Precision-guided treatment in high-risk pediatric cancers.

Recent research showed that precision medicine can identify new treatment strategies for patients with childhood cancers. However, it is unclear which patients will benefit most from precision-guided treatment (PGT). Here we report consecutive data from 384 patients with high-risk pediatric cancer (with an expected cure rate of less than 30%) who had at least 18 months of follow-up on the ZERO Childhood Cancer Precision Medicine Program PRecISion Medicine for Children with Cancer (PRISM) trial. A total of 256 (67%) patients received PGT recommendations and 110 (29%) received a recommended treatment. PGT resulted in a 36% objective response rate and improved 2-year progression-free survival compared with standard of care (26% versus 12%; P = 0.049) or targeted agents not guided by molecular findings (26% versus 5.2%; P = 0.003). PGT based on tier 1 evidence, PGT targeting fusions or commenced before disease progression had the greatest clinical benefit. Our data show that PGT informed by comprehensive molecular profiling significantly improves outcomes for children with high-risk cancers. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03336931.

Parents' expectations, preferences, and recall of germline findings in a childhood cancer precision medicine trial.

BACKGROUND: Germline genome sequencing in childhood cancer precision medicine trials may reveal pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes in more than 10% of children. These findings can have implications for diagnosis, treatment, and the child's and family's future cancer risk. Understanding parents' perspectives of germline genome sequencing is critical to successful clinical implementation. METHODS: A total of 182 parents of 144 children (<18 years of age) with poor-prognosis cancers enrolled in the Precision Medicine for Children with Cancer trial completed a questionnaire at enrollment and after the return of their child's results, including clinically relevant germline findings (received by 13% of parents). Parents' expectations of germline genome sequencing, return of results preferences, and recall of results received were assessed. Forty-five parents (of 43 children) were interviewed in depth. RESULTS: At trial enrollment, most parents (63%) believed it was at least "somewhat likely" that their child would receive a clinically relevant germline finding. Almost all expressed a preference to receive a broad range of germline genomic findings, including variants of uncertain significance (88%). Some (29%) inaccurately recalled receiving a clinically relevant germline finding. Qualitatively, parents expressed confusion and uncertainty after the return of their child's genome sequencing results by their child's clinician. CONCLUSIONS: Many parents of children with poor-prognosis childhood cancer enrolled in a precision medicine trial expect their child may have an underlying cancer predisposition syndrome. They wish to receive a wide scope of information from germline genome sequencing but may feel confused by the reporting of trial results.

Whole genome, transcriptome and methylome profiling enhances actionable target discovery in high-risk pediatric cancer.

The Zero Childhood Cancer Program is a precision medicine program to benefit children with poor-outcome, rare, relapsed or refractory cancer. Using tumor and germline whole genome sequencing (WGS) and RNA sequencing (RNAseq) across 252 tumors from high-risk pediatric patients with cancer, we identified 968 reportable molecular aberrations (39.9% in WGS and RNAseq, 35.1% in WGS only and 25.0% in RNAseq only). Of these patients, 93.7% had at least one germline or somatic aberration, 71.4% had therapeutic targets and 5.2% had a change in diagnosis. WGS identified pathogenic cancer-predisposing variants in 16.2% of patients. In 76 central nervous system tumors, methylome analysis confirmed diagnosis in 71.1% of patients and contributed to a change of diagnosis in two patients (2.6%). To date, 43 patients have received a recommended therapy, 38 of whom could be evaluated, with 31% showing objective evidence of clinical benefit. Comprehensive molecular profiling resolved the molecular basis of virtually all high-risk cancers, leading to clinical benefit in some patients.