Multidisciplinary molecular tumour board: a tool to improve clinical practice and selection accrual for clinical trials in patients with cancer

被引:72
|
作者
Rolfo, Christian [1 ,11 ]
Manca, Paolo [2 ]
Salgado, Roberto [3 ]
Van Dam, Peter [4 ]
Dendooven, Amelie [1 ,5 ]
Coelho, Andreia Machado
Gandia, Jose Ferri [6 ]
Rutten, Annemie [7 ]
Lybaert, Willem [7 ]
Vermeij, Joanna [8 ]
Gevaert, Thomas [9 ]
Weyn, Christine [1 ]
Lefebure, Anneke [8 ]
Metsu, Sofie [10 ]
Van Laere, Steven [1 ]
Peeters, Marc [1 ]
Pauwels, Patrick [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ziekenhuis Antwerpen, Early Clin Trials Unit, Oncol, Phase 1, Edegem, Belgium
[2] Univ Campus Biomed Roma, Dept Med Oncol, Rome, Italy
[3] Jules Bordet Inst, Breast Canc Translat Res Lab, Brussels, Belgium
[4] Univ Ziekenhuis Antwerpen, Gynaecol Oncol, Wilrijkstraat, Belgium
[5] Hosp Sao Francisco Xavier, Med Oncol Dept, Lisbon, Portugal
[6] Consorci Hosp Gen Univ Valencia, Med Oncol Dept, Valencia, Spain
[7] GZA Ziekenhuizen Campus Sint Vincentius, Med Oncol Dept, Antwerp, Belgium
[8] ZNA Middelheim, Med Oncol Dept, Antwerp, Belgium
[9] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Med Oncol Dept, Leuven, Belgium
[10] HistoGeneX NV, DNA RNA Mol Unit, Edegem, Belgium
[11] Univ Maryland, Sch Med, Med Oncol Dept, Marlene & Stewart Greenebaum Comprehens Canc Ctr, Baltimore, MD 21201 USA
关键词
MANAGEMENT; THERAPY;
D O I
10.1136/esmoopen-2018-000398
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background The complexity of delivering precision medicine to oncology patients has led to the creation of molecular tumourboards (MTBs) for patient selection and assessment of treatment options. New technologies like the liquid biopsy are augmenting available therapeutic opportunities. This report aims to analyse the experience of our MTB in the implementation of personalised medicine in a cancer network. Materials and methods Patients diagnosed with solid tumours progressing to standard treatments were referred to our Phase I unit. They underwent comprehensive next generation sequencing (NGS) of either tumour tissue or cell-free circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) or both. The MTB expressed either a positive or negative opinion for the treatment of the patients with discovered druggable alterations inside a clinical trial, in an expanded access programme, with a compassionate use. Afterwards, discovered alterations were matched with OncoKB levels of evidence for the choice of alteration-specific treatments in order to compare MTB outcomes with a standardised set of recommendations. Results NGS was performed either on ctDNA or tumour tissue or in both of them in 204 patients. The MTB evaluated 173 of these cases. Overall, the MTB proposed alteration-specific targeted therapy to 72 patients (41.6%). 49 patients (28.3% of the total evaluated) were indicated to enter a clinical trial. In 29 patients with matched liquid biopsy NGS (lbNGS), tumour tissue NGS (ttNGS) and MTB evaluation, the MTB changed the treatment strategy coming from standardised recommendations based on lbNGS and ttNGS alone in 10 patients (34.5%), thanks to the evaluation of other clinical parameters. In our cohort, lbNGS was more likely, compared with ttNGS, to detect point mutations (OR 11, 95% CI 2.9 to 24.1, p<0.001) and all-type alterations (OR 13.6, 95% CI 5.5 to 43.2, p<0.001) from the same genes of matched patients. Conclusions Our MTB allows patients with refractory cancer to be included in clinical trials and improves the precision of clinical decisions compared with a standardised set of mutation-driven recommendations.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Selection of Patients in Ongoing Clinical Trials on Lung Cancer
    Karlijn J.G. Schulkes
    Cindy Nguyen
    Frederiek van den Bos
    Leontine J.R. van Elden
    Marije E. Hamaker
    Lung, 2016, 194 : 967 - 974
  • [32] Selection of Patients in Ongoing Clinical Trials on Lung Cancer
    Schulkes, Karlijn J. G.
    Nguyen, Cindy
    van den Bos, Frederiek
    van Elden, Leontine J. R.
    Hamaker, Marije E.
    LUNG, 2016, 194 (06) : 967 - 974
  • [33] Patient selection for clinical trials in endometrial cancer patients
    Narayan, K.
    GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2019, 154 : 276 - 277
  • [34] SELECTION OF PATIENTS FOR CLINICAL TRIALS
    HERRINGT.RN
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1973, 4 (5888): : 357 - 358
  • [35] Negative results in cancer clinical trials - equivalence or poor accrual?
    Costa, LJM
    Xavier, ACG
    del Giglio, A
    CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 2004, 25 (05): : 525 - 533
  • [36] Hispanic Accrual on Randomized Cancer Clinical Trials: A Call to Arms
    Parra, Alberto
    Karnad, Anand B.
    Thompson, Ian M.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2014, 32 (18) : 1871 - +
  • [37] Accrual to lung cancer clinical trials - a single centre experience
    Plant, R.
    Walter, H.
    Samuel, D.
    Fennell, D. A.
    Ahmed, S. I.
    LUNG CANCER, 2014, 83 : S15 - S16
  • [38] Enhancing accrual to clinical trials of adolescents and young adults with cancer
    Fern, Lorna A.
    Taylor, Rachel M.
    PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER, 2018, 65 (09)
  • [39] Strategies for increasing accrual in cancer clinical trials: What is the evidence?
    Michaels, Margo
    Weiss, Elisa S.
    Sae-Hau, Maria
    Illei, Dora
    Lilly, Bethany
    Szumita, Leah
    Connell, Brian
    Lee, Marialanna
    Cooks, Eric
    McPheeters, Melissa
    CANCER MEDICINE, 2024, 13 (10):
  • [40] The impact of the physician on the accrual to randomized clinical trials in patients with primary operable breast cancer
    Kaas, R
    Hart, AAM
    Rutgers, EJT
    BREAST, 2005, 14 (04): : 310 - 316