrent oncogenic drivers. This combination, potentially applicable to LUADs with a wide variety of oncogenic driver mutations and kinase fusions activating the MAPK pathway, has evident clinical implications and will be investigated as part of a planned phase 1/2 clinical trial.

Antibody-Drug Conjugates in Solid Tumor Oncology: An Effectiveness Payday with a Targeted Payload

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are at the forefront of the drug development revolution occurring in oncology. Formed from three main components-an antibody, a linker molecule, and a cytotoxic agent ("payload"), ADCs have the unique ability to deliver cytotoxic agents to cells expressing a specific antigen, a great leap forward from traditional chemotherapeutic approaches that cause widespread effects without specificity. A variety of payloads can be used, including most frequently microtubular inhibitors (auristatins and maytansinoids), as well as topoisomerase inhibitors and alkylating agents. Finally, linkers play a critical role in the ADCs' effect, as cleavable moieties that serve as linkers impact site-specific activation as well as bystander killing effects, an upshot that is especially important in solid tumors that often express a variety of antigens. While ADCs were initially used in hematologic malignancies, their utility has been demonstrated in multiple solid tumor malignancies, including breast, gastrointestinal, lung, cervical, ovarian, and urothelial cancers. Currently, six ADCs are FDA-approved for the treatment of solid tumors: ado-trastuzumab emtansine and trastuzumab deruxtecan, both anti-HER2; enfortumab-vedotin, targeting nectin-4; sacituzuzmab govitecan, targeting Trop2; tisotumab vedotin, targeting tissue factor; and mirvetuximab soravtansine, targeting folate receptor-alpha. Although they demonstrate utility and tolerable safety profiles, ADCs may become ineffective as tumor cells undergo evolution to avoid expressing the specific antigen being targeted. Furthermore, the current cost of ADCs can be limiting their reach. Here, we review the structure and functions of ADCs, as well as ongoing clinical investigations into novel ADCs and their potential as treatments of solid malignancies.

Comprehensive Analysis of Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Through DNA, mRNA, and Protein in Diverse Malignancies

PURPOSE

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression (protein immunohistochemistry [IHC] or gene amplification [copy-number variation, CNV]) predicts anti-HER2 therapy responsiveness, although recently it was shown that even low HER2-expressing breast cancers benefit from trastuzumab-deruxtecan. Little is known about HER2 transcriptomic (mRNA) expression, and comparisons between genomic, mRNA, and protein HER2 assays.

METHODS

HER2 status was evaluated using clinical-grade IHC (protein), quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (mRNA), and next-generation sequencing (NGS; amplifications).

RESULTS

Multi-institutional HER2 testing was performed on 5,305 diverse cancers including non-small-cell lung (n = 1,175), breast (n = 1,040), and colon cancers (n = 566; N = 3,926 tested for CNV; N = 1,848, mRNA; N = 2,533, IHC). Overall, 4.1% (161/3,926) had NGS HER2 amplification; 33.3% (615/1,848) had mRNA overexpression; and 9.3% (236/2,533) were IHC-positive. In 723 patients with all three tests (CNV/mRNA/IHC), various amplification/expression patterns occurred: 7.5% (54/723) had all three HER2 tests positive; 62.8% (454/723) had all three tests negative. Discrepant patterns between amplification and overexpression emerged. For instance, 20% (144/723) of patients had mRNA overexpression alone with negative CNV and IHC. A range in values for only mRNA+ cases occurred in different tumor types (eg, 16.9%, breast; 5%, hepatobiliary). There were 53 patients with various tumors from our institution who had all three assays attempted; 22 tested positive for HER2, and seven received anti-HER2 therapy: two patients achieved response: one (esophageal cancer), complete response (≥42 months); one (cholangiocarcinoma), who only had HER2 mRNA positivity (tissue was inadequate for IHC and CNV assessment), partial response (≥24 months) on HER2-based regimens.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate variability of HER2 (protein and mRNA) expression and amplification using comprehensive assays (CNV, mRNA, and IHC) among diverse cancers. As HER2-targeted therapy indications expand, the relative importance of these modalities merits further evaluation.

The tumor immune microenvironment in pancreatic cancer and its potential in the identification of immunotherapy biomarkers

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer (PC) has an extremely poor prognosis, even with surgical resection and triplet chemotherapy treatment. Cancer immunotherapy has been recently approved for tumor-agnostic treatment with genome analysis, including in PC. However, it has limited efficacy.

AREAS COVERED

In addition to the low tumor mutation burden, one of the difficulties of immunotherapy in PC is the presence of abundant stromal cells in its microenvironment. Among stromal cells, cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) play a major role in immunotherapy resistance, and CAF-targeted therapies are currently under development, including those in combination with immunotherapies. Meanwhile, microbiomes and tumor-derived exosomes (TDEs) have been shown to alter the behavior of distant receptor cells in PC. This review discusses the role of CAFs, microbiomes, and TDEs in PC tumor immunity.

EXPERT OPINION

Elucidating the mechanisms by which CAFs, microbiomes, and TDEs are involved in the tumorigenesis of PC will be helpful for developing novel immunotherapeutic strategies and identifying companion biomarkers for immunotherapy. Spatial single-cell analysis of the tumor microenvironment will be useful for identifying biomarkers of PC immunity. Furthermore, given the complexity of immune mechanisms, artificial intelligence models will be beneficial for predicting the efficacy of immunotherapy.

Agnostic Approvals in Oncology: Getting the Right Drug to the Right Patient with the Right Genomics

(1) Background: The oncology field has drastically changed with the advent of precision medicine, led by the discovery of druggable genes or immune targets assessed through next-generation sequencing. Biomarker-based treatments are increasingly emerging, and currently, six tissue-agnostic therapies are FDA-approved. (2) Methods: We performed a review of the literature and reported the trials that led to the approval of tissue-agnostic treatments and ongoing clinical trials currently investigating novel biomarker-based approaches. (3) Results: We discussed the approval of agnostic treatments: pembrolizumab and dostarlimab for MMRd/MSI-H, pembrolizumab for TMB-H, larotrectinib and entrectinib for NTRK-fusions, dabrafenib plus trametinib for BRAF V600E mutation, and selpercatinib for RET fusions. In addition, we reported novel clinical trials of biomarker-based approaches, including ALK, HER2, FGFR, and NRG1. (4) Conclusions: Precision medicine is constantly evolving, and with the improvement of diagnostic tools that allow a wider genomic definition of the tumor, tissue-agnostic targeted therapies are a promising treatment strategy tailored to the specific tumor genomic profile, leading to improved survival outcomes.

From Biology to Diagnosis and Treatment: The Ariadne’s Thread in Cancer of Unknown Primary

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) encloses a group of heterogeneous tumours, the primary sites for which cannot be identified at the time of diagnosis, despite extensive investigations. CUP has always posed major challenges both in its diagnosis and management, leading to the hypothesis that it is rather a distinct entity with specific genetic and phenotypic aberrations, considering the regression or dormancy of the primary tumour; the development of early, uncommon systemic metastases; and the resistance to therapy. Patients with CUP account for 1–3% of all human malignancies and can be categorised into two prognostic subsets according to their clinicopathologic characteristics at presentation. The diagnosis of CUP mainly depends on the standard evaluation comprising a thorough medical history; complete physical examination; histopathologic morphology and algorithmic immunohistochemistry assessment; and CT scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis. However, physicians and patients do not fare well with these criteria and often perform additional time-consuming evaluations to identify the primary tumour site to guide treatment decisions. The development of molecularly guided diagnostic strategies has emerged to complement traditional procedures but has been disappointing thus far. In this review, we present the latest data on CUP regarding the biology, molecular profiling, classification, diagnostic workup, and treatment.

Cancer immunity marker RNA expression levels across gynecologic cancers: Implications for immunotherapy

Background: Our objective was to characterize cancer immunity marker expression in gynecologic cancers and compare immune landscapes between gynecologic tumor subtypes and with non-gynecologic solid tumors. Methods: RNA expression levels of 51 cancer-immunity markers were analyzed in patients with gynecologic cancers vs. non-gynecologic cancers, and normalized to a reference population of 735 control cancers, ranked from 0-100, and categorized as low (0-24), moderate (25-74), or high (75-100) percentile rank. Results: Of the 72 patients studied, 43 (60%) had ovarian, 24 (33%) uterine, and 5 (7%) cervical cancer. No two immune profiles were identical according to expression rank (0-100) or rank level (low, moderate, or high). Patients with cervical cancer had significantly higher expression level ranks of immune activating, pro-inflammatory, tumor infiltrating lymphocyte markers and checkpoints than patients with uterine or ovarian cancer (p<0.001 for all comparisons). However, there were no significant differences in immune marker expression between uterine and ovarian cancers. Tumors with PD-L1 TPS =>1% versus 0% had significantly higher expression levels of pro-inflammatory markers (58 vs. 49%, p=0.0004). Compared to patients with non-gynecologic cancers, more patients with gynecologic cancers express high levels of IDO-1 (44 vs. 13%, p<0.001), LAG3 (35 vs. 21%, p=0.008) and IL10 (31 vs. 15%, p=0.002.) Conclusions: Patients with gynecologic cancers have complex and heterogeneous immune landscapes that are distinct from patient to patient and from other solid tumors. High levels of IDO1 and LAG3 suggest that clinical trials with IDO1 inhibitors or LAG3 inhibitors, respectively, may be warranted in gynecologic cancers.

Molecular portraits of clear cell ovarian and endometrial carcinoma with comparison to clear cell renal cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

Advanced clear cell gynecologic malignancies remain among the most challenging diseases to manage. We evaluated ovarian and endometrial clear cell carcinoma (OCCC and ECCC) specimens using comprehensive sequencing technology to identify mutational targets and compared their molecular profiles to histologically similar clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).

METHODS

Using next-generation sequencing (NGS), fragment analysis (FA), and in situ hybridization (ISH), 164 OCCC, 75 ECCC and 234 ccRCC specimens from 2015 to 2018 were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

The highest mutation rates in ECCC and OCCC were noted in: ARID1A (75.0%, 87.5%), TP53 (34.8%, 11.1%), PIK3CA (25.0%, 46.8%), PPP2R1A (8.7%, 16.7%), MSI-high (8.8%, 6.4%) and PTEN (8.3%, 7.1%). Among these mutations, there was no significant difference between OCCC and ECCC mutation prevalence except in TP53, with higher mutation rates in ECCC versus OCCC (34.8 vs. 11.1%, respectively, p < 0.05). ccRCC demonstrated different mutation profiles with higher mutation rates in VHL (80.3%), PBRM1 (43.9%), SETD2 (31.1%), and KDM5C (29.2%). By contrast, VHL, PBRM1, and SETD2 mutations were not found in ECCC and OCCC (0.0%). Compared to ccRCC and ECCC, OCCC was found to have a significantly higher tumor mutation burden (TMB) (19.1%).

CONCLUSION

Gynecologic and renal CCC demonstrate separate and disparate somatic profiles. However, OCCC and ECCC are diseases with similar profiles. TMB and MSI analyses indicate that a subset of OCCC may benefit from immunotherapy. Prospective clinical trials are needed and are underway to examine targeted therapies in these gynecologic disease subtypes.

Cancer: slaying the nine-headed Hydra

Modern medicine continues to evolve, and the treatment armamentarium for various diseases grows more individualized across a breadth of medical disciplines. Cure rates for infectious diseases that were previously pan-fatal approach 100% because of the identification of the specific pathogen(s) involved and the use of appropriate combinations of drugs, where needed, to completely extinguish infection and hence prevent emergence of resistant strains. Similarly, with the assistance of technologies such as next-generation sequencing and immunomic analysis as part of the contemporary oncology armory, therapies can be tailored to each tumor. Importantly, molecular interrogation has revealed that metastatic cancers are distinct from each other and complex. Therefore, it is conceivable that rational personalized drug combinations will be needed to eradicate cancers, and eradication will be necessary to mitigate clonal evolution and resistance.

The coming decade in precision oncology: six riddles

High-throughput methods to investigate tumour omic landscapes have quickly catapulted cancer specialists into the precision oncology era. The singular lesson of precision oncology might be that, for it to be precise, treatment must be personalized, as each cancer's complex molecular and immune landscape differs from patient to patient. Transformative therapies include those that are targeted at the sequelae of molecular abnormalities or at immune mechanisms, and, increasingly, pathways previously thought to be undruggable have become druggable. Critical to applying precision medicine is the concept that the right combination of drugs must be chosen for each patient and used at the right stage of the disease. Multiple puzzles remain that complicate therapy choice, including evidence that deleterious mutations are common in normal tissues and non-malignant conditions. The host's role is also likely to be key in determining treatment response, especially for immunotherapy. Indeed, maximizing the impact of immunotherapy will require omic analyses to match the right immune-targeted drugs to the individualized patient and tumour setting. In this Perspective, we discuss six key riddles that must be solved to optimize the application of precision oncology to otherwise lethal malignancies.

Primary refractory plasmablastic lymphoma: A precision oncology approach

Introduction

Hematologic malignancies are currently underrepresented in multidisciplinary molecular-tumor-boards (MTB). This study assesses the potential of precision-oncology in primary-refractory plasmablastic-lymphoma (prPBL), a highly lethal blood cancer.

Methods

We evaluated clinicopathological and molecular-genetic data of 14 clinically annotated prPBL-patients from initial diagnosis. For this proof-of-concept study, we employed our certified institutional MTB-pipeline (University-Cancer-Center-Schleswig-Holstein, UCCSH) to annotate a comprehensive dataset within the scope of a virtual MTB-setting, ultimately recommending molecularly stratified therapies. Evidence-levels for MTB-recommendations were defined in accordance with the NCT/DKTK and ESCAT criteria.

Results

Median age in the cohort was 76.5 years (range 56-91), 78.6% of patients were male, 50% were HIV-positive and clinical outcome was dismal. Comprehensive genomic/transcriptomic analysis revealed potential recommendations of a molecularly stratified treatment option with evidence-levels according to NCT/DKTK of at least m2B/ESCAT of at least IIIA were detected for all 14 prPBL-cases. In addition, immunohistochemical-assessment (CD19/CD30/CD38/CD79B) revealed targeted treatment-recommendations in all 14 cases. Genetic alterations were classified by treatment-baskets proposed by Horak et al. Hereby, we identified tyrosine-kinases (TK; n=4), PI3K-MTOR-AKT-pathway (PAM; n=3), cell-cycle-alterations (CC; n=2), RAF-MEK-ERK-cascade (RME; n=2), immune-evasion (IE; n=2), B-cell-targets (BCT; n=25) and others (OTH; n=4) for targeted treatment-recommendations. The minimum requirement for consideration of a drug within the scope of the study was FDA-fast-track development.

Discussion

The presented proof-of-concept study demonstrates the clinical potential of precision-oncology, even in prPBL-patients. Due to the aggressive course of the disease, there is an urgent medical-need for personalized treatment approaches, and this population should be considered for MTB inclusion at the earliest time.

High tumor amplification burden is associated with TP53 mutations in the pan-cancer setting

Next-generation sequencing data is fundamentally changing the clinical management of patients with cancer. The most frequent genomic alterations in malignancy are mutations and amplifications, with a subset of tumors having multiple amplifications – “amplificators”. We sought to understand the molecular correlates of high tumor amplification burden in a pan-cancer context. Using both national registries and a single-institution dataset, our results demonstrate that cancers with TP53 mutations (as compared to those with wild-type TP53) exhibited significantly higher tumor amplification burden across all datasets. Amplifications, generally associated with overexpression, may be potentially actionable secondary consequences of TP53 mutations.

Targeting the FGF/FGFR axis and its co-alteration allies

BACKGROUND

We analyzed the FGF/FGFR and co-alteration cancer landscape, hypothesizing that combination therapy might be useful in the presence of co-drivers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We describe FGF/FGFR-altered pathways, prognosis, and co-alterations [cBioPortal (N = 7574)] and therapeutic outcomes [University of California San Diego Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) (N = 16)].

RESULTS

Patients whose cancers harbored FGF/FGFR alterations (N = 1074) versus those without them (N = 6500) had shorter overall survival (OS) (median: 23.1 versus 26.4 months, P = 0.038) (cBioPortal). Only 6.1% (65/1074 patients) had no pathogenic co-alterations accompanying FGF/FGFR axis abnormalities. The most frequently co-altered pathways/genes involved: TP53 (70%); cell cycle (58%); PI3K (55%); and receptor tyrosine kinases and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) (65%). Harboring alterations in both FGF/FGFR and in the TP53 pathway or in the cell cycle pathway correlated with shorter OS (versus FGF/FGFR-altered without those co-altered signals) (P = 0.0001 and 0.0065). Four of 16 fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor-treated patients presented at MTB attained durable partial responses (PRs) (9, 12, 22+, and 52+ months); an additional two, stable disease (SD) of ≥6 months (13+ and 15 months) [clinical benefit rate (SD ≥ 6 months/PR) = 38%]. Importantly, six patients with cyclin pathway co-alterations received the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib (75 mg p.o. 3 weeks on, 1 week off) and the multikinase FGFR inhibitor lenvatinib (10 mg p.o. daily); three (50%) achieved a PR [9 (ovarian), 12 (biliary), and 52+ months (osteosarcoma)]. Palbociclib and lenvatinib were tolerated well.

CONCLUSIONS

FGF/FGFR alterations portend a poor prognosis and are frequently accompanied by pathogenic co-aberrations. Malignancies harboring co-alterations that activate both cyclin and FGFR pathways can be co-targeted by CDK4/6 and FGFR inhibitors.

Clinical trial design in the era of precision medicine

Recent rapid biotechnological breakthroughs have led to the identification of complex and unique molecular features that drive malignancies. Precision medicine has exploited next-generation sequencing and matched targeted therapy/immunotherapy deployment to successfully transform the outlook for several fatal cancers. Tumor and liquid biopsy genomic profiling and transcriptomic, immunomic, and proteomic interrogation can now all be leveraged to optimize therapy. Multiple new trial designs, including basket and umbrella trials, master platform trials, and N-of-1 patient-centric studies, are beginning to supplant standard phase I, II, and III protocols, allowing for accelerated drug evaluation and approval and molecular-based individualized treatment. Furthermore, real-world data, as well as exploitation of digital apps and structured observational registries, and the utilization of machine learning and/or artificial intelligence, may further accelerate knowledge acquisition. Overall, clinical trials have evolved, shifting from tumor type-centered to gene-directed and histology-agnostic trials, with innovative adaptive designs and personalized combination treatment strategies tailored to individual biomarker profiles. Some, but not all, novel trials now demonstrate that matched therapy correlates with superior outcomes compared to non-matched therapy across tumor types and in specific cancers. To further improve the precision medicine paradigm, the strategy of matching drugs to patients based on molecular features should be implemented earlier in the disease course, and cancers should have comprehensive multi-omic (genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, immunomic) tumor profiling. To overcome cancer complexity, moving from drug-centric to patient-centric individualized combination therapy is critical. This review focuses on the design, advantages, limitations, and challenges of a spectrum of clinical trial designs in the era of precision oncology.

A State-of-the-Art Roadmap for Biomarker-Driven Drug Development in the Era of Personalized Therapies

Advances in biotechnology have enabled us to assay human tissue and cells to a depth and resolution that was never possible before, redefining what we know as the “biomarker”, and how we define a “disease”. This comes along with the shift of focus from a “one-drug-fits-all” to a “personalized approach”, placing the drug development industry in a highly dynamic landscape, having to navigate such disruptive trends. In response to this, innovative clinical trial designs have been key in realizing biomarker-driven drug development. Regulatory approvals of cancer genome sequencing panels and associated targeted therapies has brought personalized medicines to the clinic. Increasing availability of sophisticated biotechnologies such as next-generation sequencing (NGS) has also led to a massive outflux of real-world genomic data. This review summarizes the current state of biomarker-driven drug development and highlights examples showing the utility and importance of the application of real-world data in the process. We also propose that all stakeholders in drug development should (1) be conscious of and efficiently utilize real-world evidence and (2) re-vamp the way the industry approaches drug development in this era of personalized medicines.

A clinician’s handbook for using ctDNA throughout the patient journey

Background

The promise of precision cancer medicine presently centers around the genomic sequence of a patient’s tumor being translated into timely, actionable information to inform clinical care. The analysis of cell-free DNA from liquid biopsy, which contains circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patients with cancer, has proven to be amenable to various settings in oncology. However, open questions surrounding the clinical validity and utility of plasma-based analyses have hindered widespread clinical adoption.

Main body

Owing to the rapid evolution of the field, studies supporting the use of ctDNA as a biomarker throughout a patient’s journey with cancer have accumulated in the last few years, warranting a review of the latest status for clinicians who may employ ctDNA in their precision oncology programs. In this work, we take a step back from the intricate coverage of detection approaches described extensively elsewhere and cover basic concepts around the practical implementation of next generation sequencing (NGS)-guided liquid biopsy. We compare relevant targeted and untargeted approaches to plasma DNA analysis, describe the latest evidence for clinical validity and utility, and highlight the value of genome-wide ctDNA analysis, particularly as it relates to early detection strategies and discovery applications harnessing the non-coding genome.

Conclusions

The maturation of liquid biopsy for clinical application will require interdisciplinary efforts to address current challenges. However, patients and clinicians alike may greatly benefit in the future from its incorporation into routine oncology care.

What Do We Have to Know about PD-L1 Expression in Prostate Cancer? A Systematic Literature Review (Part 6): Correlation of PD-L1 Expression with the Status of Mismatch Repair System, BRCA, PTEN, and Other Genes

Pembrolizumab (anti-PD-1) is allowed in selected metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PC) patients showing microsatellite instability/mismatch repair system deficiency (MSI-H/dMMR). BRCA1/2 loss-of-function is linked to hereditary PCs and homologous recombination DNA-repair system deficiency: poly-ADP-ribose-polymerase inhibitors can be administered to BRCA-mutated PC patients. Recently, docetaxel-refractory metastatic castration-resistant PC patients with BRCA1/2 or ATM somatic mutations had higher response rates to pembrolizumab. PTEN regulates cell cycle/proliferation/apoptosis through pathways including the AKT/mTOR, which upregulates PD-L1 expression in PC. Our systematic literature review (PRISMA guidelines) investigated the potential correlations between PD-L1 and MMR/MSI/BRCA/PTEN statuses in PC, discussing few other relevant genes. Excluding selection biases, 74/677 (11%) PCs showed dMMR/MSI; 8/67 (12%) of dMMR/MSI cases were PD-L1+. dMMR-PCs included ductal (3%) and acinar (14%) PCs (all cases tested for MSI were acinar-PCs). In total, 15/39 (39%) PCs harbored BRCA1/2 aberrations: limited data are available for PD-L1 expression in these patients. 13/137 (10%) PTEN- PCs were PD-L1+; 10/29 (35%) PD-L1+ PCs showed PTEN negativity. SPOP mutations may increase PD-L1 levels, while the potential correlation between PD-L1 and ERG expression in PC should be clarified. Further research should verify how the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors in metastatic castration-resistant PCs is related to dMMR/MSI, DNA-damage repair genes defects, or PD-L1 expression.

Independent Drug Action in Combination Therapy: Implications for Precision Oncology

Combination therapies are superior to monotherapy for many cancers. This advantage was historically ascribed to the ability of combinations to address tumor heterogeneity, but synergistic interaction is now a common explanation as well as a design criterion for new combinations. We review evidence that independent drug action, described in 1961, explains the efficacy of many practice-changing combination therapies: it provides populations of patients with heterogeneous drug sensitivities multiple chances of benefit from at least one drug. Understanding response heterogeneity could reveal predictive or pharmacodynamic biomarkers for more precise use of existing drugs and realize the benefits of additivity or synergy.

Systematic review of computational methods for drug combination prediction

Synergistic effects between drugs are rare and highly context-dependent and patient-specific. Hence, there is a need to develop novel approaches to stratify patients for optimal therapy regimens, especially in the context of personalized design of combinatorial treatments. Computational methods enable systematic in-silico screening of combination effects, and can thereby prioritize most potent combinations for further testing, among the massive number of potential combinations. To help researchers to choose a prediction method that best fits for various real-world applications, we carried out a systematic literature review of 117 computational methods developed to date for drug combination prediction, and classified the methods in terms of their combination prediction tasks and input data requirements. Most current methods focus on prediction or classification of combination synergy, and only a few methods consider the efficacy and potential toxicity of the combinations, which are the key determinants of therapeutic success of drug treatments. Furthermore, there is a need to further develop methods that enable dose-specific predictions of combination effects across multiple doses, which is important for clinical translation of the predictions, as well as model-based identification of biomarkers predictive of heterogeneous drug combination responses. Even if most of the computational methods reviewed focus on anticancer applications, many of the modelling approaches are also applicable to antiviral and other diseases or indications.