Clinical utility of circulating tumor DNA sequencing with a large panel: a National Center for Precision Medicine (PRISM) study.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) sequencing is a promising approach for tailoring therapy in patients with cancer. We report hereby the results from a prospective study where we investigated the impact of comprehensive molecular profiling of ctDNA in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Genomic analysis was performed using the FoundationOne Liquid CDx Assay [324 genes, tumor mutational burden (TMB), microsatellite instability status]. Each individual genomic report was reviewed and discussed weekly by a multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB). Actionable targets were classified by ESMO Scale for Clinical Actionability of Molecular Targets (ESCAT) tier leading to molecular-based treatment suggestions wherever it was possible. RESULTS: Between December 2020 and November 2021, 1772 patients with metastatic solid tumors underwent molecular profiling. Median time to assay results was 12 days. Results were contributive for 1658 patients (94%). At least one actionable target was detected in 1059 patients (64%) with a total of 1825 actionable alterations including alteration of the DNA damage repair response pathway (n = 336, 18%), high TMB (>16 mutations/Mb; n = 243, 13%), PIK3CA mutations (n = 150, 8%), ERBB family pathway alterations (n = 127, 7%), PTEN alterations (n = 95, 5%), FGFR alterations (n = 67, 4%) and MET activations (n = 13, 0.7%). The MTB recommended a matched therapy for 597 patients (56%) with a total of 819 therapeutic orientations: clinical trials (n = 639, 78%), off-label/compassionate use (n = 81, 10%), approved drug (n = 51, 6%), and early access program (n = 48, 6%). In total, 122 patients (21%) were treated. Among the assessable patients (n = 107), 4 (4%) had complete response, 35 (33%) had partial response, 27 (25%) had stable disease, and 41 (38%) a progressive disease as best response. The median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 4.7 months (95% confidence interval 2.7-6.7 months) and 8.3 months (95% confidence interval 4.7-11.9 months) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ctDNA sequencing with a large panel is an efficient approach to match patients with advanced cancer with targeted therapies.

HPV ctDNA detection of high-risk HPV types during chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is the standard of care for patients diagnosed with locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC), a human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cancer that relapses in 30%-60% of patients. This study aimed to (i) design HPV droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) assays for blood detection (including rare genotypes) and (ii) monitor blood HPV circulating tumor DNA (HPV ctDNA) levels during CRT in patients with LACC. METHODS: We analyzed blood and tumor samples from 55 patients with HPV-positive LACC treated by CRT in a retrospective cohort (n = 41) and a prospective cohort (n = 14). HPV-ctDNA detection was carried out by genotype-specific ddPCR. RESULTS: HPV ctDNA was successfully detected in 69% of patients (n = 38/55) before CRT for LACC, including nine patients with a rare genotype. HPV-ctDNA level was correlated with HPV copy number in the tumor (r = 0.41, P < 0.001). HPV-ctDNA positivity for HPV18 (20%, n = 2/10) was significantly lower than for HPV16 (77%, n = 27/35) or other types (90%, n = 9/10, P = 0.002). HPV-ctDNA detection (positive versus negative) before CRT was associated with tumor stage (P = 0.037) and lymph node status (P = 0.02). Taking into account all samples from the end of CRT and during follow-up in the prospective cohort, positive HPV-ctDNA detection was associated with lower disease-free survival (DFS) (P = 0.048) and overall survival (OS) (P = 0.0013). CONCLUSION: This is one of the largest studies to report HPV-ctDNA detection before CRT and showed clearance of HPV ctDNA at the end of treatment in most patients. Residual HPV ctDNA at the end of CRT or during follow-up could help to identify patients more likely to experience subsequent relapse.

Outcomes of long-term responders to anti-programmed death 1 and anti-programmed death ligand 1 when being rechallenged with the same anti-programmed death 1 and anti-programmed death ligand 1 at progression.

BACKGROUND: Long-term responders have been observed with anti-programmed death 1 and anti-programmed death ligand 1 (anti-PD(L)1). Optimal duration of therapy in responding and stable disease (SD) patients is unclear with various attitudes encompassing treatment until progression disease, stopping therapy after a defined timeframe. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We report the experience of 13 patients who discontinued immune checkpoint inhibitor in phase I trials as per protocol while experiencing a tumour-controlled disease. According to protocols, patients could restart the same immunotherapy if radiological or clinical progression occurred. RESULTS: Patients were treated for colorectal microsatellite instability-high genotype (n = 5), urothelial carcinoma (n = 3), melanoma (n = 2), non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 2) and triple-negative breast cancer (n = 1) for a median time of 12 months (range 10.6-12). Patients achieved 1 (8%) complete response, 10 (77%) partial response (PR) and 2 (15%) SD. The median progression-free survival 1 (PFS1) defined as the time from the first infusion until progression was 24.4 months (range 15.8-49). The median time free-treatment after discontinuation was 12.6 months (range 4-39.7). Eight patients experienced disease progression and were retreated. Best responses observed after rechallenging were 2 PR (25%) and 6 SD (75%). Median PFS2 defined from the first day of retreatment until disease progression or the last news was 12.9 months (range 5-35.4). No grade 3/4 events occurred during the study period. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that anti-PD(L)1 therapy should be resumed if progression occurs after a planned anti-PD(L)1 interruption. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these results.