3523 Background: Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare malignancy, with lower incidence, later stage at diagnosis, and worse overall survival compared to other intestinal cancers, such as colorectal cancer (CRC). Since the majority of small bowel tumors are not accessible to endoscopic biopsy, comprehensive genomic profiling using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) may enable non-invasive detection of targetable genomic alterations (GA) in SBA patients. In this study, we characterize the ctDNA GA landscape in SBA. Methods: Analysis of 299 ctDNA samples prospectively collected from 265 SBA patients between 2017 to 2020 was performed using a 73 gene next generation sequencing panel (Guardant360). A subset of patients underwent longitudinal analysis of changes in GA associated with systemic therapy. Results: Of the 265 patients, 160 (60.3%) were male; the median age was 66 (range: 21-93 years). The most common GA identified in SBA patients included TP53 [58%], KRAS [44%], and APC [40%]. MSI was detected in 3.4% of SBA patients. When stratified by primary tumor location, APC, KRAS, TP53, PIK3CA, and ARID1A were the most common GA identified in both duodenal and jejunal adenocarcinomas. ERBB2, BRCA2 and CDK6 alterations were enriched in duodenal adenocarcinoma, while NOTCH and BRAF alterations were enriched in jejunal adenocarcinoma. The most common currently-targetable GA identified were ATM [18%], PIK3CA [17%], EGFR [15%], CDK4/6 [11%], BRAF [10%], and ERBB2 [10%]. Unique differences in GA between SBA and CRC were identified: i) the majority of ERBB2 alterations are mutations (89%) in the extracellular domain and kinase domain, not amplifications (11%); ii) the majority of BRAF alterations are non V600E mutations (69%) and amplifications (28%); iii) there is a significantly lower rate of APC mutations (40%). Alterations in DNA damage response pathway proteins, including ATM and BRCA 1/2, were identified in 30% of SBA patients. ATM alterations were more common in patients ³65 years old. The most common mutations predicted to be related to clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential were TP53, KRAS and GNAS. Longitudinal ctDNA analysis in 4 SBA patients revealed loss of mutations associated with therapeutic response (TP53 R342*, MAPK3 R189Q) and acquired mutations associated with therapeutic resistance (NF1 R1968*, MET S170N, RAF1 L613V). Conclusions: This study represents the first large-scale blood-based ctDNA genomic profiling of SBA. SBA represents a unique molecular entity with differences in frequency and types of GA compared to CRC. Variations in GA were noted based on anatomic origin within the small intestine. Longitudinal ctDNA monitoring revealed novel GA associated with therapeutic resistance. Identification of multiple targetable GA may facilitate clinical decision making and improve patient outcomes in SBA, especially when a tissue biopsy is not feasible or sufficient for comprehensive genomic profiling.
The Role Of Circulating Tumor DNA In Therapeutic Resistance
