Cargando…
The Impact of Foundation Medicine Testing on Cancer Patients: A Single Academic Centre Experience
BACKGROUND: The use of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) has recently allowed significant improvements in cancer treatment. Foundation Medicine(®) (FM) provides a genomic profiling test based on NGS for a variety of cancers. However, it is unclear if the Foundation Medicine test would result in a bet...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8350441/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34381713 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.687730 |
_version_ | 1783735761473896448 |
---|---|
author | Karol, Dalia McKinnon, Mathieu Mukhtar, Lenah Awan, Arif Lo, Bryan Wheatley-Price, Paul |
author_facet | Karol, Dalia McKinnon, Mathieu Mukhtar, Lenah Awan, Arif Lo, Bryan Wheatley-Price, Paul |
author_sort | Karol, Dalia |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The use of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) has recently allowed significant improvements in cancer treatment. Foundation Medicine(®) (FM) provides a genomic profiling test based on NGS for a variety of cancers. However, it is unclear if the Foundation Medicine test would result in a better outcome than the standard on-site molecular testing. In this retrospective chart review, we identified the FM cases from an academic Canadian hospital and determined whether these test results improved treatment options for those patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with solid tumors who had FM testing between May 1, 2014 and May 1, 2018. Clinical factors and outcomes were measured using descriptive statistics using Microsoft Excel(®) Software. RESULTS: Out of 66 FM tests, eight patients (= 12%) had a direct change in therapy based on the FM tests. Identified were 285 oncogenic mutations (median 1, range 0–31); where TP53 (n = 31, 10.9%), CDKN2A (n = 19, 6.7%), KRAS (n = 16, 5.6%) and APC (n = 9, 3.2%) were the most common FM mutations identified. CONCLUSION: A small proportion of FM reports identified actionable mutations and led to direct treatment change. FM testing is expensive and a few of the identified mutations are now part of routine on-site testing. NGS testing is likely to become more widespread, but this research suggests that its true clinical impact may be restricted to a minority of patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8350441 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83504412021-08-10 The Impact of Foundation Medicine Testing on Cancer Patients: A Single Academic Centre Experience Karol, Dalia McKinnon, Mathieu Mukhtar, Lenah Awan, Arif Lo, Bryan Wheatley-Price, Paul Front Oncol Oncology BACKGROUND: The use of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) has recently allowed significant improvements in cancer treatment. Foundation Medicine(®) (FM) provides a genomic profiling test based on NGS for a variety of cancers. However, it is unclear if the Foundation Medicine test would result in a better outcome than the standard on-site molecular testing. In this retrospective chart review, we identified the FM cases from an academic Canadian hospital and determined whether these test results improved treatment options for those patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with solid tumors who had FM testing between May 1, 2014 and May 1, 2018. Clinical factors and outcomes were measured using descriptive statistics using Microsoft Excel(®) Software. RESULTS: Out of 66 FM tests, eight patients (= 12%) had a direct change in therapy based on the FM tests. Identified were 285 oncogenic mutations (median 1, range 0–31); where TP53 (n = 31, 10.9%), CDKN2A (n = 19, 6.7%), KRAS (n = 16, 5.6%) and APC (n = 9, 3.2%) were the most common FM mutations identified. CONCLUSION: A small proportion of FM reports identified actionable mutations and led to direct treatment change. FM testing is expensive and a few of the identified mutations are now part of routine on-site testing. NGS testing is likely to become more widespread, but this research suggests that its true clinical impact may be restricted to a minority of patients. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8350441/ /pubmed/34381713 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.687730 Text en Copyright © 2021 Karol, McKinnon, Mukhtar, Awan, Lo and Wheatley-Price https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Oncology Karol, Dalia McKinnon, Mathieu Mukhtar, Lenah Awan, Arif Lo, Bryan Wheatley-Price, Paul The Impact of Foundation Medicine Testing on Cancer Patients: A Single Academic Centre Experience |
title | The Impact of Foundation Medicine Testing on Cancer Patients: A Single Academic Centre Experience |
title_full | The Impact of Foundation Medicine Testing on Cancer Patients: A Single Academic Centre Experience |
title_fullStr | The Impact of Foundation Medicine Testing on Cancer Patients: A Single Academic Centre Experience |
title_full_unstemmed | The Impact of Foundation Medicine Testing on Cancer Patients: A Single Academic Centre Experience |
title_short | The Impact of Foundation Medicine Testing on Cancer Patients: A Single Academic Centre Experience |
title_sort | impact of foundation medicine testing on cancer patients: a single academic centre experience |
topic | Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8350441/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34381713 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.687730 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT karoldalia theimpactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT mckinnonmathieu theimpactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT mukhtarlenah theimpactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT awanarif theimpactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT lobryan theimpactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT wheatleypricepaul theimpactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT karoldalia impactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT mckinnonmathieu impactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT mukhtarlenah impactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT awanarif impactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT lobryan impactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience AT wheatleypricepaul impactoffoundationmedicinetestingoncancerpatientsasingleacademiccentreexperience |