Cargando…
Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor in clinical practice
Previous clinical trials indicate that 10%–25% of patients received genomically matched therapy after comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) tests. However, the clinical utility of CGP tests has not been assessed in clinical practice. We assessed the clinical utility of CGP tests for advanced or meta...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9746060/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36106376 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cas.15586 |
_version_ | 1784849285243731968 |
---|---|
author | Ida, Hanae Koyama, Takafumi Mizuno, Takaaki Sunami, Kuniko Kubo, Takashi Sudo, Kazuki Tao, Kayoko Hirata, Makoto Yonemori, Kan Kato, Ken Okusaka, Takuji Ohe, Yuichiro Matsui, Yoshiyuki Yamazaki, Naoya Ogawa, Chitose Kawai, Akira Narita, Yoshitaka Esaki, Minoru Yamamoto, Noboru |
author_facet | Ida, Hanae Koyama, Takafumi Mizuno, Takaaki Sunami, Kuniko Kubo, Takashi Sudo, Kazuki Tao, Kayoko Hirata, Makoto Yonemori, Kan Kato, Ken Okusaka, Takuji Ohe, Yuichiro Matsui, Yoshiyuki Yamazaki, Naoya Ogawa, Chitose Kawai, Akira Narita, Yoshitaka Esaki, Minoru Yamamoto, Noboru |
author_sort | Ida, Hanae |
collection | PubMed |
description | Previous clinical trials indicate that 10%–25% of patients received genomically matched therapy after comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) tests. However, the clinical utility of CGP tests has not been assessed in clinical practice. We assessed the clinical utility of CGP tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor and determined the proportion of patients receiving genomically matched therapy among those with common and non‐common cancers. From August 2019 to July 2020, a total of 418 patients had undergone CGP tests, and the results were discussed through the molecular tumor board at our site. The median age of patients was 57 (range: 3–86) years. Colorectal cancer was the most common, with 47 (11%) patients. Actionable genomic alterations (median 3, range: 1–17) were identified in 368 (88.0%) of 418 patients. Druggable genomic alterations were determined in 196 (46.9%) of 418 patients through the molecular tumor board. Genomically matched therapy was administered as the subsequent line of therapy in 51 (12.2%) patients, which is comparable to the proportion we previously reported in a clinical trial (13.4%) (p = 0.6919). The proportion of patients receiving genomically matched therapy was significantly higher among those with common cancers (16.2%) than non‐common cancers (9.4%) (p = 0.0365). Genomically matched therapy after the CGP tests was administered to 12.2% of patients, which is similar to the proportion reported in the previous clinical trials. The clinical utility of CGP tests in patients with common cancers greatly exceeded that in patients with non‐common cancers. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9746060 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97460602022-12-14 Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor in clinical practice Ida, Hanae Koyama, Takafumi Mizuno, Takaaki Sunami, Kuniko Kubo, Takashi Sudo, Kazuki Tao, Kayoko Hirata, Makoto Yonemori, Kan Kato, Ken Okusaka, Takuji Ohe, Yuichiro Matsui, Yoshiyuki Yamazaki, Naoya Ogawa, Chitose Kawai, Akira Narita, Yoshitaka Esaki, Minoru Yamamoto, Noboru Cancer Sci ORIGINAL ARTICLES Previous clinical trials indicate that 10%–25% of patients received genomically matched therapy after comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) tests. However, the clinical utility of CGP tests has not been assessed in clinical practice. We assessed the clinical utility of CGP tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor and determined the proportion of patients receiving genomically matched therapy among those with common and non‐common cancers. From August 2019 to July 2020, a total of 418 patients had undergone CGP tests, and the results were discussed through the molecular tumor board at our site. The median age of patients was 57 (range: 3–86) years. Colorectal cancer was the most common, with 47 (11%) patients. Actionable genomic alterations (median 3, range: 1–17) were identified in 368 (88.0%) of 418 patients. Druggable genomic alterations were determined in 196 (46.9%) of 418 patients through the molecular tumor board. Genomically matched therapy was administered as the subsequent line of therapy in 51 (12.2%) patients, which is comparable to the proportion we previously reported in a clinical trial (13.4%) (p = 0.6919). The proportion of patients receiving genomically matched therapy was significantly higher among those with common cancers (16.2%) than non‐common cancers (9.4%) (p = 0.0365). Genomically matched therapy after the CGP tests was administered to 12.2% of patients, which is similar to the proportion reported in the previous clinical trials. The clinical utility of CGP tests in patients with common cancers greatly exceeded that in patients with non‐common cancers. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-09-29 2022-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9746060/ /pubmed/36106376 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cas.15586 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Cancer Science published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Cancer Association. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | ORIGINAL ARTICLES Ida, Hanae Koyama, Takafumi Mizuno, Takaaki Sunami, Kuniko Kubo, Takashi Sudo, Kazuki Tao, Kayoko Hirata, Makoto Yonemori, Kan Kato, Ken Okusaka, Takuji Ohe, Yuichiro Matsui, Yoshiyuki Yamazaki, Naoya Ogawa, Chitose Kawai, Akira Narita, Yoshitaka Esaki, Minoru Yamamoto, Noboru Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor in clinical practice |
title | Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor in clinical practice |
title_full | Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor in clinical practice |
title_fullStr | Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor in clinical practice |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor in clinical practice |
title_short | Clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor in clinical practice |
title_sort | clinical utility of comprehensive genomic profiling tests for advanced or metastatic solid tumor in clinical practice |
topic | ORIGINAL ARTICLES |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9746060/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36106376 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cas.15586 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT idahanae clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT koyamatakafumi clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT mizunotakaaki clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT sunamikuniko clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT kubotakashi clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT sudokazuki clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT taokayoko clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT hiratamakoto clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT yonemorikan clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT katoken clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT okusakatakuji clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT oheyuichiro clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT matsuiyoshiyuki clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT yamazakinaoya clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT ogawachitose clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT kawaiakira clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT naritayoshitaka clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT esakiminoru clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice AT yamamotonoboru clinicalutilityofcomprehensivegenomicprofilingtestsforadvancedormetastaticsolidtumorinclinicalpractice |