How to read a next-generation sequencing report-what oncologists need to know.

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of tumor cell-derived DNA/RNA to screen for targetable genomic alterations is now widely available and has become part of routine practice in oncology. NGS testing strategies depend on cancer type, disease stage and the impact of results on treatment selection. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) has recently published recommendations for the use of NGS in patients with advanced cancer. We complement the ESMO recommendations with a practical review of how oncologists should read and interpret NGS reports. A concise and straightforward NGS report contains details of the tumor sample, the technology used and highlights not only the most important and potentially actionable results, but also other pathogenic alterations detected. Variants of unknown significance should also be listed. Interpretation of NGS reports should be a joint effort between molecular pathologists, tumor biologists and clinicians. Rather than relying and acting on the information provided by the NGS report, oncologists need to obtain a basic level of understanding to read and interpret NGS results. Comprehensive annotated databases are available for clinicians to review the information detailed in the NGS report. Molecular tumor boards do not only stimulate debate and exchange, but may also help to interpret challenging reports and to ensure continuing medical education

Similarities and Differences of Blood N-Glycoproteins in Five Solid Carcinomas at Localized Clinical Stage Analyzed by SWATH-MS.

Cancer is mostly incurable when diagnosed at a metastatic stage, making its early detection via blood proteins of immense clinical interest. Proteomic changes in tumor tissue may lead to changes detectable in the protein composition of circulating blood plasma. Using a proteomic workflow combining N-glycosite enrichment and SWATH mass spectrometry, we generate a data resource of 284 blood samples derived from patients with different types of localized-stage carcinomas and from matched controls. We observe whether the changes in the patient's plasma are specific to a particular carcinoma or represent a generic signature of proteins modified uniformly in a common, systemic response to many cancers. A quantitative comparison of the resulting N-glycosite profiles discovers that proteins related to blood platelets are common to several cancers (e.g., THBS1), whereas others are highly cancer-type specific. Available proteomics data, including a SWATH library to study N-glycoproteins, will facilitate follow-up biomarker research into early cancer detection

61MO Biomarker analysis of men with enzalutamide (enza)-resistant metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with pembrolizumab (pembro) + enza in KEYNOTE-199

Background: In KEYNOTE-199 (NCT02787005), pembro + enza had durable antitumor activity in enza-refractory mCRPC. We evaluated the association between prespecified biomarkers and clinical outcomes. Methods: Cohorts 4 (C4; RECIST-measurable disease) and 5 (C5; nonmeasurable, bone-predominant disease) enrolled men with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC, irrespective of PD-L1 status, that progressed after initial response to enza. We evaluated TMB by whole exome sequencing (n = 64), PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) by IHC (n = 124), and 18-gene T-cell–inflamed gene expression profile (TcellinfGEP) by NanoString (n = 51). Outcomes were DCR, PFS, PSA response, PSA progression, OS, and ORR per blinded independent review (C4 only). Significance of continuous biomarkers (CPS, TMB, GEP) was prespecified at 0.05 for 1-sided P values from logistic (ORR, DCR, PSA response) and Cox proportional hazard (PFS, OS, PSA progression) regression adjusted for ECOG PS. Results: In C4, ORR was 10% (5/48) in pts with evaluable TMB data and 12% (10/81) in pts with CPS data. In C4 and C5, 16% (10/64) and 14% (17/124) of pts with TMB and CPS data, respectively, achieved a PSA response. TMB was significantly associated with DCR (P = 0.03) and trended toward an association with PSA response (P = 0.08). TMB (AUROC [95% CI]: 0.68 [0.51-0.86]), but not CPS (0.54 [0.41-0.67]) or TcellinfGEP (0.55 [0.37-0.74]), enriched for PSA response. TMB (P = 0.04), but not CPS (P = 0.57) or TcellinfGEP (P = 0.32), was significantly associated with PSA progression. There was 1 MSI-H pt (per Promega PCR assay); this pt achieved an objective and PSA response and had PFS \u3e6 months. TMB, CPS, and TcellinfGEP were not associated with PFS or OS. There was a low prevalence of TMB ≥175 mut/exome (11%) and TcellinfGEP-high (≥−0.318; 16%). Conclusions: In this biomarker analysis of KEYNOTE-199 C4-C5, PD-L1 CPS and TcellinfGEP were not significantly associated with clinical outcome. Despite the low prevalence of TMB ≥175 mut/exome, TMB was positively associated with outcomes of pembro + enza in pts with mCRPC. The sample sizes for the exploratory analyses were small, and results should be interpreted with caution

Imaging Diagnosis and Follow-up of Advanced Prostate Cancer: Clinical Perspectives and State of the Art.

The management of advanced prostate cancer has changed substantially with the availability of multiple effective novel treatments, which has led to improved disease survival. In the era of personalized cancer treatments, more precise imaging may help physicians deliver better care. More accurate local staging and earlier detection of metastatic disease, accurate identification of oligometastatic disease, and optimal assessment of treatment response are areas where modern imaging is rapidly evolving and expanding. Next-generation imaging modalities, including whole-body MRI and molecular imaging with combined PET and CT and combined PET and MRI using novel radiopharmaceuticals, create new opportunities for imaging to support and refine management pathways in patients with advanced prostate cancer. This article demonstrates the potential and challenges of applying next-generation imaging to deliver the clinical promise of treatment breakthroughs

Lack of consensus identifies important areas for future clinical research: Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2019 findings

BACKGROUND: Innovations in treatments, imaging and molecular characterisation have improved outcomes for people with advanced prostate cancer; however, many aspects of clinical management are devoid of high-level evidence. At the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2019, many of these topics were addressed, and consensus was not always reached. The results from clinical trials will most reliably plus the gaps. METHODS: An invited panel of 57 experts voted on 123 multiple-choice questions on clinical management at APCCC 2019. No consensus was reached on 88 (71.5%) questions defined as <75% of panellists voting for the same answer option. We reviewed clinicaltrials.gov to identify relevant ongoing phase III trials in these areas of non-consensus. RESULTS: A number of ongoing phase III trials were identified that are relevant to these non-consensus issues. However, many non-consensus issues appear not to be addressed by current clinical trials. Of note, no phase III but only phase II trials were identified, investigating side effects of hormonal treatments and their management. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of consensus almost invariably indicates gaps in existing evidence. The high percentage of questions lacking consensus at APCCC 2019 highlights the complexity of advanced prostate cancer care and the need for robust, clinically relevant trials that can fill current gaps with high-level evidence. Our review of these areas of non-consensus and ongoing trials provides a useful summary, indicating areas in which future consensus may soon be reached. This review may facilitate academic investigators to identify and prioritise topics for future research

Volume of Bone Metastasis Assessed with Whole-Body Diffusion-weighted Imaging Is Associated with Overall Survival in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer.

Purpose To determine the correlation between the volume of bone metastasis as assessed with diffusion-weighted (DW) imaging and established prognostic factors in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and the association with overall survival (OS). Materials and Methods This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was obtained from all patients. The authors analyzed whole-body DW images obtained between June 2010 and February 2013 in 53 patients with mCRPC at the time of starting a new line of anticancer therapy. Bone metastases were identified and delineated on whole-body DW images in 43 eligible patients. Total tumor diffusion volume (tDV) was correlated with the bone scan index (BSI) and other prognostic factors by using the Pearson correlation coefficient (r). Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression. Results The median tDV was 503.1 mL (range, 5.6-2242 mL), and the median OS was 12.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.7, 16.1 months). There was a significant correlation between tDV and established prognostic factors, including hemoglobin level (r = -0.521, P < .001), prostate-specific antigen level (r = 0.556, P < .001), lactate dehydrogenase level (r = 0.534, P < .001), alkaline phosphatase level (r = 0.572, P < .001), circulating tumor cell count (r = 0.613, P = .004), and BSI (r = 0.565, P = .001). A higher tDV also showed a significant association with poorer OS (hazard ratio, 1.74; 95% CI: 1.02, 2.96; P = .035). Conclusion Metastatic bone disease from mCRPC can be evaluated and quantified with whole-body DW imaging. Whole-body DW imaging-generated tDV showed correlation with established prognostic biomarkers and is associated with OS in mCRPC. (©) RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article

Feasibility and acceptance of electronic monitoring of symptoms and syndromes using a handheld computer in patients with advanced cancer in daily oncology practice

Purpose: We investigated the feasibility and acceptance of electronic monitoring of symptoms and syndromes in oncological outpatient clinics using a PALM (handheld computer). Methods: The assessment of a combination of symptoms and clinical benefit parameters grouped in four pairs was tested in a pilot phase in advanced cancer patients. Based on these experiences, the software E-MOSAIC was developed, consisting of patient-reported symptoms and nutritional intake and objective assessments (weight, weight loss, performance status and medication for pain, fatigue, and cachexia). E-MOSAIC was then tested in four Swiss oncology centers. In order to compare the methods, patients completed the E-MOSAIC as a paper and a PALM version. Preferences of version and completion times were collected. Assessments were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests , and the test-retest reliability was evaluated. Results: The pilot phase was completed by 22 patients. Most patients and physicians perceived the assessment as useful. Sixty-two patients participated in the feasibility study. Twelve patients reported problems (understanding, optical, tactile), and five patients could not complete the assessment. The median time to complete the PALM-based assessment was 3min. Forty-nine percent of patients preferred the PALM, 23% preferred a paper version, and 28% of patients had no preference. Paper vs. PALM revealed no significant differences in symptoms, but in nutritional intake (p = 0.013). Test-retest (1h, n = 20) reliability was satisfactory (r = 073-98). Conclusion: Electronic symptom and clinical benefit monitoring is feasible in oncology outpatient clinics and perceived as useful by patients, oncology nurses, and oncologists. E-MOSAIC is tested in a prospective randomized trial

Addition of docetaxel to hormonal therapy in low- and high-burden metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer : long-term survival results from the STAMPEDE trial

Background STAMPEDE has previously reported that the use of upfront docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We report on long-term outcomes stratified by metastatic burden for M1 patients. Methods We randomly allocated patients in 2 : 1 ratio to standard-of-care (SOC; control group) or SOC + docetaxel. Metastatic disease burden was categorised using retrospectively-collected baseline staging scans where available. Analysis used Cox regression models, adjusted for stratification factors, with emphasis on restricted mean survival time where hazards were non-proportional. Results Between 05 October 2005 and 31 March 2013, 1086 M1 patients were randomised to receive SOC (n = 724) or SOC + docetaxel (n = 362). Metastatic burden was assessable for 830/1086 (76%) patients; 362 (44%) had low and 468 (56%) high metastatic burden. Median follow-up was 78.2 months. There were 494 deaths on SOC (41% more than the previous report). There was good evidence of benefit of docetaxel over SOC on OS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.69–0.95, P = 0.009) with no evidence of heterogeneity of docetaxel effect between metastatic burden sub-groups (interaction P = 0.827). Analysis of other outcomes found evidence of benefit for docetaxel over SOC in failure-free survival (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.57–0.76, P  0.5 in each case). There was no evidence that docetaxel resulted in late toxicity compared with SOC: after 1 year, G3-5 toxicity was reported for 28% SOC and 27% docetaxel (in patients still on follow-up at 1 year without prior progression). Conclusions The clinically significant benefit in survival for upfront docetaxel persists at longer follow-up, with no evidence that benefit differed by metastatic burden. We advocate that upfront docetaxel is considered for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients regardless of metastatic burden