Concordance of next-generation sequencing between tissue and liquid biopsies in non-small cell lung cancer
Abstract only e21547 Background: While genetic profiling has become standard of care for patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), next-generation sequencing (NGS) provides a wealth of information about targetable mutations. Advances in genetic testing have led to sequencing platfo...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of clinical oncology Vol. 38; no. 15_suppl; p. e21547 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
20.05.2020
|
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Abstract only
e21547
Background: While genetic profiling has become standard of care for patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), next-generation sequencing (NGS) provides a wealth of information about targetable mutations. Advances in genetic testing have led to sequencing platforms that utilize tissue itself or extracellular circulating tumor DNA in the blood, known as a “liquid biopsy.” Methods: We identified 55 patients with NSCLC who had undergone both tissue and liquid biopsy, using Foundation One and Guardant 360 at the University of Miami / Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center between January 2016 and December 2018, and performed retrospective analysis to determine patient characteristics as well concordance between different NGS platforms. Results: In our patient population, 34% of patients had never smoked prior to diagnosis, while 22% had more than a 30 pack-year smoking history. 64% of patients had no treatment prior to initial NGS. 40% of patients had both testing done essentially simultaneously, while 60% of patients had one test done after disease progression. Of these patients, therapy was changed as a result in 73%. Median number of days between tests was 21 days, with 56% of testing done within 90 days of the previous testing. Nine patients had an additional Foundation One tissue NGS performed. Concordance across all genes tested in both platforms was 98 ± 0.2%. Concordance with consideration of genetic alterations detected in both assays was 24.5 ± 3.0%. The median number of gene alterations determined by Foundation One testing was 4 (range 1-9), while the median for gene alterations detected by Guardant 360 was 3 (range 1-13). The median number of variants of unknown significance (VUS) was 10 (range 5-25). Conclusions: Our analysis indicates a role for both tissue-based and circulating tumor DNA-based NGS for determination of targetable mutations and thus appropriate treatment regimens. Low levels of concordance are potentially related to post-treatment changes in the tumor genetic profile as well as evolution in the testing itself. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0732-183X 1527-7755 |
DOI: | 10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.e21547 |