Search

Nearly all breast cancer deaths result from metastatic disease. Despite this, the genomic events that drive metastatic recurrence are poorly understood. We performed whole-exome and shallow whole-genome sequencing to identify genes and pathways preferentially mutated or copy-number altered in metastases compared with the paired primary tumors from which they arose. Seven genes were preferentially mutated in metastases — MYLK, PEAK1, SLC2A4RG, EVC2, XIRP2, PALB2, and ESR1 — 5 of which are not significantly mutated in any type of human primary cancer. Four regions were preferentially copy-number altered: loss of STK11 and CDKN2A/B, as well as gain of PTK6 and the membrane-bound progesterone receptor, PAQR8. PAQR8 gain was mutually exclusive with mutations in the nuclear estrogen and progesterone receptors, suggesting a role in treatment resistance. Several pathways were preferentially mutated or altered in metastases, including mTOR, CDK/RB, cAMP/PKA, WNT, HKMT, and focal adhesion. Immunohistochemical analyses revealed that metastases preferentially inactivate pRB, upregulate the mTORC1 and WNT signaling pathways, and exhibit nuclear localization of activated PKA. Our findings identify multiple therapeutic targets in metastatic recurrence that are not significantly mutated in primary cancers, implicate membrane progesterone signaling and nuclear PKA in metastatic recurrence, and provide genomic bases for the efficacy of mTORC1, CDK4/6, and PARP inhibitors in metastatic breast cancer.

One caveat of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based clinical oncology testing is the high amount of input DNA required. We sought to develop a focused NGS panel that could capture hotspot regions in relevant genes requiring 0.5-10 ng input DNA. The resulting Penn Precision Panel (PPP) targeted 20 genes containing clinically significant variants relevant to many cancers. One hundred twenty-three samples were analyzed, including 83 solid tumor specimens derived from FFPE. Various input quantities of DNA (0.5-10 ng) were amplified with content-specific PCR primer pools, then sequenced on a MiSeq instrument (Illumina, Inc.) via paired-end, 2 × 186 base pair reads to an average read depth of greater than 6500x. Variants were detected using an in-house analysis pipeline. Clinical sensitivity and specificity were assessed using results from our previously validated solid tumor NGS panel; sensitivity of the PPP is 96.75% (387/400 variants) and specificity is 99.9% (8427/8428 base pairs). Variant allele frequencies (VAFs) are highly concordant across both assays (r = 0.98 p 0.0001). The PPP is a robust, clinically validated test optimized for low-yield solid tumor specimens, capturing a high percentage of clinically relevant variants found by larger commercially available NGS panels while using only 0.5-10 ng of input DNA.

To determine the feasibility of liquid biopsy for monitoring of patients with advanced melanoma, cell-free DNA was extracted from plasma for 25 Stage III/IV patients, most (84.0%) having received previous therapy. DNA concentrations ranged from 0.6 to 390.0 ng/ml (median = 7.8 ng/ml) and were positively correlated with tumor burden as measured by imaging (Spearman rho = 0.5435, p = .0363). Using ultra-deep sequencing for a 61-gene panel, one or more mutations were detected in 12 of 25 samples (48.0%), and this proportion did not vary significantly for patients on or off therapy at the time of blood draw (52.9% and 37.5% respectively; p = .673). Sixteen mutations were detected in eight different genes, with the most frequent mutations detected in BRAF, NRAS, and KIT. Allele fractions ranged from 1.1% to 63.2% (median = 29.1%). Among patients with tissue next-generation sequencing, nine of 11 plasma mutations were also detected in matched tissue, for a concordance of 81.8%.

Context.— Next-generation sequencing is a high-throughput method for detecting genetic abnormalities and providing prognostic and therapeutic information for patients with cancer. Oncogenic fusion transcripts are among the various classifications of genetic abnormalities present in tumors and are typically detected clinically with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). However, FISH probes only exist for a limited number of targets, do not provide any information about fusion partners, cannot be multiplex, and have been shown to be limited in specificity for common targets such as ALK. Objective.— To validate an anchored multiplex polymerase chain reaction–based panel for the detection of fusion transcripts in a university hospital–based clinical molecular diagnostics laboratory. Design.— We used 109 unique clinical specimens to validate a custom panel targeting 104 exon boundaries from 17 genes involved in fusions in solid tumors. The panel can accept as little as 100 ng of total nucleic acid from PreservCyt-fixed tissue, and formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded specimens with as little as 10% tumor nuclei. Results.— Using FISH as the gold standard, this assay has a sensitivity of 88.46% and a specificity of 95.83% for the detection of fusion transcripts involving ALK, RET, and ROS1 in lung adenocarcinomas. Using a validated next-generation sequencing assay as the orthogonal gold standard for the detection of EGFR variant III (EGFRvIII) in glioblastomas, the assay is 92.31% sensitive and 100% specific. Conclusions.— This multiplexed assay is tumor and fusion partner agnostic and will provide clinical utility in therapy selection for patients with solid tumors.

Molecular profiling of glioblastoma has revealed complex cytogenetic, epigenetic, and molecular abnormalities that are necessary for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. Our neuro-oncology group has developed a data-driven, institutional consensus guideline for efficient and optimal workup of glioblastomas based on our routine performance of molecular testing. We describe our institution’s testing algorithm, assay development, and genetic findings in glioblastoma, to illustrate current practices and challenges in neuropathology related to molecular and genetic testing. We have found that coordination of test requisition, tissue handling, and incorporation of results into the final pathologic diagnosis by the neuropathologist improve patient care. Here, we present analysis of O 6 -methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase promoter methylation and next-generation sequencing results of 189 patients, obtained utilizing our internal processes led by the neuropathology team. Our institutional pathway for neuropathologist-driven molecular testing has streamlined the management of glioblastoma samples for efficient return of results for incorporation of genomic data into the pathological diagnosis and optimal patient care.

Purpose: The expanding number of targeted therapeutics for non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) necessitates real-time tumor genotyping, yet tissue biopsies are difficult to perform serially and often yield inadequate DNA for next-generation sequencing (NGS). We evaluated the feasibility of using cell-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) NGS as a complement or alternative to tissue NGS. Experimental Design: A total of 112 plasma samples obtained from a consecutive study of 102 prospectively enrolled patients with advanced NSCLC were subjected to ultra-deep sequencing of up to 70 genes and matched with tissue samples, when possible. Results: We detected 275 alterations in 45 genes, and at least one alteration in the ctDNA for 86 of 102 patients (84%), with EGFR variants being most common. ctDNA NGS detected 50 driver and 12 resistance mutations, and mutations in 22 additional genes for which experimental therapies, including clinical trials, are available. Although ctDNA NGS was completed for 102 consecutive patients, tissue sequencing was only successful for 50 patients (49%). Actionable EGFR mutations were detected in 24 tissue and 19 ctDNA samples, yielding concordance of 79%, with a shorter time interval between tissue and blood collection associated with increased concordance (P = 0.038). ctDNA sequencing identified eight patients harboring a resistance mutation who developed progressive disease while on targeted therapy, and for whom tissue sequencing was not possible. Conclusions: Therapeutically targetable driver and resistance mutations can be detected by ctDNA NGS, even when tissue is unavailable, thus allowing more accurate diagnosis, improved patient management, and serial sampling to monitor disease progression and clonal evolution. Clin Cancer Res; 22(23); 5772–82. ©2016 AACR.

PURPOSE Tumor-only genomic profiling (TGP) is increasingly advocated for all patients with cancer given the possible therapeutic implications. It is critical to develop clinical algorithms to identify and address potentially actionable germline findings identified by TGP. METHODS A multidisciplinary team analyzed publicly available data for genes in which mutations are implicated in germline cancer susceptibility and established a pipeline to automate clinical referral for evaluation of TGP findings. RESULTS A total of 2,308 patients underwent TGP, with 81 patients (3.5%) identified by the automatic referral pipeline; 37 patients (1.6%) were referred outside the pipeline based on concerns by the molecular geneticist, pathologist, or oncologist regarding genotype-phenotype correlation. Thirty-one patients (38%) and 17 patients (46%) underwent germline testing from the automatic pipeline and other referrals, respectively, and of these patients, 23 (72%) and four (24%) had confirmed germline pathogenic variants (GPVs), respectively. The majority of confirmed GPVs were in automatic referral genes, with BRCA2 being most common (confirmed GPVs in 11 [85%] of 13 patients tested), followed by PALB2 (five [67%] of six patients), BRCA1 (two [40%] of five patients), MSH6 (two of three patients), and MLH1 (two of two patients). Forty-eight percent of confirmed GPVs were found in tumors known to be associated with germline mutations in the gene. Germline testing was not performed in 50 (62%) of 81 patients identified by automatic referral as a result of poor patient health or death (30%), lack of follow-up (30%), and patient refusal (30%). CONCLUSION Of patients undergoing TGP, 5% had somatic findings triggering referral, and implementation of an automatic referral pipeline based solely on gene versus other clinical or molecular features resulted in a 74% germline confirmation. However, only 41% of referred patients underwent germline testing. Systems-based approaches are needed to identify carriers of actionable germline cancer susceptibility mutations identified by TGP.

Comprehensive genomic profiling of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cases have enabled the detection and differentiation of driver and subclonal mutations, informed risk prognostication, and defined targeted therapies. These insights into disease biology, and management have made multigene-acquired mutation testing a critical part of the diagnostic assessment of patients with sporadic MDS and AML. More recently, our understanding of the role of an increasing number of inherited genetic factors on MDS/AML risk and management has rapidly progressed. In recognition of the growing impact of this field, clinical guidelines and disease classification systems for both MDS and AML have recently incorporated familial MDS/AML predisposition syndromes into their diagnostic algorithms. In this perspective piece, we contemplate the advantages, disadvantages, and barriers that would need to be overcome to incorporate inherited MDS/AML genetic testing into the upfront molecular diagnostic work-up of every MDS/AML patient. For centers already performing panel-based tumor-only testing, including genes associated with familial forms of MDS/AML (e.g., RUNX1, CEBPA, GATA2, TP53), we advocate optimizing these tests to detect all types of germline variants in these genes and moving toward upfront paired tumor/germline testing to maximize detection and streamline patient care.

As our understanding of the driver mutations necessary for initiation and progression of cancers improves, we gain critical information on how specific molecular profiles of a tumor may predict responsiveness to therapeutic agents or provide knowledge about prognosis. At our institution a tumor genotyping program was established as part of routine clinical care, screening both hematologic and solid tumors for a wide spectrum of mutations using two next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels: a custom, 33 gene hematological malignancies panel for use with peripheral blood and bone marrow, and a commercially produced solid tumor panel for use with formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue that targets 47 genes commonly mutated in cancer. Our workflow includes a pathologist review of the biopsy to ensure there is adequate amount of tumor for the assay followed by customized DNA extraction is performed on the specimen. Quality control of the specimen includes steps for quantity, quality and integrity and only after the extracted DNA passes these metrics an amplicon library is generated and sequenced. The resulting data is analyzed through an in-house bioinformatics pipeline and the variants are reviewed and interpreted for pathogenicity. Here we provide a snapshot of the utility of each panel using two clinical cases to provide insight into how a well-designed NGS workflow can contribute to optimizing clinical outcomes.

To determine the association of somatic mutations in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with risk of relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT), we retrospectively studied pre-transplantation genetic profiles obtained from next-generation sequencing of 26 genes in 112 adult patients with AML who underwent alloHSCT. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were used to assess the association between the presence of a pathogenic mutation and risk of relapse after alloHSCT. Eighty-six percent (96 of 112) of patients had at least 1 pathogenic mutation. Mutations in TP53, WT1, and FLT3-internal tandem duplication (ITD) were associated with an increased risk of relapse after alloHSCT (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.90; P = .009; aHR, 2.51; P = .02; and aHR, 1.83; P = .07, respectively). DNMT3A mutation in the absence of FLT3-ITD and NPM1 mutations was associated with a lower relapse risk (aHR, .22; P = .04). Comparison of pre-alloHSCT and post-alloHSCT genetic profiles showed clonal evolution in 6 of 6 patients, including acquisition of actionable mutations in 4 patients. In summary, genetic profiling is useful for assessing relapse risk in patients with AML undergoing alloHSCT and may identify patients in need of strategies to reduce this risk. Clonal evolution is present at post-alloHSCT relapse and repeat genetic profiling may uncover acquired actionable mutations.

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a powerful platform for identifying cancer mutations. Routine clinical adoption of NGS requires optimized quality control metrics to ensure accurate results. To assess the robustness of our clinical NGS pipeline, we analyzed the results of 304 solid tumor and hematologic malignancy specimens tested simultaneously by NGS and one or more targeted single-gene tests (EGFR, KRAS, BRAF, NPM1, FLT3, and JAK2). For samples that passed our validated tumor percentage and DNA quality and quantity thresholds, there was perfect concordance between NGS and targeted single-gene tests with the exception of two FLT3 internal tandem duplications that fell below the stringent pre-established reporting threshold but were readily detected by manual inspection. In addition, NGS identified clinically significant mutations not covered by single-gene tests. These findings confirm NGS as a reliable platform for routine clinical use when appropriate quality control metrics, such as tumor percentage and DNA quality cutoffs, are in place. Based on our findings, we suggest a simple workflow that should facilitate adoption of clinical oncologic NGS services at other institutions.

Breast cancer metastases differ biologically from primary disease; therefore, metastatic biopsies may assist in treatment decision making. Commercial genomic testing of both tumor and circulating tumor DNA have become available clinically, but utility of these tests in breast cancer management remains unclear. Patients undergoing a clinically indicated metastatic tumor biopsy were consented to the ongoing METAMORPH registry. Tumor and blood were collected at the time of disease progression before subsequent therapy, and patients were followed for response on subsequent treatment. Tumor testing (n = 53) and concurrent cell-free DNA (n = 32) in a subset of patients was performed using CLIA-approved assays. The proportion of patients with a genomic alteration was lower in tumor than in blood (69 vs. 91%; p = 0.06). After restricting analysis to alterations covered on both platforms, 83% of tumor alterations were detected in blood, while 90% of blood alterations were detected in tumor. Mutational load specific for the panel genes was calculated for both tumor and blood. Time to progression on subsequent treatment was significantly shorter for patients whose tumors had high panel-specific mutational load (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.12–0.78) or a TP53 mutation (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20–0.79), after adjusting for stage at presentation, hormone receptor status, prior treatment type, and number of lines of metastatic treatment. Treating oncologists must distinguish platform differences from true biological heterogeneity when comparing tumor and cfDNA genomic testing results. Tumor and concurrent cfDNA contribute unique genomic information in metastatic breast cancer patients, providing potentially useful biomarkers for aggressive metastatic disease.

Background Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of surgically resected solid tumor samples has become integral to personalized medicine approaches for cancer treatment and monitoring. Liquid biopsies, or the enrichment and characterization of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from blood, can provide noninvasive detection of evolving tumor mutations to improve cancer patient care. However, the application of solid tumor NGS approaches to circulating tumor samples has been hampered by the low-input DNA available from rare CTCs. Moreover, whole genome amplification (WGA) approaches used to generate sufficient input DNA are often incompatible with blood collection tube preservatives used to facilitate clinical sample batching. Methods To address this, we have developed a novel approach combining tumor cell isolation from preserved blood with Repli-G WGA and Illumina TruSeq Amplicon Cancer Panel-based NGS. We purified cell pools ranging from 10 to 1000 cells from three different cell lines, and quantitatively demonstrate comparable quality of DNA extracted from preserved versus unpreserved samples. Results Preservation and WGA were compatible with the generation of high-quality libraries. Known point mutations and gene amplification were detected for libraries that had been prepared from amplified DNA from preserved blood. Conclusion These spiking experiments provide proof of concept of a clinically applicable workflow for real-time monitoring of patient tumor using noninvasive liquid biopsies.