Dataset Information

Personalized Medicine in the Oncology Clinic: Implementation and Outcomes of the Johns Hopkins Molecular Tumor Board.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Tumor genomic profiling for personalized oncology therapy is being widely applied in clinical practice even as it is being evaluated more formally in clinical trials. Given the complexities of genomic data and its application to clinical use, molecular tumor boards with diverse expertise can provide guidance to oncologists and patients seeking to implement personalized genetically targeted therapy in practice.

Methods

A multidisciplinary molecular tumor board reviewed tumor molecular profiling reports from consecutive referrals at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins over a 3-year period. The tumor board weighed evidence for actionability of genomic alterations identified by molecular profiling and provided recommendations including US Food and Drug Administration-approved drug therapy, clinical trials of matched targeted therapy, off-label use of such therapy, and additional tumor or germline genetic testing.

Results

One hundred fifty-five patients were reviewed. Actionable genomic alterations were identified in 132 patients (85%). Off-label therapies were recommended in 37 patients (24%). Eleven patients were treated off-label, and 13 patients were enrolled onto clinical trials of matched targeted therapies. Median progression-free survival of patients treated with matched therapies was 5 months (95% CI, 2.9 months to not reached), and the progression-free survival probability at 6 months was 43%(95% CI, 26% to 71%). Lack of locally available clinical trials was the major limitation on clinical actionability of tumor profiling reports.

Conclusion

The molecular tumor board recommended off-label targeted therapies for a quarter of all patients reviewed. Outcomes were heterogeneous, although 43% of patients receiving genomically matched therapy derived clinical benefit lasting at least 6 months. Until more data become available from precision oncology trials, molecular tumor boards can help guide appropriate use of tumor molecular testing to direct therapy.

SUBMITTER: Dalton WB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6039131 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWith rapid advances in genomic medicine, the complexity of delivering precision medicine to oncology patients across a university health system demanded the creation of a Molecular Tumor Board (MTB) for patient selection and assessment of treatment options. The objective of this report is to analyze our progress to date and discuss the importance of the MTB in the implementation of personalized medicine.Materials and methodsPatients were reviewed in the MTB for appropriateness for comprehensive next generation sequencing (NGS) cancer gene set testing based on set criteria that were in place. Because profiling of stage IV lung cancer, colon cancer, and melanoma cancers were standard of care, these cancer types were excluded from this process. We subsequently analyzed the types of cases referred for testing and approved with regards to their results.Results191 cases were discussed at the MTB and 132 cases were approved for testing. Forty-six cases (34.8%) had driver mutations that were associated with an active targeted therapeutic agent, including BRAF, PIK3CA, IDH1, KRAS, and BRCA1. An additional 56 cases (42.4%) had driver mutations previously reported in some type of cancer. Twenty-two cases (16.7%) did not have any clinically significant mutations. Eight cases did not yield adequate DNA. 15 cases were considered for targeted therapy, 13 of which received targeted therapy. One patient experienced a near complete response. Seven of 13 had stable disease or a partial response.ConclusionsMTB at University of Alabama-Birmingham is unique because it reviews the appropriateness of NGS testing for patients with recurrent cancer and serves as a forum to educate our physicians about the pathways of precision medicine. Our results suggest that our detection of actionable mutations may be higher due to our careful selection. The application of precision medicine and molecular genetic testing for cancer patients remains a continuous educational process for physicians.

Project description:Purpose:Dramatic advances in our understanding of the molecular pathophysiology of cancer, along with a rapidly expanding portfolio of molecular targeted drugs, have led to a paradigm shift toward personalized, biomarker-driven cancer treatment. Here, we report the 2-year experience of the Comprehensive Cancer Center Freiburg Molecular Tumor Board (MTB), one of the first interdisciplinary molecular tumor conferences established in Europe. The role of the MTB is to recommend personalized therapy for patients with cancer beyond standard-of-care treatment. Methods:This retrospective case series includes 198 patients discussed from March 2015 through February 2017. The MTB guided individual molecular diagnostics, assessed evidence of actionability of molecular alterations, and provided therapy recommendations, including approved and off-label treatments as well as available matched clinical trials. Results:The majority of patients had metastatic solid tumors (73.7%), mostly progressive (77.3%) after a mean of 2.0 lines of standard treatment. Diagnostic recommendations resulted in 867 molecular diagnostic tests for 172 patients (five per case), including exome analysis in 36 cases (18.2%). With a median turnaround time of 28 days, treatment recommendations were given to 104 patients (52.5%). These included single-agent targeted therapies (42.3%), checkpoint inhibitors (37.5%), and combination therapies (18.3%). Treatment recommendations were implemented in 33 of 104 patients (31.7%), of whom 19 (57.6%) showed stable disease or partial response, including 14 patients (7.1% of the entire population) receiving off-label treatments. Conclusion:Personalized extended molecular-guided patient care is effective for a small but clinically meaningful proportion of patients in challenging clinical situations. Limited access to targeted drugs, lack of trials, and submission at late disease stage prevents broader applicability, whereas genome-wide analyses are not a strict requirement for predictive molecular testing.

Project description:PurposeThe use of radiation therapy (RT) in consolidating oligometastatic prostate cancer (OPCa) is a rapidly evolving treatment paradigm. We review our institutional experience using metastasis-directed therapy in the definitive management of men with OPCa.Methods and materialsPatients with OPCa treated with definitive RT were included. The Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regression analysis were performed to assess biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) and time to next intervention. Cumulative incidence functions were used to calculate rates of local failure. Toxicity was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4).ResultsThis study analyzed 156 patients with OPCa and 354 metastatic lesions with median follow-up of 24.6 months. Of 150 patients with toxicity data, 53 (35%) experienced acute grade 1 toxicity, 8 (5%) had grade 2, and none had grade 3 toxicity. Only 13 patients (9%) had late toxicities. At 24 months, the cumulative incidence of local failure was 7.4%. Median bPFS for the entire cohort was 12.9 months and 52% at 1 year. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with prolonged bPFS were peri-RT androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), lower gross tumor volume, and hormone-sensitive (HS) OPCa. Median time to next intervention, including repeat RT, was 21.6 months. Median bPFS for men with HS prostate cancer was 17.2 months compared with 7.2 months in men with castrate-resistant OPCa (P < .0001), and cumulative incidence of local failure at 24 months was lower with HS OPCa (4.8% vs 12.1%; P = .034). We analyzed 28 men with HS OPCa treated with a course of peri-RT ADT (median, 4.3 months) with recovery of testosterone. At a median follow-up of 33.5 months, 20 patients had not developed bPFS, median bPFS had not been reached, and 24-month bPFS was 77%.ConclusionsMetastasis-directed therapy can be effective across a wide range of OPCa subtypes, but with differential efficacy. Further study is warranted to investigate the use of RT across the wide range of patients with OPCa.