A comprehensive overview of the heterogeneity of EGFR exon 20 variants in NSCLC and (pre)clinical activity to currently available treatments

Activating EGFR mutations are commonly observed in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). About 4-10 % of all activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations are heterogenous in-frame deletion and/or insertion mutations clustering within exon 20 (EGFRex20+). NSCLC patients with EGFRex20+ mutations are treated as a single disease entity, irrespective of the type and location of the mutation. Here, we provide a comprehensive assessment of the literature reporting both in vitro and clinical drug sensitivity across different EGFRex20+ mutations. The activating A763_Y764insFQEA mutation has a better tumor response in comparison with mutations in the near- and far regions directly following the C-helix and should therefore be treated differently. For other EGFRex20+ mutations marked differences in treatment responses have been reported indicating the need for a classification beyond the exon-based classification. A further classification can be achieved using a structure-function modeling approach and experimental data using patient-derived cell lines. The detailed overview of TKI responses for each EGFRex20+ mutation can assist treating physicians to select the most optimal drug for individual NSCLC patients.</p

Repeatability of [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT total metabolic active tumour volume and total tumour burden in NSCLC patients

Background: Total metabolic active tumour volume (TMATV) and total tumour burden (TTB) are increasingly studied as prognostic and predictive factors in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. In this study, we investigated the repeatability of TMATV and TTB as function of uptake interval, positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) image reconstruction settings, and lesion delineation method. We used six lesion delineation methods, four direct PET image-derived delineations and two based on a majority vote approach, i.e. intersection between two or more delineations (MV2) and between three or more delineations (MV3). To evaluate the accuracy of those methods, they were compared with a reference delineation obtained from the consensus of the segmentations performed by three experienced observers. Ten NSCLC patients underwent two baseline whole-body [ 18 F]2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-2-D-glucose ([ 18 F]FDG) PET/CT studies on separate days, within 3 days. Two scans were obtained on each day at 60 and 90 min post-injection to assess the influence of tracer uptake interval. PET/CT images were reconstructed following the European Association of Nuclear Medicine Research Ltd. (EARL) compliant settings and with point-spread-function (PSF) modelling. Repeatability between the measurements of each day was determined and the influence of uptake interval, reconstruction settings, and lesion delineation method was assessed using the generalized estimating equations model. Results: Based on the Jaccard index with the reference delineation, the MV2 lesion delineation method was the most successful method for automated lesion segmentation. The best overall repeatability (lowest repeatability coefficient, RC) was found for TTB from 90 min of tracer uptake scans reconstructed with EARL compliant settings and delineated with 41% of lesion’s maximum SUV method (RC = 11%). In most cases, TMATV and TTB repeatability were not significantly affected by changes in tracer uptake time or reconstruction settings. However, some lesion delineation methods had significantly different repeatability when applied to the same images. Conclusions: This study suggests that under some circumstances TMATV and TTB repeatability are significantly affected by the lesion delineation method used. Performing the delineation with a majority vote approach improves reliability and does not hamper repeatability, regardless of acquisition and reconstruction settings. It is therefore concluded that by using a majority vote based tumour segmentation approach, TMATV and TTB in NSCLC patients can be measured with high reliability and precision

Multicenter Comparison of Molecular Tumor Boards in The Netherlands:Definition, Composition, Methods, and Targeted Therapy Recommendations

Background Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) provide rational, genomics-driven, patient-tailored treatment recommendations. Worldwide, MTBs differ in terms of scope, composition, methods, and recommendations. This study aimed to assess differences in methods and agreement in treatment recommendations among MTBs from tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands. Materials and Methods MTBs from all tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands were invited to participate. A survey assessing scope, value, logistics, composition, decision-making method, reporting, and registration of the MTBs was completed through on-site interviews with members from each MTB. Targeted therapy recommendations were compared using 10 anonymized cases. Participating MTBs were asked to provide a treatment recommendation in accordance with their own methods. Agreement was based on which molecular alteration(s) was considered actionable with the next line of targeted therapy. Results Interviews with 24 members of eight MTBs revealed that all participating MTBs focused on rare or complex mutational cancer profiles, operated independently of cancer type-specific multidisciplinary teams, and consisted of at least (thoracic and/or medical) oncologists, pathologists, and clinical scientists in molecular pathology. Differences were the types of cancer discussed and the methods used to achieve a recommendation. Nevertheless, agreement among MTB recommendations, based on identified actionable molecular alteration(s), was high for the 10 evaluated cases (86%). Conclusion MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational cancer profiles. We propose a "Dutch MTB model" for an optimal, collaborative, and nationally aligned MTB workflow. Implications for Practice Interpretation of genomic analyses for optimal choice of target therapy for patients with cancer is becoming increasingly complex. A molecular tumor board (MTB) supports oncologists in rationalizing therapy options. However, there is no consensus on the most optimal setup for an MTB, which can affect the quality of recommendations. This study reveals that the eight MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational profiles. The Dutch MTB model is based on a collaborative and nationally aligned workflow with interinstitutional collaboration and data sharing

Reproducibility of quantitative F-18-3'-deoxy-3'-fluorothymidine measurements using positron emission tomography

Positron emission tomography (PET) using F-18-3'-deoxy-3'-fluorothymidine ([F-18]FLT) allows noninvasive monitoring of tumour proliferation. For serial imaging in individual patients, good reproducibility is essential. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the reproducibility of quantitative [F-18]FLT measurements. Nine patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and six with head-and-neck cancer (HNC) underwent [F-18]FLT PET twice within 7 days prior to therapy. The maximum pixel value (SUVmax) and a threshold defined volume (SUV41%) were defined for all delineated lesions. The plasma to tumour transfer constant (K-i) was estimated using both Patlak graphical analysis and nonlinear regression (NLR). NLR was also used to estimate k(3), which, at least in theory, selectively reflects thymidine kinase 1 activity. The level of agreement between test and retest values was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis. All primary tumours and > 90% of clinically suspected locoregional metastases could be delineated. In total, 24 lesions were defined. NLR-derived K-i, Patlak-derived K-i, SUV41% and SUVmax showed excellent reproducibility with ICCs of 0.92, 0.95, 0.98 and 0.93, and SDs of 16%, 12%, 7% and 11%, respectively. Reproducibility was poor for k(3) with an ICC of 0.43 and SD of 38%. Quantitative [F-18]FLT measurements are reproducible in both NSCLC and HNC patients. When monitoring response in individual patients, changes of more than 15% in SUV41%, 20-25% in SUVmax and Patlak-derived K-i, and 32% in NLR3k-derived K-i are likely to represent treatment effect

Multicenter Comparison of Molecular Tumor Boards in The Netherlands: Definition, Composition, Methods, and Targeted Therapy Recommendations

Background: Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) provide rational, genomics-driven, patient-tailored treatment recommendations. Worldwide, MTBs differ in terms of scope, composition, methods, and recommendations. This study aimed to assess differences in methods and agreement in treatment recommendations among MTBs from tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands. Materials and Methods: MTBs from all tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands were invited to participate. A survey assessing scope, value, logistics, composition, decision-making method, reporting, and registration of the MTBs was completed through on-site interviews with members from each MTB. Targeted therapy recommendations were compared using 10 anonymized cases. Participating MTBs were asked to provide a treatment recommendation in accordance with their own methods. Agreement was based on which molecular alteration(s) was considered actionable with the next line of targeted therapy. Results: Interviews with 24 members of eight MTBs revealed that all participating MTBs focused on rare or complex mutational cancer profiles, operated independently of cancer type–specific multidisciplinary teams, and consisted of at least (thoracic and/or medical) oncologists, pathologists, and clinical scientists in molecular pathology. Differences were the types of cancer discussed and the methods used to achieve a recommendation. Nevertheless, agreement among MTB recommendations, based on identified actionable molecular alteration(s), was high for the 10 evaluated cases (86%). Conclusion: MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational cancer profiles. We propose a “Dutch MTB model” for an optimal, collaborative, and nationally aligned MTB workflow. Implications for Practice: Interpretation of genomic analyses for optimal choice of target therapy for patients with cancer is becoming increasingly complex. A molecular tumor board (MTB) supports oncologists in rationalizing therapy options. However, there is no consensus on the most optimal setup for an MTB, which can affect the quality of recommendations. This study reveals that the eight MTBs associated with tertiary cancer referral centers in The Netherlands are similar in setup and reach a high agreement in recommendations for rare or complex mutational profiles. The Dutch MTB model is based on a collaborative and nationally aligned workflow with interinstitutional collaboration and data sharing

Detection and localization of early- and late-stage cancers using platelet RNA

Cancer patients benefit from early tumor detection since treatment outcomes are more favorable for less advanced cancers. Platelets are involved in cancer progression and are considered a promising biosource for cancer detection, as they alter their RNA content upon local and systemic cues. We show that tumor-educated platelet (TEP) RNA-based blood tests enable the detection of 18 cancer types. With 99% specificity in asymptomatic controls, thromboSeq correctly detected the presence of cancer in two-thirds of 1,096 blood samples from stage I–IV cancer patients and in half of 352 stage I–III tumors. Symptomatic controls, including inflammatory and cardiovascular diseases, and benign tumors had increased false-positive test results with an average specificity of 78%. Moreover, thromboSeq determined the tumor site of origin in five different tumor types correctly in over 80% of the cancer patients. These results highlight the potential properties of TEP-derived RNA panels to supplement current approaches for blood-based cancer screening

Therapeutic approach to treating patients with BRAF-mutant lung cancer: Latest evidence and clinical implications

Lung adenocarcinoma is known for its high rate of somatic mutations and genomic rearrangements. The identification of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements that sensitize tumors to specific drugs has changed the therapeutic approach and prognosis in these molecularly-defined subgroups. Several other key genetic alterations have been identified, of which BRAF mutations are found in 4% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases. Targeted drugs against BRAF and downstream MEK were recently approved for the treatment of BRAF-positive melanoma and have entered clinical evaluation in NSCLC. In this review we discuss the latest evidence on the treatment of BRAF-mutated NSCLC, including tumor biology, targeted treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors, therapeutic resistance and strategies to overcome resistance

PD-L1 IHC in NSCLC with a global and methodological perspective

In summary, the PD-L1 biomarker discussed here highlights the importance of understanding the practice of IHC. This can be used to the patients advantage, with appropriate usage. The currently available literature on PD-L1 IHC from a methodologic point of view has not shown that different assays are comparable. The route of laboratory developed test and commercial test validation is the same: challenging and complex. Executing this process along proper methodologic lines is needed to ensure that patients receive the most accurate and representative test outcomes

Nonsmall cell lung carcinoma: Diagnostic difficulties in small biopsies and cytological specimens

The pathological and molecular classification of lung cancer has become substantially more complex over the past decade. For diagnostic purposes on small samples, additional stains are frequently required to distinguish between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma. Subsequently, for advanced nonsquamous cell nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) patients, predictive analyses on epidermal growth factor receptor, anaplastic lymphoma kinase and ROS1 are required. In NSCLCs negative for these biomarkers, programmed death ligand-1 immunohistochemistry is performed. Small samples (biopsy and cytology) require “tissue” management, which is best achieved by the interaction of all physicians involved