User login
For identifying patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who might benefit from therapy with drugs targeted against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), analysis of plasma for circulating tumor DNA – aka “liquid biopsy” – is about as capable as and considerably faster than tissue analysis of RAS mutational status, investigators contend.
Among 412 chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) for whom both plasma and tissue samples were available, the kappa coefficient (a measure of acceptable concordance) between ctDNA RAS mutation detection and tissue-based analysis was 0.71, just over the minimum 0.7, and the accuracy of the liquid biopsy sampling was 85.2%, reported Pierre Laurent-Puig, MD, PhD, of Sorbonne University in Paris, and his colleagues.
“[E]ven if our results are limited to the techniques used with their analytic sensitivity, we show here for the first time in a prospective study an excellent concordance between plasma and tumor RAS mutation status in metastatic colorectal cancer patients, especially those with liver metastases. These results validate the routine use of plasma RAS analysis in patients with colorectal cancer and liver metastases,” they wrote. The report was published in Annals of Oncology.
The investigators found that ctDNA was more likely to yield inconclusive results in patients without liver metastases. In patients with liver metastases, the accuracy of the liquid biopsy using next-generation sequencing (NGS) alone to detect RAS mutations was 93.5%, and when detection of methylated biomarkers was added in, the accuracy was 97%.
In the AGEO RASANC prospective multicenter study, the investigators prospectively collected plasma samples from patients with mCRC and sent them to a central lab for analysis by NGS with the colon/lung cancer V2 Ampliseq panel and with digital polymerase chain reaction dPCR for genes associated with DNA methylation (WIF1 and NPY).
Matched tissue samples from the same patients were analyzed locally according to routine practice.
As noted before, the kappa coefficient was 0.71, indicating that agreement between the tests was at least 70% better than by chance alone.
In 329 patients who had detectable ctDNA, defined as at least one mutation or one methylated biomarker, the kappa coefficient rose to 89% and the accuracy to 94.8%.
Also as noted, in the 293 patients with liver metastases, the accuracy improved to close to 100% with both NGS and methylated biomarker detection.
“Based solely on the plasma analysis using our prespecified analysis, 14 patients would have received ineffective and potentially deleterious anti-EGFR therapy. All were considered as truly RAS wild-type in their plasma because of the presence of other mutations detected by NGS and/or a positive methylation assay,” the researchers wrote.
The lack of sensitivity of ctDNA in these patients may have been due to the fact that the fraction of mutated alleles in these patients was lower than in patients for whom both plasma and tissue analysis were negative for RAS mutations. All of these patients had early metastases, which could explain why the sensitivity of the plasma assay was lower than in patients with advanced-stage disease, they said.
“On the contrary detection of RAS mutations in plasma but not in tumor cells could exclude some patients from potentially effective anti-EGFR therapy,” they added. They identified eight patients with plasma-positive, tissue-negative discordance, which could be due to errors in tissue sampling due to heterogeneity of mutations within tissues, or to a lack of sensitivity of RAS mutation detection in tissues.
The trial was sponsored by AGEO and supported by a grant from Merck Serono. Dr. Laurent-Puig disclosed grants from AGEO and personal fees from Merck Serono and other companies. Multiple coauthors reported fees from Merck Serono and others.
SOURCE: Laurent-Puig P et al. Ann Oncol. 2018 Feb 9. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy061/4846852.
Regarding next steps, several studies have now shown a high correlation between RAS testing in plasma versus tissue, and a better understanding of the technical and clinical characteristics of RAS ctDNA testing has helped in increasing the accuracy to almost 100%. With that, RAS ctDNA testing should be ready for its clinical use.
However, as clinicians, we need to remember that the goal of RAS testing is to select patients that will benefit from anti-EGFR therapy, and thus, a threshold of RAS detection in ctDNA that is clinically meaningful needs to be established in future studies.
In summary, Laurent-Puig et al. confirm the high correlation between tissue and ctDNA RAS testing, but more importantly they help by optimizing the limits for its clinical implementation. ctDNA RAS testing is ready for clinical use, but we now know that it may not be a good tool for a minority of patients with specific clinical characteristics.
Clara Montagut, MD, is with Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute in Barcelona. Dana Tsui, PhD, and Luis Alberto Diaz Jr., MD, are with Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. Dr. Montagut is an advisory consultant to Merck Serono and other companies. Dr. Diaz is a founder and shareholder of PapGene and Personal Genome Diagnostics and a consultant for Merck and others. Dr. Tsui is a former consultant of Inivata Ltd, and a contributor to patents on cell-free DNA detection methodologies, and may receive royalties related to the licenses of those patents to Inivata Ltd. Their remarks are adapted from an editorial (Ann Oncol. 2018 Feb 9. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy091).
Regarding next steps, several studies have now shown a high correlation between RAS testing in plasma versus tissue, and a better understanding of the technical and clinical characteristics of RAS ctDNA testing has helped in increasing the accuracy to almost 100%. With that, RAS ctDNA testing should be ready for its clinical use.
However, as clinicians, we need to remember that the goal of RAS testing is to select patients that will benefit from anti-EGFR therapy, and thus, a threshold of RAS detection in ctDNA that is clinically meaningful needs to be established in future studies.
In summary, Laurent-Puig et al. confirm the high correlation between tissue and ctDNA RAS testing, but more importantly they help by optimizing the limits for its clinical implementation. ctDNA RAS testing is ready for clinical use, but we now know that it may not be a good tool for a minority of patients with specific clinical characteristics.
Clara Montagut, MD, is with Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute in Barcelona. Dana Tsui, PhD, and Luis Alberto Diaz Jr., MD, are with Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. Dr. Montagut is an advisory consultant to Merck Serono and other companies. Dr. Diaz is a founder and shareholder of PapGene and Personal Genome Diagnostics and a consultant for Merck and others. Dr. Tsui is a former consultant of Inivata Ltd, and a contributor to patents on cell-free DNA detection methodologies, and may receive royalties related to the licenses of those patents to Inivata Ltd. Their remarks are adapted from an editorial (Ann Oncol. 2018 Feb 9. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy091).
Regarding next steps, several studies have now shown a high correlation between RAS testing in plasma versus tissue, and a better understanding of the technical and clinical characteristics of RAS ctDNA testing has helped in increasing the accuracy to almost 100%. With that, RAS ctDNA testing should be ready for its clinical use.
However, as clinicians, we need to remember that the goal of RAS testing is to select patients that will benefit from anti-EGFR therapy, and thus, a threshold of RAS detection in ctDNA that is clinically meaningful needs to be established in future studies.
In summary, Laurent-Puig et al. confirm the high correlation between tissue and ctDNA RAS testing, but more importantly they help by optimizing the limits for its clinical implementation. ctDNA RAS testing is ready for clinical use, but we now know that it may not be a good tool for a minority of patients with specific clinical characteristics.
Clara Montagut, MD, is with Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute in Barcelona. Dana Tsui, PhD, and Luis Alberto Diaz Jr., MD, are with Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. Dr. Montagut is an advisory consultant to Merck Serono and other companies. Dr. Diaz is a founder and shareholder of PapGene and Personal Genome Diagnostics and a consultant for Merck and others. Dr. Tsui is a former consultant of Inivata Ltd, and a contributor to patents on cell-free DNA detection methodologies, and may receive royalties related to the licenses of those patents to Inivata Ltd. Their remarks are adapted from an editorial (Ann Oncol. 2018 Feb 9. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy091).
For identifying patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who might benefit from therapy with drugs targeted against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), analysis of plasma for circulating tumor DNA – aka “liquid biopsy” – is about as capable as and considerably faster than tissue analysis of RAS mutational status, investigators contend.
Among 412 chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) for whom both plasma and tissue samples were available, the kappa coefficient (a measure of acceptable concordance) between ctDNA RAS mutation detection and tissue-based analysis was 0.71, just over the minimum 0.7, and the accuracy of the liquid biopsy sampling was 85.2%, reported Pierre Laurent-Puig, MD, PhD, of Sorbonne University in Paris, and his colleagues.
“[E]ven if our results are limited to the techniques used with their analytic sensitivity, we show here for the first time in a prospective study an excellent concordance between plasma and tumor RAS mutation status in metastatic colorectal cancer patients, especially those with liver metastases. These results validate the routine use of plasma RAS analysis in patients with colorectal cancer and liver metastases,” they wrote. The report was published in Annals of Oncology.
The investigators found that ctDNA was more likely to yield inconclusive results in patients without liver metastases. In patients with liver metastases, the accuracy of the liquid biopsy using next-generation sequencing (NGS) alone to detect RAS mutations was 93.5%, and when detection of methylated biomarkers was added in, the accuracy was 97%.
In the AGEO RASANC prospective multicenter study, the investigators prospectively collected plasma samples from patients with mCRC and sent them to a central lab for analysis by NGS with the colon/lung cancer V2 Ampliseq panel and with digital polymerase chain reaction dPCR for genes associated with DNA methylation (WIF1 and NPY).
Matched tissue samples from the same patients were analyzed locally according to routine practice.
As noted before, the kappa coefficient was 0.71, indicating that agreement between the tests was at least 70% better than by chance alone.
In 329 patients who had detectable ctDNA, defined as at least one mutation or one methylated biomarker, the kappa coefficient rose to 89% and the accuracy to 94.8%.
Also as noted, in the 293 patients with liver metastases, the accuracy improved to close to 100% with both NGS and methylated biomarker detection.
“Based solely on the plasma analysis using our prespecified analysis, 14 patients would have received ineffective and potentially deleterious anti-EGFR therapy. All were considered as truly RAS wild-type in their plasma because of the presence of other mutations detected by NGS and/or a positive methylation assay,” the researchers wrote.
The lack of sensitivity of ctDNA in these patients may have been due to the fact that the fraction of mutated alleles in these patients was lower than in patients for whom both plasma and tissue analysis were negative for RAS mutations. All of these patients had early metastases, which could explain why the sensitivity of the plasma assay was lower than in patients with advanced-stage disease, they said.
“On the contrary detection of RAS mutations in plasma but not in tumor cells could exclude some patients from potentially effective anti-EGFR therapy,” they added. They identified eight patients with plasma-positive, tissue-negative discordance, which could be due to errors in tissue sampling due to heterogeneity of mutations within tissues, or to a lack of sensitivity of RAS mutation detection in tissues.
The trial was sponsored by AGEO and supported by a grant from Merck Serono. Dr. Laurent-Puig disclosed grants from AGEO and personal fees from Merck Serono and other companies. Multiple coauthors reported fees from Merck Serono and others.
SOURCE: Laurent-Puig P et al. Ann Oncol. 2018 Feb 9. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy061/4846852.
For identifying patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who might benefit from therapy with drugs targeted against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), analysis of plasma for circulating tumor DNA – aka “liquid biopsy” – is about as capable as and considerably faster than tissue analysis of RAS mutational status, investigators contend.
Among 412 chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) for whom both plasma and tissue samples were available, the kappa coefficient (a measure of acceptable concordance) between ctDNA RAS mutation detection and tissue-based analysis was 0.71, just over the minimum 0.7, and the accuracy of the liquid biopsy sampling was 85.2%, reported Pierre Laurent-Puig, MD, PhD, of Sorbonne University in Paris, and his colleagues.
“[E]ven if our results are limited to the techniques used with their analytic sensitivity, we show here for the first time in a prospective study an excellent concordance between plasma and tumor RAS mutation status in metastatic colorectal cancer patients, especially those with liver metastases. These results validate the routine use of plasma RAS analysis in patients with colorectal cancer and liver metastases,” they wrote. The report was published in Annals of Oncology.
The investigators found that ctDNA was more likely to yield inconclusive results in patients without liver metastases. In patients with liver metastases, the accuracy of the liquid biopsy using next-generation sequencing (NGS) alone to detect RAS mutations was 93.5%, and when detection of methylated biomarkers was added in, the accuracy was 97%.
In the AGEO RASANC prospective multicenter study, the investigators prospectively collected plasma samples from patients with mCRC and sent them to a central lab for analysis by NGS with the colon/lung cancer V2 Ampliseq panel and with digital polymerase chain reaction dPCR for genes associated with DNA methylation (WIF1 and NPY).
Matched tissue samples from the same patients were analyzed locally according to routine practice.
As noted before, the kappa coefficient was 0.71, indicating that agreement between the tests was at least 70% better than by chance alone.
In 329 patients who had detectable ctDNA, defined as at least one mutation or one methylated biomarker, the kappa coefficient rose to 89% and the accuracy to 94.8%.
Also as noted, in the 293 patients with liver metastases, the accuracy improved to close to 100% with both NGS and methylated biomarker detection.
“Based solely on the plasma analysis using our prespecified analysis, 14 patients would have received ineffective and potentially deleterious anti-EGFR therapy. All were considered as truly RAS wild-type in their plasma because of the presence of other mutations detected by NGS and/or a positive methylation assay,” the researchers wrote.
The lack of sensitivity of ctDNA in these patients may have been due to the fact that the fraction of mutated alleles in these patients was lower than in patients for whom both plasma and tissue analysis were negative for RAS mutations. All of these patients had early metastases, which could explain why the sensitivity of the plasma assay was lower than in patients with advanced-stage disease, they said.
“On the contrary detection of RAS mutations in plasma but not in tumor cells could exclude some patients from potentially effective anti-EGFR therapy,” they added. They identified eight patients with plasma-positive, tissue-negative discordance, which could be due to errors in tissue sampling due to heterogeneity of mutations within tissues, or to a lack of sensitivity of RAS mutation detection in tissues.
The trial was sponsored by AGEO and supported by a grant from Merck Serono. Dr. Laurent-Puig disclosed grants from AGEO and personal fees from Merck Serono and other companies. Multiple coauthors reported fees from Merck Serono and others.
SOURCE: Laurent-Puig P et al. Ann Oncol. 2018 Feb 9. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy061/4846852.
FROM ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
Key clinical point: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) may offer a more rapid method for accurately determining RAS mutational status.
Major finding: In patients with colorectal cancer with liver metastases, concordance between ctDNA and tissues samples was high.
Study details: Prospective study comparing RAS mutational analysis results with plasma ctDNA and tissue analysis in 412 chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
Disclosures: The trial was sponsored by AGEO and supported by a grant from Merck Serono. Dr. Laurent-Puig disclosed grants from AGEO and personal fees from Merck Serono and other companies. Multiple coauthors reported fees from Merck Serono and others.
Source: Laurent-Puig P et al. Ann Oncol. 2018 Feb 9. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy061/4846852.