Larotrectinib followed by selitrectinib in a novel DCTN1–NTRK1 fusion undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma

2020 ◽  
pp. 107815522093884
Author(s):  
Xue Na Goh ◽  
Michaela Su-Fern Seng ◽  
Amos Hong Pheng Loh ◽  
Achint Gupta ◽  
Kenneth Tou En Chang ◽  
...  

Introduction Neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase fusions cause overexpression or activation of kinase and are believed to confer oncogenic potential in some non-rhabdomyosarcoma soft tissue sarcomas. TRK inhibitors have recently been shown to induce responses in these tumours though current experience with these agents is still limited. Case report We report a case of an adolescent with treatment-refractory non-rhabdomyosarcoma soft tissue sarcomas, carrying a novel DCTN1–NTRK1 gene fusion whose progressive disease was treated with multi-kinase and TRK inhibitors. Management and outcome: Our patient was started on pan-TRK inhibitor larotrectinib, as his disease progressed after chemotherapy, radiation therapy and surgery, based on next-generation sequencing test showing DCTN1–NTRK1 gene fusion. He responded quickly to larotrectinib with the improvement of symptoms and reduction of masses. However, this response was short-lived due to the development of acquired solvent front resistance mutation. This patient did not respond to next-generation TRK inhibitor selitrectinib and eventually succumbed to his disease. Discussion The initial rapid and drastic response of our patient to larotrectinib was not sustained due to the development of acquired resistance. This case emphasizes the need for upfront and periodic next-generation sequencing testing to guide treatment of patients with refractory non-rhabdomyosarcoma soft tissue sarcomas.

2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (8) ◽  
pp. 1563-1571 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Jour ◽  
John D. Scarborough ◽  
Robin L. Jones ◽  
Elizabeth Loggers ◽  
Seth M. Pollack ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22552-e22552
Author(s):  
Mia C. Weiss ◽  
Alan Blank ◽  
Steven Gitelis ◽  
Mary J. Fidler ◽  
Marta Batus

e22552 Background: The overall survival for metastatic sarcoma has remained at only 18-20%. In the era of next generation sequencing (NGS), much research is ongoing on identifying optimal treatments. The MULTISARC trial aims to determine if NGS can lead to improved overall survival by randomizing patients with metastatic STS to receive NGS (followed by possible NGS-guided therapy) or not. We present our center’s experience with NGS in sarcomas patients. Methods: Patients with soft tissue and bone sarcomas at Rush that had the Foundation Medicine assay sent on tumor samples between August 2017 and August 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. The impact of NGS on clinical decision making was determined based on patients being prescribed off-label FDA-approved therapy targeting identified mutation. Results: Thirty-four patients with bone/soft tissue sarcomas that had NGS sent on specimens were identified. Median age at diagnosis: 43 (18-78 years); 18 males, 16 females. Histologic subtypes: synovial sarcoma, myxofibrosarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, sclerosing epitheloid fibrosarcoma, PEcoma, pleomorphic undifferentiated sarcoma, MPNST, liposarcoma- well and de-differentiated, angiosarcoma, osteosarcoma. 16/34 patients had targetable mutations with approved therapies in tumor types other than sarcoma. Four of these patients had therapy changed based on NGS results, 1 patient with metastatic chondrosarcoma (PTEN mutation, everolimus added), 1 patient with metastatic liposarcoma (CDK4 mutation, palbociclib added), 1 patient with metastatic osteosarcoma (CCD1/CDK4 and a PDGFRA mutation for which palbociclib followed by imatinib was added), and 1 patient with metastatic pleomorphic undifferentiated sarcoma (CDK4 mutation, palbociclib added). Targetable mutations for which clinical trials are available were identified in 25/34 (73%) of the cases. Conclusions: NGS was readily able to identify actionable mutations in close to 50% of patients with clinical trial opportunities in close to 75%. Four patients had therapy changed as a result of NGS testing. Although our study size is small, our data show potential for the use of genomic profiling to identify actionable targets, tailor therapy, and hopefully improve outcomes. [Table: see text]


2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_4) ◽  
pp. iv23-iv24
Author(s):  
Santhosh Nagaraju ◽  
Ion Boiangiu ◽  
Ian Brown ◽  
Hussien El-Maghraby ◽  
U Pohl

Abstract Aims Molecular profiling is increasingly used in the diagnosis of CNS and non-CNS neoplasms. More than a quarter of all soft tissue tumours are characterized by specific recurrent chromosomal translocations which can be used as molecular signatures. With increasing frequency, EWSR1 rearrangements are found on both mesenchymal tumours and primary glial/neuronal tumours. Here we present a case of intracranial myxoid mesenchymal tumour (IMMT), a rare tumour which is becoming more recognised in recent years, affecting mainly children and young adults, and rarely older adults. It can be found in intraaxial and extraaxial location, with frequent dural connection. The tumour is defined by the genetic hallmark of EWSR1-CREB family gene fusion. Including our case, 16 intracranial tumours with this gene fusion have been reported to date. Our goal is to contribute further to the characterisation of the morphological spectrum, fusion partners and biological behaviour of rare EWSR1-CREB (non-ETS)-rearranged tumours of the CNS. Method Case: The patient is a 27 year old woman with a frontal lobe lesion, radiologically described as a tumour with dural attachment. She underwent surgical debulking, and tumour tissue was histologically examined with conventional immunohistochemistry. Additional genetic testing included targeted mutation screening, FISH, EPIC (Illumina BeadChip) methylation array and next generation sequencing. Histology showed a mitotically active neoplasm with relatively uniform cells, round nuclei and oligodendroglioma-like clear cell change, but no myxoid change. Glomeruloid microvascular proliferation and large areas of tumour necrosis were present. Immunohistochemistry was focally positive for GFAP, and negative or normal for synaptophysin, IDH1 R132H mutation, ATRX and p53. The ki-67 index reached ~20%. Sequencing of IDH1 and IDH2 did not reveal rare IDH mutations, and FISH did not show 1p19q codeletion. Testing for BRAF V600 mutation was negative. Results Although the histology initially suggested a diagnosis of oligodendroglioma, the integrated diagnosis was compatible with glioblastoma, IDH wildtype. Methylation array analysis by EPIC array did not result in classification of currently known entities, neither confirming glioblastoma, nor providing a new diagnosis, when analysed on both brain tumour and sarcoma classifier. This suggested a novel tumour entity not yet represented in the classifier algorithm. Additional testing including next generation sequencing revealed EWSR1 gene rearrangement with fusion partner ATF1 (EWSR1-ATF1 fusion). Based on this, the diagnosis was revised to the emerging new entity of ‘intracranial myxoid mesenchymal tumor’ (IMMT) characterised by EWSR1 fusion with members of the cAMP response element binding protein (CREB) family (ATF1, CREB1 and CREM). Subsequent immunohistochemistry demonstrated positive staining for CD99 and EMA but not desmin. The patient underwent various oncological treatments and is recurrence-free 3 years after initial diagnosis. Conclusion Histologically, IMMT demonstrates a spectrum of features that overlaps with other tumours, but often displays circumscribed growth, uniform cellularity, cytoplasmic clearing and variable myxoid change. The clinical behaviour of these tumours is not fully understood, however provisionally considered intermediate grade. EWSR1-CREB family fusion is not specific but shared with a diverse group of extracranial tumours including soft tissue, salivary gland, odontogenic and myoepithelial tumours. Therefore, clinico-radiologico-pathological correlation is essential to achieve the final diagnosis, and ensure the absence of a primary tumour elsewhere. Familiarisation with IMMT, its characteristic genetic profile and its as yet underreported natural course is crucial, as it can clinically mimic other intracranial tumours such as malignant meningioma or glioma but appears to behave less aggressively than high grade glioma. It is also important to further our understanding of its optimal treatment through review of larger case series and global comparison of patient management.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 1156-1158
Author(s):  
Warren H. Chan ◽  
Aatman Shah ◽  
Gordon Bae ◽  
Caely Hambro ◽  
Beth A. Martin ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Carmagnani Pestana ◽  
Roman Groisberg ◽  
Jason Roszik ◽  
Vivek Subbiah

Sarcomas are a heterogeneous group of rare malignancies that exhibit remarkable heterogeneity, with more than 50 subtypes recognized. Advances in next-generation sequencing technology have resulted in the discovery of genetic events in these mesenchymal tumors, which in addition to enhancing understanding of the biology, have opened up avenues for molecularly targeted therapy and immunotherapy. This review focuses on how incorporation of next-generation sequencing has affected drug development in sarcomas and strategies for optimizing precision oncology for these rare cancers. In a significant percentage of soft tissue sarcomas, which represent up to 40% of all sarcomas, specific driver molecular abnormalities have been identified. The challenge to evaluate these mutations across rare cancer subtypes requires the careful characterization of these genetic alterations to further define compelling drivers with therapeutic implications. Novel models of clinical trial design also are needed. This shift would entail sustained efforts by the sarcoma community to move from one-size-fits-all trials, in which all sarcomas are treated similarly, to divide-and-conquer subtype-specific strategies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 306-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariano Provencio ◽  
Clara Pérez-Barrios ◽  
Miguel Barquin ◽  
Virginia Calvo ◽  
Fabio Franco ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundNon-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients benefit from targeted therapies both in first- and second-line treatment. Nevertheless, molecular profiling of lung cancer tumors after first disease progression is seldom performed. The analysis of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) enables not only non-invasive biomarker testing but also monitoring tumor response to treatment. Digital PCR (dPCR), although a robust approach, only enables the analysis of a limited number of mutations. Next-generation sequencing (NGS), on the other hand, enables the analysis of significantly greater numbers of mutations.MethodsA total of 54 circulating free DNA (cfDNA) samples from 52 NSCLC patients and two healthy donors were analyzed by NGS using the Oncomine™ Lung cfDNA Assay kit and dPCR.ResultsLin’s concordance correlation coefficient and Pearson’s correlation coefficient between mutant allele frequencies (MAFs) assessed by NGS and dPCR revealed a positive and linear relationship between the two data sets (ρc = 0.986; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.975–0.991; r = 0.987; p < 0.0001, respectively), indicating an excellent concordance between both measurements. Similarly, the agreement between NGS and dPCR for the detection of the resistance mutation p.T790M was almost perfect (K = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.62–0.99), with an excellent correlation in terms of MAFs (ρc = 0.991; 95% CI = 0.981–0.992 and Pearson’s r = 0.998; p < 0.0001). Importantly, cfDNA sequencing was successful using as low as 10 ng cfDNA input.ConclusionsMAFs assessed by NGS were highly correlated with MAFs assessed by dPCR, demonstrating that NGS is a robust technique for ctDNA quantification using clinical samples, thereby allowing for dynamic genomic surveillance in the era of precision medicine.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document