Search

The current increase in number and diversity of targeted anticancer agents poses challenges to the logistics and timeliness of molecular diagnostics (MolDx), resulting in underdiagnosis and treatment. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) may provide a sustainable solution for addressing current as well as future diagnostic challenges. The present study therefore aimed to prospectively assess feasibility, validity, and value of WGS in routine clinical practice. WGS was conducted independently of, and in parallel with, standard of care (SOC) diagnostics on routinely obtained tumor samples from 1,200 consecutive patients with metastatic cancer. Results from both tests were compared and discussed in a dedicated tumor board. From 1,200 patients, 1,302 samples were obtained, of which 1,216 contained tumor cells. WGS was successful in 70% (854/1,216) of samples with a median turnaround time of 11 days. Low tumor purity (lt;20%) was the main reason for not completing WGS. WGS identified 99.2% and SOC MolDx 99.7% of the total of 896 biomarkers found in genomic regions covered by both tests. Actionable biomarkers were found in 603/848 patients (71%). Of the 936 associated therapy options identified by WGS, 343 were identified with SOC MolDx (36.6%). Biomarker-based therapy was started in 147 patients. WGS revealed 49 not previously identified pathogenic germline variants. Fresh-frozen, instead of formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded, sample logistics were easily adopted as experienced by the professionals involved. WGS for patients with metastatic cancer is well feasible in routine clinical practice, successfully yielding comprehensive genomic profiling for the vast majority of patients. © 2022 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wileyamp; Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

PURPOSE The combination of whole-genome and transcriptome sequencing (WGTS) is expected to transform diagnosis and treatment for patients with cancer. WGTS is a comprehensive precision diagnostic test that is starting to replace the standard of care for oncology molecular testing in health care systems around the world; however, the implementation and widescale adoption of this best-in-class testing is lacking. METHODS Here, we address the barriers in integrating WGTS for cancer diagnostics and treatment selection and answer questions regarding utility in different cancer types, cost-effectiveness and affordability, and other practical considerations for WGTS implementation. RESULTS We review the current studies implementing WGTS in health care systems and provide a synopsis of the clinical evidence and insights into practical considerations for WGTS implementation. We reflect on regulatory, costs, reimbursement, and incidental findings aspects of this test. CONCLUSION WGTS is an appropriate comprehensive clinical test for many tumor types and can replace multiple, cascade testing approaches currently performed. Decreasing sequencing cost, increasing number of clinically relevant aberrations and discovery of more complex biomarkers of treatment response, should pave the way for health care systems and laboratories in implementing WGTS into clinical practice, to transform diagnosis and treatment for patients with cancer.

PurposePredictive diagnostics play an increasingly important role in personalized medicine for cancer treatment. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) based treatment selection is expected to rapidly increase worldwide. Detailed and comparative cost analyses of diagnostic techniques are an essential element in decision-making. This study aimed to calculate and compare the total cost of currently used diagnostic techniques and of WGS in treatment of non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), melanoma, colorectal cancer (CRC) and gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) in the Netherlands.MethodsThe activity-based costing (ABC) method was conducted to calculate the total cost of included diagnostic techniques based on data provided by Dutch pathology laboratories and the Dutch centralized cancer WGS facility. Costs were allocated to four categories: capital costs, maintenance costs, software costs and operational costs. Outcome measures were total cost per cancer patient per included technique, and the total cost per cancer patient per most commonly applied technique (combination) for each cancer type.ResultsThe total cost per cancer patient per technique varied from € 58 (Sanger sequencing, 3 amplicons) to € 4738 (paired tumor-normal WGS). The operational costs accounted for the vast majority over 90 % of the total per cancer patient technique costs. The most important operational cost drivers were consumables followed by personnel (for sample preparation and primary data analysis).ConclusionThis study outlined in detail all costing aspects and cost prices of current and new diagnostic modalities used in treatment of NSCLC, melanoma, CRC and GIST in the Netherlands. Detailed cost differences and value comparisons between these diagnostic techniques enable future economic evaluations to support decision-making on implementation of WGS and other diagnostic modalities in routine clinical practice.