Dataset Information

Revisiting Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Amplification as a Target for Anti-EGFR Therapy: Analysis of Cell-Free Circulating Tumor DNA in Patients With Advanced Malignancies.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To date, evidence for tissue epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) overexpression as a biomarker for anti-EGFR therapies has been weak. We investigated the genomic landscape of EGFR amplification in blood-derived cell-free tumor DNA (cfDNA) across diverse cancers and the role of anti-EGFR therapies in achieving response.

Methods

We assessed EGFR amplification status among 28,584 patients with malignancies evaluated by clinical-grade next-generation sequencing (NGS) of blood-derived cfDNA (54- to 73-gene panel). Furthermore, we curated the clinical characteristics of 1,434 patients at the University of California San Diego who had cfDNA testing by this NGS test.

Results

Overall, EGFR amplification was detected in cfDNA from 8.5% of patients (2,423 of 28,584), most commonly in colorectal (16.3% [458 of 2,807]), non-small-cell lung (9.0% [1,096 of 12,197]), and genitourinary cancers (8.1% [170 of 2,104]). Most patients had genomic coalterations (96.9% [95 of 98]), frequently involving genes affecting other tyrosine kinases (72.4% [71 of 98]), mitogen-activated protein kinase cascades (56.1% [55 of 98]), cell-cycle-associated signals (52.0% [51 of 98]), and the phosphoinositide 3-kinase pathway (35.7% [35 of 98]). EGFR amplification emerged in serial cfDNA after various anticancer therapies (n = 6), including checkpoint inhibitors (n = 4), suggesting a possible role for these amplifications in acquired resistance. Nine evaluable patients with EGFR amplification were treated with anti-EGFR-based regimens; five (55.6%) achieved partial responses, including three patients whose tissue NGS lacked EGFR amplification.

Conclusion

EGFR amplification was detected in cfDNA among 8.5% of 28,584 diverse cancers. Most patients had coexisting alterations. Responses were observed in five of nine patients who received EGFR inhibitors. Incorporating EGFR inhibitors into the treatment regimens of patients harboring EGFR amplification in cfDNA merits additional study.

SUBMITTER: Kato S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6497417 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Amplification (amp) of MET can be observed in cases of focal gene copy number gain, such as MET-driven amp, or with a gain of chromosome 7, such as aneuploidy. Several studies have shown that only high-level focal MET amp (MET/CEP7 ratio ≥5) is oncogenic, with such tumors responding to targeted therapy. However, there are few reports on how to distinguish between focal amplification and aneuploidy using next-generation sequencing (NGS). A total of 1025 patients with advanced solid tumors (typically pre-treated) were tested with a non-invasive comprehensive cfDNA NGS panel (Guardant360) from July 2014 to June 2019. Since bioinformatics upgrades of Guardant360 were undergoing in September 2018, focal MET amp was determined by our independent algorithm using the cohorts tested before September 2018 (291 patients), and validation was performed in the remaining cohort (734 patients). MET alterations (alts) associated with aberrant signaling were found in 110 patients (10.7%) among nine different cancer types, most commonly in non-small cell (12.2%, 62/510) and small cell (33.3%, 3/9) lung cancers, gastroesophageal cancer (19.4%, 7/36), and prostate adenocarcinoma (15.6%; 5/32). Among 291 patients tested before September 2018, 37 (12.7%) had MET alts. Among these, 24 (64.9%) had amps, 5 (13.5%) had exon 14 skipping, and 13 (35.1%) had single nucleotide variants (SNVs). Co-alterations, such as amp + SNVs, were found in four samples (10.8%). Among 24 MET amps, 29.2% (7/24) were focal according to our algorithm. MET copy number was significantly higher with focal amp compared to non-focal amp (mean copy number 3.26 vs. 2.44, respectively, p = 0.00304). In 734 patients tested after September 2018, our definition of focal MET amp was detected in 4.2% (31/734). Overall, focal amplification based on our algorithm was 3.7% (=38/1025). This study describes an approach to distinguish focal and non-focal MET amplification using comprehensive genomic profiling of cfDNA in advanced cancer patients. Focal MET amp accounted for ~30% of all MET amp, which was found in 3.7% of patients with diverse cancers and was associated with a higher plasma copy number. Clinical studies are warranted to assess the clinical utility of targeted therapies for tumors with focal MET amplification detected by NGS of cfDNA.