Comprehensive genomic profiling: Does timing matter?

PURPOSE: There is variability in utilization of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling (CGP) in most of the metastatic solid tumors (MST). We evaluated the CGP utilization patterns and its impact on outcomes at an academic tertiary center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Institutional database was reviewed for CGP data in adult patients with MST between 01/2012 – 04/2020. Patients were categorized based on interval between CGP and metastatic diagnosis; 3 tertiles of distribution (T1-earliest to the diagnosis, T3-furthest), and pre-mets (CGP performed prior to diagnosis of metastasis). Overall survival (OS) was estimated from the time of metastatic diagnosis with left truncation at the time of CGP. Cox regression model was used to estimate the impact of timing of CGP on survival. RESULTS: Among 1,358 patients, 710 were female, 1,109 Caucasian, 186 Afro-Americans, and 36 Hispanic. The common histologies were lung cancer (254; 19%), colorectal cancer (203; 15%), gynecologic cancers (121; 8.9%), and pancreatic cancer (106; 7.8%). Time interval between diagnosis of metastatic disease and CGP was not statistically significantly different based on sex, race and ethnicity after adjusting for histologic diagnoses with 2 exceptions - Hispanics with lung cancer had delayed CGP compared to non-Hispanics (p =0.019) and females with pancreas cancer had delayed CGP compared to males (p =0.025). Lung cancer, gastro-esophageal cancer and gynecologic malignancies had better survival if they had CGP performed during the first tertile after metastatic diagnosis. CONCLUSION: CGP utilization across cancer types was equitable irrespective of sex, race and ethnicity. Early CGP after metastatic diagnosis might have effect on treatment delivery and clinical outcomes in cancer type with more actionable targets.