scholarly journals Lung Cancer Genomics

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 78
Author(s):  
Ankur R. Parikh

<p>The landscape of lung cancer treatment is rapidly evolving with the use of genomic testing which helps identify specific mutations or resistance mutations for these heterogenous tumors. Advanced lung cancer has a very poor prognosis but identifying other treatment options based on genomic profiling of the tumor can lead to improved outcomes. Evidence of benefit for genomic testing in lung cancer has now resulted in this test becoming part of national guidelines. There are challenges with genomic testing which need to be understood as well as understanding how to apply test results. These results can help identify treatment options or may serve as predictors to respond to specific therapies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion.</strong> In the current era of precision medicine, it is imperative clinicians be familiar with genomic testing and be able to offer it to their cancer patients, specifically those with advanced lung cancer.</p>

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. ii22-ii22
Author(s):  
Yoshiki Arakawa ◽  
Junko Suga ◽  
Yukinori Terada ◽  
Kohei Nakajima ◽  
Masahiro Tanji ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective: Kyoto University Hospital has introduced the cancer genomic profiling tests, Oncoprime in 2015, Guardant360 in 2018, which are not under insurance coverage, FoundationOne CDx(F1CDx) and OncoGuide NCC Oncopanel system(NCC OP) in 2019, which received approval for insurance coverage for the first time in Japan. We investigated the results of cancer genomic profiling test under insurance coverage in our hospital. Methods: A special facility for the cancer genomic profiling tests was produced. To perform the cancer genomic profiling test, an outpatient must visit the facility three times (learning, ordering of the test, and getting the results). The expert panels decide the final test results and treatment options with the all information of the patients. Results: From November 2019 to March 2020, 51 and 9 patients were tested with F1CDx and NCC OP, respectively. 16 patients (31%) of F1CDX and 2 patients (22%) of NCC OP got treatment recommendations from the expert panels. However, only 5 patients (9.8%) of F1CDX and 1 patient (11%) of NCC OP received the treatments. The secondary finding suspecting germline mutations was found in 8 patients of F1CDX. Conclusion: After the approval the cancer genomic profiling tests with insurance coverage in Japan, it becomes easy for the patients to perform the test and get the genetic information of the tumor. However, it remains not easy to receive the recommended drugs because of several limitations of their usages.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4s-9s ◽  
Author(s):  
Marianne J. Davies ◽  
Anne C. Chiang

Immunotherapy with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) receptor and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors has improved outcomes for certain patients with advanced lung cancer. As use of these therapies has expanded in first-line settings, in patients with different histologies, and in combinations with chemotherapeutic and targeted agents, more patients with lung cancer may benefit from these therapies. However, with expanded use comes greater potential exposure to the immune-related adverse events (irAEs) associated with these immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). This article uses two case examples to illustrate the presentation, evaluation, and management of pulmonary and neurologic symptoms in two patients receiving PD-1–based therapy for non–small-cell lung cancer. These cases illustrate the challenges associated with recognizing pneumonitis and neuropathy in patients receiving ICIs for lung cancer. Although pneumonitis and neuropathy are relatively rare irAEs, they can have devastating or even fatal outcomes if not promptly recognized and managed appropriately. Specific use of guideline-based, multidisciplinary management is emphasized, as illustrated in the Immuno-Oncology Essentials Care Step Pathways.


2020 ◽  
Vol 154 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S147-S148
Author(s):  
E M Gardner ◽  
W Li ◽  
M B Cohen ◽  
U Topaloglu ◽  
S Ramkissoon

Abstract Introduction/Objective Lung cancer continues to be the leading cause of cancer death in the United States. For individuals with advanced lung cancer, genomic testing has the potential to direct patients and their care teams toward a targeted therapy or a specific clinical trial. In some instances, however, submitted specimens fail to meet test standards or do not survive the analytic process. The implications of a failed genomic test for patients can be grave. In this study, we aim to identify common features among non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) samples submitted from our medical center that failed FoundationOne testing (Foundation Medicine Inc. Cambridge, MA). Methods From all 366 NSCLC samples listed in the FoundationOne database, we identified 31 (8.5%) unique and accessible accession numbers submitted from our institution that failed processing between 2013-2018. These 31 samples were compared for common features, including NSCLC subtype, tumor location, sampling method, tumor size, submitting team, and reported error type. Results From all of our samples, 45% (14/31) were adenocarcinoma, 29% (9/31) were squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), 22% (7/31) were NSCLC otherwise unspecified, and 3% (1/31) was adenoid cystic carcinoma. The majority of samples (20/31) were sampled from primary sites including core biopsies (n=9), FNA (n=5), lobectomy specimens (n=4), and bronchial washings (n=2). The remaining metastatic samples came from sites including lymph node, bone, brain, and adrenal gland. Per FoundationOne: the majority of samples (27, 87%) failed following sequencing, while the remaining four (4, 13%) samples failed in the analytic phase. Conclusion At this time, it remains unclear why many of these samples failed sequencing. Our next steps include comparing the degree of necrosis from samples and comparing our failed sample pool to a successful sample pool of equal size to remove potential confounding factors.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21099-e21099
Author(s):  
Meifang Chen ◽  
Ding Zhang ◽  
Guoqiang Wang ◽  
Bijiong Wang

e21099 Background: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly aggressive carcinoma of the lung. Whereas, precise treatment options for SCLC are limited. Genomic profiling would be essential to understand drug resistance related mechanism. So far, little is known about an in-depth molecular characterization for SCLC in Chinese patients. Here we described the mutational landscape and programmed cell death-1 (PD-L1) expression profile in Chinese patients with SCLC by next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay. Methods: Chinese patients with SCLC were included in this study. Genomic profiling of DNA was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor samples and matched blood through a NGS with 381 cancer-related genes panel. PD-L1 expression status of tumor tissue was determined by immunohistochemistry. Results: In total, 115 patients with SCLC were included in the present study. We identified 2,948 mutations, spanning 434 genes, with TP53, RB1 and LRP1B being the most frequently mutated genes, occurring in 109(94.78%), 88(76.52%) and 48(41.74%) of SCLC patients, respectively. For somatic single nucleotide variant (SNV), TP53 (108/115, 93.91%), RB1 (82/115, 71.30%) and LRP1B (43/115, 37.39%) were frequently mutated, which exhibited the similar mutation frequencies with TCGA database. To be noted, 79 (68.70%) SCLC patients harbored both RB1 and TP53 mutations, which was comparable with TCGA data (84/110, 76.36%). Germline SNV spectrum varied significantly compare with somatic SNV. BLM, MSH2 and VEGFA were the most frequently germline mutated genes. In our dataset, the tumor mutation burden (TMB) of 108 patients, PD-L1 expression status of 95 patients and microsatellite stabilities/instabilities (MSS/MSI) status of 112 patients were also analyzed. The median TMB was 10.61/MB. The positive rate of PD-L1 expression was 12.63%. All patients were MSS. Conclusions: Our study revealed the genetic landscape and PD-L1 expression of SCLC. The data may provide the support on immunotherapy and targeted therapy research.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21584-e21584
Author(s):  
Renhua Guo ◽  
Likun Chen ◽  
Chengzhi Zhou ◽  
Xinghao Ai ◽  
Jun Zhao ◽  
...  

e21584 Background: Pleural effusion (PE) is commonly observed in advanced lung cancer. Researches have suggested molecular profiling of PE represents a minimally invasive approach of detecting tumor driver mutations for clinical decision making. The objective of this study is to investigate the efficacy and precision of detecting gene alterations in PE samples in the real world setting. Methods: 656 metastatic lung cancer patients with pleural effusion were enrolled in this study. Seven hundred and thirty-two samples, including 351 samples of PE supernatant, 224 plasma, 138 tissue, and 25 PE sediments from these patients were collected and subjected to targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) of 1021 cancer-related genes in a real world setting. The efficacy of pleural effusion in detecting actionable mutations and identifying resistant mechanisms of targeted therapy were analyzed by comparing different samples. Results: Among the 656 NSCLC patients, 413 were in M1a stage and 243 were in M1b/M1c stage, while 272 were newly diagnosed and 384 was previously treated. When comparing different groups of stage and therapeutic history, PE supernatant was preferred as the choice for those patients (46.6% - 48.2% vs 23.3%-34.8% of plasma vs 16.8%-21.2% of tissue and 0.96%-7.3% of PE sediment). While mutant allele frequency (MAFs) of plasma in patients of M1a stage was significantly lower than that of M1b/c stages, MAFs was similar for PE supernatant. EGFR, KRAS, MET, ALK, BRAF, ERBB2, ROS1, and RET actionable mutations were identified in 60, 12, 9, 7, 6, 3, 2, and 1 of the 118 PE supernatant samples at M1a stage taken before treatment. PE-supernatant demonstrated higher sensitivity than plasma of detecting actionable mutations in M1a disease (84.7% of PE-supernatant vs 42.1% of plasma, p < 0.01) but not in M1b/c stages (80.7% of PE-supernatant vs 86.4% of plasma). Seventy-two of the 117 patients who were resistant to 1st or 2nd generation of EGFR-TKI, 22 of the 42 patients resistant to osimertinib, and 9 of the 13 patients resistant to crizotinib had known resistant mutations identified. Remarkably, PE supernatant outperformed plasma in identifying resistant mutations to 1st/2nd generation EGFR-TKI (75.4% vs 29.8%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This real world large cohort study verified that genomic profiling of PE-supernatant has higher actionable mutation detection sensitivity than plasma. It offers an alternative approach in assessing tumor genomics in advanced lung cancer when tumor tissue is not available.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey A. Bogart ◽  
Jason Wallen

The treatment of stage I non–small-cell lung cancer has advanced markedly over the past century. The transition from therapeutic nihilism with ensured mortality to radical surgery with pneumonectomy to rational oncologic-based resection has resulted in dramatically improved outcomes and reduced morbidity. The superiority of anatomic resection with lobectomy over sublobar resection for fit patients with stage I disease, where more than one half of all patients should expect to be cured, is backed by level 1 evidence. Minimally invasive approaches have further decreased morbidity and mortality, and prospective trials continue to assess whether sublobar resection is appropriate in more select circumstances for tumors < 2 cm. Interest in studying the patient at high risk for complications after lobectomy has been spurred by recent advances in surgical, radiotherapy, and ablative treatment options. In particular, provocative results with stereotactic body radiotherapy have led to rapid adoption in clinical practice with a resultant decrease in the number of untreated patients. A comparison of outcomes across studies of competing modalities remains challenging given the potential impact of selection bias in single-arm trials, and attempts to conduct randomized studies have been largely unsuccessful. Given the uncertainty in defining optimal therapy, patients are best served by a multidisciplinary team of thoracic surgeons, radiation oncologists, pulmonologists, and chest and interventional radiologists to ensure that they receive the evaluation and treatment best suited not only to their tumor and medical challenges but also to their concerns, fears, and values.


Theranostics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (19) ◽  
pp. 5532-5541 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lin Tong ◽  
Ning Ding ◽  
Xiaoling Tong ◽  
Jiamin Li ◽  
Yong Zhang ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 1705-1716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Smadar Laufer-Geva ◽  
Anna Belilovski Rozenblum ◽  
Tal Twito ◽  
Roxana Grinberg ◽  
Addie Dvir ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keisuke Tamari ◽  
Hiroshi Doi ◽  
Hiroya Shiomi ◽  
Ryoongjin Oh ◽  
Kazuhiko Ogawa

Abstract Background: Re-irradiation is one of the treatment options for recurrence after initial radiotherapy for locally advanced lung cancer. However, the safety and efficacy of high-dose re-irradiation for recurrent lung cancer has yet to be completely understood. This study investigated the outcomes of high-dose re-irradiation for patients with recurrent lung cancer at our clinic.Methods: Data were collected from 36 patients with lung cancer (median age, 68 years) who received high-dose re-irradiation using intensity-modulated radiotherapy for locoregional recurrence after initial radiotherapy in the locally advanced stage. Histology findings showed that 11 (30.6%), 14 (38.9%), and 11 (30.6%) patients had adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and small cell carcinoma, respectively. The interval from initial radiotherapy to re-irradiation was 23.4 months. Local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors, while late toxicities ≥grade3 were evaluated according to the CTCAE ver. 3.0.Results: The median follow-up was 14.6 months. The 1-year LC, PFS, and OS were 74.1%, 45.2%, and 78.7%, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that histology was a significant prognostic factor for LC (p = 0.02), while histology (p = 0.04) and distant metastasis (p = 0.01) were significant prognostic factors for PFS. Grade 5 late toxicities occurred in 2 patients (5.6%) who exhibited esophageal perforation and bronchial perforation. No other ≥grade3 late toxicities occurred.Conclusion: High-dose re-irradiation for recurrent locally advanced lung cancer was effective and feasible. Lung adenocarcinoma might therefore be a good indication for re-irradiation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document