{"title":"Leveraging non-coding regions to guarantee the accuracy of small-sized panel-based tumor mutational burden estimates.","authors":"Takahiro Nishino, Mio Yumura, Kuniko Sunami, Takashi Kubo, Hitoshi Ichikawa, Tomoyo Yasuda, Eisaku Furukawa, Momoko Nagai, Yasushi Yatabe, Mamoru Kato, Takashi Kohno","doi":"10.1111/cas.16342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Accurate estimation of tumor mutational burden (TMB) as a predictor of responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitors in gene panel assays requires an adequate panel size. The current calculations of TMB only consider coding regions, while most of gene panel assays interrogate non-coding regions. Leveraging the non-coding regions is a potential solution to address this panel size limitation. However, the impact of including non-coding regions on the accuracy of TMB estimates remains unclear. This study investigated the validity of leveraging non-coding regions to supplement panel size using the OncoGuide NCC Oncopanel System (NOP). The aim of this study was to evaluate test performance against orthogonal assays and the association with responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitors was not included in the evaluation. We compared TMB status and values between TMB calculated only from coding regions (NOP-coding) and from both coding and non-coding regions (NOP-overall) using whole exome sequencing (WES) and FoundationOne®CDx (F1CDx) assay. Our findings revealed that NOP-overall significantly improved the overall percent agreement (OPA) with TMB status compared with NOP-coding for both WES (OPA: 96.7% vs. 73.3%, n = 30) and F1CDx (OPA: 90.0% vs. 73.3%). Additionally, the mean difference in TMB values compared with WES was lower for NOP-overall (3.55 [95% CI: 0.98-6.13]) than for NOP-coding (6.22 [95% CI: 3.73-8.70]). These results exemplify the utility of incorporating non-coding regions to maintain accurate TMB estimates in small-sized panels.</p>","PeriodicalId":48943,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cas.16342","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Accurate estimation of tumor mutational burden (TMB) as a predictor of responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitors in gene panel assays requires an adequate panel size. The current calculations of TMB only consider coding regions, while most of gene panel assays interrogate non-coding regions. Leveraging the non-coding regions is a potential solution to address this panel size limitation. However, the impact of including non-coding regions on the accuracy of TMB estimates remains unclear. This study investigated the validity of leveraging non-coding regions to supplement panel size using the OncoGuide NCC Oncopanel System (NOP). The aim of this study was to evaluate test performance against orthogonal assays and the association with responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitors was not included in the evaluation. We compared TMB status and values between TMB calculated only from coding regions (NOP-coding) and from both coding and non-coding regions (NOP-overall) using whole exome sequencing (WES) and FoundationOne®CDx (F1CDx) assay. Our findings revealed that NOP-overall significantly improved the overall percent agreement (OPA) with TMB status compared with NOP-coding for both WES (OPA: 96.7% vs. 73.3%, n = 30) and F1CDx (OPA: 90.0% vs. 73.3%). Additionally, the mean difference in TMB values compared with WES was lower for NOP-overall (3.55 [95% CI: 0.98-6.13]) than for NOP-coding (6.22 [95% CI: 3.73-8.70]). These results exemplify the utility of incorporating non-coding regions to maintain accurate TMB estimates in small-sized panels.
期刊介绍:
Cancer Science (formerly Japanese Journal of Cancer Research) is a monthly publication of the Japanese Cancer Association. First published in 1907, the Journal continues to publish original articles, editorials, and letters to the editor, describing original research in the fields of basic, translational and clinical cancer research. The Journal also accepts reports and case reports.
Cancer Science aims to present highly significant and timely findings that have a significant clinical impact on oncologists or that may alter the disease concept of a tumor. The Journal will not publish case reports that describe a rare tumor or condition without new findings to be added to previous reports; combination of different tumors without new suggestive findings for oncological research; remarkable effect of already known treatments without suggestive data to explain the exceptional result. Review articles may also be published.