Association Between Preanalytical Factors and Tumor Mutational Burden Estimated by Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Multiplex Gene Panel Assay

Enhancing the quality of panel-based tumor mutation burden assessment: a comprehensive study of real-world and in-silico outcomes

Targeted panel-based tumor mutation burden (TMB) assays are widely employed to guide immunotherapy for patients with solid tumors. However, the accuracy and consistency of this method can be compromised due to the variability in technical details across different laboratories, particularly in terms of panel size, somatic mutation detection and TMB calculation rules. Currently, systematic evaluations of the impact of these technical factors on existing assays and best practice recommendations remain lacking. We assessed the performance of 50 participating panel-based TMB assays involving 38 unique methods using cell line samples. In silico experiments utilizing TCGA MC3 datasets were performed to further dissect the impact of technical factors. Here we show that the panel sizes beyond 1.04 Mb and 389 genes are necessary for the basic discrete accuracy, as determined by over 40,000 synthetic panels. The somatic mutation detection should maintain a reciprocal gap of recall and precision less than 0.179 for reliable psTMB calculation results. The inclusion of synonymous, nonsense and hotspot mutations could enhance the accuracy of panel-based TMB assay. A 5% variant allele frequency cut-off is suitable for TMB assays using tumor samples with at least 20% tumor purity. In conclusion, this multicenter study elucidates the major technical factors as sources of variability in panel-based TMB assays and proposed comprehensive recommendations for the enhancement of accuracy and consistency. These findings will assist clinical laboratories in optimizing the methodological details through bioinformatic experiments to enhance the reliability of panel-based methods.

Heterogeneity of tumour mutational burden in metastatic NSCLC demonstrated by endobronchial ultrasound sampling

Introduction

Tumour mutational burden (TMB) is an important emerging biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). The stability of TMB values across distinct EBUS tumour regions is not well defined in advanced lung cancer patients.

Methods

This study included a whole-genome sequencing cohort (n=11, LxG cohort) and a targeted Oncomine TML panel cohort (n=10, SxD cohort), where paired primary and metastatic samples were obtained by endobronchial ultrasound transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA).

Results

The LxG cohort displayed a strong correlation between the paired primary and metastatic sites, with a median TMB score of 7.70 ± 5.39 and 8.31 ± 5.88 respectively. Evaluation of the SxD cohort demonstrated greater inter-tumoural TMB heterogeneity, where Spearman correlation between the primary and metastatic sites fell short of significance. Whilst median TMB scores were not significantly different between the two sites, 3 out of 10 paired samples were discordant when using a TMB cut-off of 10 mutations per Mb. In addition, PD-L1 copy number and KRAS mutations were assessed, demonstrating the feasibility of performing multiple molecular tests relevant to ICI treatment using a single EBUS sample. We also observed good consistency in PD-L1 copy number and KRAS mutation, where cut-off estimates were consistent across the primary and metastatic sites.

Conclusions

Assessment of TMB acquired by EBUS from multiple sites is highly feasible and has the potential to improve accuracy of TMB panels as a companion diagnostic test. We demonstrate similar TMB values across primary and metastatic sites, however 3 out of 10 samples displayed inter-tumoural heterogeneity that would alter clinical management.

Current Clinical Practice of Precision Medicine Using Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Tests in Biliary Tract Cancer in Japan

With the recent advances of next generation sequencing technologies, comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) tests, which are designed to measure more than hundreds of cancer-related genes at a time, have now been widely introduced into daily clinical practice. For the patients whose tumor samples are not fit for tissue-based CGP tests, a blood-based CGP test (liquid biopsy) is available as an alternative option. Three CGP tests, "OncoGuide NCC™Oncopanel System (124 genes)", "FoundationOne®CDx (324 genes)", and "Founda-tionOne®CDx Liquid (324 genes)", are now reimbursed by public insurance in 233 hospitals designated for cancer genomic medicine in Japan. In biliary tract cancer, the prevalence of druggable variants is relatively higher compared to other cancer types and the European Society for Medical Oncology recommends routine use of CGP tests for advanced biliary tract cancer to guide treatment options. The latest National Cancer Center Network guideline lists eight druggable markers (NTRK fusion, MSI-H, TMB-H, BRAF V600E, FGFR2 fusions/rearrangement, IDH1 mutations, RET fusion, and HER2 overexpression) and matched therapies. In Japan, matched therapies for four markers (NTRK, MSI-H, TMB-H, and FGFR2) are reimbursed by public insurance (as of September 2022). The progress of genomic profiling technology will contribute to the improvement of the dismal clinical outcomes of this disease in the future.

Open the Technical Black Box of Tumor Mutational Burden (TMB): Factors Affecting Harmonization and Standardization of Panel-Based TMB

As tumor mutational burden (TMB) has been approved as a predictive biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), next-generation sequencing (NGS) TMB panels are being increasingly used clinically. However, only a few of them have been validated in clinical trials or authorized by administration. The harmonization and standardization of TMB panels are thus essential for clinical implementation. In this review, preanalytic, sequencing, bioinformatics and interpretative factors are summarized to provide a comprehensive picture of how the different factors affect the estimation of panel-based TMB. Among the factors, poor DNA quality, improper formalin fixation and residual germline variants after filtration may overestimate TMB, while low tumor purity may decrease the sensitivity of the TMB panel. In addition, a small panel size leads to more variability when comparing with true TMB values detected by whole-exome sequencing (WES). A panel covering a genomic region of more than 1Mb is more stable for harmonization and standardization. Because the TMB estimate reflects the sum of effects from multiple factors, deliberation based on laboratory and specimen quality, as well as clinical information, is essential for decision making.

Inter-assay variability of next-generation sequencing-based gene panels

BACKGROUND

Tumor heterogeneity has been known to cause inter-assay discordance among next-generation sequencing (NGS) results. However, whether preclinical factors such as sample type, sample quality and analytical features of gene panel can affect the concordance between two different assays remains largely unexplored.

METHODS

Replicate sets of DNA samples extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues (FFPE) (n = 20) and fresh frozen (FF) tissues (n = 10) were herein analyzed using a tumor-only (TO) and paired tumor-normal (TN) gene panel in laboratories certified by the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment. Reported variants from the TO and TN panels were then compared. Furthermore, additional FFPE samples were sequentially sliced from the same FFPE block and submitted to another TN panel assay.

RESULTS

Substantial discordance (71.8%) was observed between the results of the two panels despite using identical DNA samples, with the discordance rate being significantly higher for FFPE samples (p < 0.05). Among the 99 variants reported only in the TO panel, 32.3% were consistent with germline variants, which were excluded in the TN panel, while 30.3% had an allele frequency of less than 5%, some of which were highly likely to be artificial calls. The comparison of two independent TN panel assay results from the same FFPE block also showed substantial discordance rate (55.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of clinical settings, our comparative analysis revealed that inter-NGS assay discordance commonly occurred due to sample types and the different analytical features of each panel.

Tumor Mutational Burden as a Potential Biomarker for Immunotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer: Systematic Review and Still-Open Questions

Simple Summary

Tumor mutational burden (TMB) represents the number of mutations per megabase (muts/Mb) harbored by tumor cells in a given neoplasm, and can be determined with next-generation sequencing. High values are an indicator of potential response to immunotherapy. With this systematic review, we assessed its role in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Our main findings can be summarized as: (i) high-TMB can be found in about 1% of PDAC; (ii) it is associated with mucinous/colloid and medullary histology; (iii) high-TMB PDAC frequently harbor other actionable alterations, with microsatellite instability as the most common; (iv) immunotherapy has shown promising results in high-TMB PDAC.

Abstract

Tumor mutational burden (TMB) is a numeric index that expresses the number of mutations per megabase (muts/Mb) harbored by tumor cells in a neoplasm. TMB can be determined using different approaches based on next-generation sequencing. In the case of high values, it indicates a potential response to immunotherapy. In this systematic review, we assessed the potential predictive role of high-TMB in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), as well as the histo-molecular features of high-TMB PDAC. High-TMB appeared as a rare but not-negligible molecular feature in PDAC, being present in about 1.1% of cases. This genetic condition was closely associated with mucinous/colloid and medullary histology (p < 0.01). PDAC with high-TMB frequently harbored other actionable alterations, with microsatellite instability/defective mismatch repair as the most common. Immunotherapy has shown promising results in high-TMB PDAC, but the sample size of high-TMB PDAC treated so far is quite small. This study highlights interesting peculiarities of PDAC harboring high-TMB and may represent a reliable starting point for the assessment of TMB in the clinical management of patients affected by pancreatic cancer.

Choosing tumor mutational burden wisely for immunotherapy: A hard road to explore

Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of cancer due to its remarkable efficacy and extensive survival benefit in multiple tumor types. However, predictive biomarkers are required to identify patients who are likely to respond to immunotherapy. Recently, tumor mutational burden (TMB) has been shown to be associated with clinical outcomes in diverse cancers, such as melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer and colorectal cancer. Several studies have demonstrated that high TMB can effectively predict the objective response rate and progression-free survival, but the ability of TMB to predict overall survival is limited. Thus, the clinical utility of TMB as a predictive and prognostic biomarker in immunotherapy is currently controversial. Importantly, multiple factors can affect the accurate assessment of TMB and further interfere with its prediction of clinical outcomes. These factors include preanalytical factors such as sample status, analytical factors such as differences in platforms and methods for determining TMB and variability of cutoff values, and postanalytical factors such as inconsistent interpretation and reporting of results. In addition, the optimal definition and quantification of TMB are unclear and require harmonization and standardization for reliable clinical application. This review elaborates on the factors affecting TMB status in primary tumors, summarizes the clinical utility of TMB as a biomarker in immunotherapy, and evaluates the impact of each analysis stage on the accurate estimation of TMB, especially its quantification, aiming to facilitate TMB assessment in routine clinical settings.