Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology (Feb 2021)

Profiling of circulating tumor DNA and tumor tissue for treatment selection in patients with advanced and refractory carcinoma: a prospective, two-stage phase II Individualized Cancer Treatment trial

  • Jakob M. Riedl,
  • Samantha O. Hasenleithner,
  • Gudrun Pregartner,
  • Lukas Scheipner,
  • Florian Posch,
  • Karin Groller,
  • Karl Kashofer,
  • Stephan W. Jahn,
  • Thomas Bauernhofer,
  • Martin Pichler,
  • Herbert Stöger,
  • Andrea Berghold,
  • Gerald Hoefler,
  • Michael R. Speicher,
  • Ellen Heitzer,
  • Armin Gerger

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/1758835920987658
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13

Abstract

Read online

Background: Molecular profiling (MP) represents an opportunity to match patients to a targeted therapy and when tumor tissue is unavailable, circulating tumor deoxyribonucleic acid (ctDNA) can be harnessed as a non-invasive analyte for this purpose. We evaluated the success of a targeted therapy selected by profiling of ctDNA and tissue in patients with advanced and refractory carcinoma. Patients and methods: A blood draw as well as an optional tissue biopsy were obtained for MP. Whole-genome sequencing and a cancer hotspot panel were performed, and publicly available databases were used to match the molecular profile to targeted treatments. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) ratio (PFS on MP-guided therapy/PFS on the last evidence-based therapy), whereas the success of the targeted therapy was defined as a PFS ratio ⩾1.2. To test the impact of molecular profile-treatment matching strategies, we retrospectively analyzed selected cases via the CureMatch PreciGENE™ decision support algorithm. Results: Interim analysis of 24 patients yielded informative results from 20 patients (83%). A potential tumor-specific drug could be matched in 11 patients (46%) and eight (33%) received a matched treatment. Median PFS in the matched treatment group was 61.5 days [interquartile range (IQR) 49.8–71.0] compared with 81.5 days (IQR 68.5–117.8) for the last evidence-based treatment, resulting in a median PFS ratio of 0.7 (IQR 0.6–0.9). Hence, as no patient experienced a PFS ratio ⩾1.2, the study was terminated. Except for one case, the CureMatch analysis identified either a two-drug or three-drug combination option. Conclusions: Our study employed a histotype–agnostic approach to harness molecular profiling data from both ctDNA and metastatic tumor tissue. The outcome results indicate that more innovative approaches to study design and matching algorithms are necessary to achieve improved patient outcomes. EU Clinical Trials Registry ( https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu ): EudraCT: 2014-005341-44