Widespread Adoption of Precision Anticancer Therapies After Implementation of Pathologist-Directed Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Across a Large US Health System.
Alexa K Dowdell, Ryan C Meng, Ann Vita, Bela Bapat, Douglas Hanes, Shu-Ching Chang, Lauren Harold, Cliff Wong, Hoifung Poon, Brock Schroeder, Roshanthi Weerasinghe, Rom Leidner, Walter J Urba, Carlo B Bifulco, Brian D Piening
{"title":"Widespread Adoption of Precision Anticancer Therapies After Implementation of Pathologist-Directed Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Across a Large US Health System.","authors":"Alexa K Dowdell, Ryan C Meng, Ann Vita, Bela Bapat, Douglas Hanes, Shu-Ching Chang, Lauren Harold, Cliff Wong, Hoifung Poon, Brock Schroeder, Roshanthi Weerasinghe, Rom Leidner, Walter J Urba, Carlo B Bifulco, Brian D Piening","doi":"10.1200/OP.24.00226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Precision therapies and immunotherapies have revolutionized cancer care, with novel genomic biomarker-associated therapies being introduced into clinical practice rapidly, resulting in notable gains in patient survival. Despite this, there is significant variability in the utilization of tumor molecular profiling that spans the timing of test ordering, comprehensiveness of gene panels, and clinical decision support through therapy and trial recommendations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To standardize testing, we designed a pathologist-directed test ordering system at the time of diagnosis using a 523-gene DNA/RNA hybrid comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) panel and extensive clinical decision support tools. To comprehensively characterize the clinical impact of this protocol, we developed a novel natural language processing (NLP)-based approach to extract clinical features from physician chart notes. We assessed test actionability rates, therapy choice, and outcomes across a set of 3,216 patients with advanced cancer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We observed 49% of patients had at least one actionable genomic biomarker-driven-approved and/or guideline-recommended targeted or immunotherapy (IO) and 53% of patients would have been eligible for a precision therapy clinical trial from three large basket trials. When assessing CGP versus an in silico 50-gene panel, 67% of tumors compared with 33% harbored actionable alterations including clinical trials. Among patients with 6 months or more of follow-up, over 52% received a targeted therapy (TT) or IO, versus 32% who received conventional chemotherapy alone. Furthermore, patients receiving TT had significantly improved overall survival compared with patients receiving chemotherapy alone (<i>P</i> < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, these data represent a major shift in standard clinical practice toward molecularly guided treatments (targeted and immunotherapies) over conventional systemic chemotherapy. As guidelines continue to evolve and more precision therapeutics gain approval, we expect this gap to continue to widen.</p>","PeriodicalId":14612,"journal":{"name":"JCO oncology practice","volume":"20 11","pages":"1523-1532"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO oncology practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.24.00226","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Precision therapies and immunotherapies have revolutionized cancer care, with novel genomic biomarker-associated therapies being introduced into clinical practice rapidly, resulting in notable gains in patient survival. Despite this, there is significant variability in the utilization of tumor molecular profiling that spans the timing of test ordering, comprehensiveness of gene panels, and clinical decision support through therapy and trial recommendations.
Methods: To standardize testing, we designed a pathologist-directed test ordering system at the time of diagnosis using a 523-gene DNA/RNA hybrid comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) panel and extensive clinical decision support tools. To comprehensively characterize the clinical impact of this protocol, we developed a novel natural language processing (NLP)-based approach to extract clinical features from physician chart notes. We assessed test actionability rates, therapy choice, and outcomes across a set of 3,216 patients with advanced cancer.
Results: We observed 49% of patients had at least one actionable genomic biomarker-driven-approved and/or guideline-recommended targeted or immunotherapy (IO) and 53% of patients would have been eligible for a precision therapy clinical trial from three large basket trials. When assessing CGP versus an in silico 50-gene panel, 67% of tumors compared with 33% harbored actionable alterations including clinical trials. Among patients with 6 months or more of follow-up, over 52% received a targeted therapy (TT) or IO, versus 32% who received conventional chemotherapy alone. Furthermore, patients receiving TT had significantly improved overall survival compared with patients receiving chemotherapy alone (P < .001).
Conclusion: Overall, these data represent a major shift in standard clinical practice toward molecularly guided treatments (targeted and immunotherapies) over conventional systemic chemotherapy. As guidelines continue to evolve and more precision therapeutics gain approval, we expect this gap to continue to widen.