Rose McCormack

Gefitinib treatment in EGFR mutated caucasian NSCLC: Circulating-free tumor DNA as a surrogate for determination of EGFR status

Introduction: In the phase IV, open-label, single-arm study NCT01203917, first-line gefitinib 250 mg/d was effective and well tolerated in Caucasian patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non–small-cell lung cancer (previously published). Here, we report EGFR mutation analyses of plasma-derived, circulating-free tumor DNA. Methods: Mandatory tumor and duplicate plasma (1 and 2) baseline samples were collected (all screened patients; n = 1060). Preplanned, exploratory analyses included EGFR mutation (and subtype) status of tumor versus plasma and between plasma samples. Post hoc, exploratory analyses included efficacy by tumor and plasma EGFR mutation (and subtype) status. Results: Available baseline tumor samples were 1033 of 1060 (118 positive of 859 mutation status known; mutation frequency, 13.7%). Available plasma 1 samples were 803 of 1060 (82 positive of 784 mutation status known; mutation frequency, 10.5%). Mutation status concordance between 652 matched tumor and plasma 1 samples was 94.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 92.3–96.0) (comparable for mutation subtypes); test sensitivity was 65.7% (95% CI, 55.8–74.7); and test specificity was 99.8% (95% CI, 99.0–100.0). Twelve patients of unknown tumor mutation status were subsequently identified as plasma mutation-positive. Available plasma 2 samples were 803 of 1060 (65 positive of 224 mutation status-evaluable and -known). Mutation status concordance between 224 matched duplicate plasma 1 and 2 samples was 96.9% (95% CI, 93.7–98.7). Objective response rates are as follows: mutation-positive tumor, 70% (95% CI, 60.5–77.7); mutation-positive tumor and plasma 1, 76.9% (95% CI, 65.4–85.5); and mutation-positive tumor and mutation-negative plasma 1, 59.5% (95% CI, 43.5–73.7). Median progression-free survival (months) was 9.7 (95% CI, 8.5–11.0; 61 events) for mutation-positive tumor and 10.2 (95% CI, 8.5–12.5; 36 events) for mutation-positive tumor and plasma 1. Conclusion: The high concordance, specificity, and sensitivity demonstrate that EGFR mutation status can be accurately assessed using circulating-free tumor DNA. Although encouraging and suggesting that plasma is a suitable substitute for mutation analysis, tumor tissue should remain the preferred sample type when available.

EGFR mutation testing in lung cancer: a review of available methods and their use for analysis of tumour tissue and cytology samples

Aims Activating mutations in the gene encoding epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) can confer sensitivity to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as gefitinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Testing for mutations in EGFR is therefore an important step in the treatment-decision pathway. We reviewed reported methods for EGFR mutation testing in patients with lung cancer, initially focusing on studies involving standard tumour tissue samples. We also evaluated data on the use of cytology samples in order to determine their suitability for EGFR mutation analysis. Methods We searched the MEDLINE database for studies reporting on EGFR mutation testing methods in patients with lung cancer. Results Various methods have been investigated as potential alternatives to the historical standard for EGFR mutation testing, direct DNA sequencing. Many of these are targeted methods that specifically detect the most common EGFR mutations. The development of targeted mutation testing methods and commercially available test kits has enabled sensitive, rapid and robust analysis of clinical samples. The use of screening methods, subsequent to sample micro dissection, has also ensured that identification of more rare, uncommon mutations is now feasible. Cytology samples including fine needle aspirate and pleural effusion can be used successfully to determine EGFR mutation status provided that sensitive testing methods are employed. Conclusions Several different testing methods offer a more sensitive alternative to direct sequencing for the detection of common EGFR mutations. Evidence published to date suggests cytology samples are viable alternatives for mutation testing when tumour tissue samples are not available.

Transcriptional Pathway Signatures Predict MEK Addiction and Response to Selumetinib (AZD6244)

Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) is a selective, non-ATP-competitive inhibitor of mitogen-activated protein/extracellular signal-regulated kinase kinase (MEK)-1/2. The range of antitumor activity seen preclinically and in patients highlights the importance of identifying determinants of response to this drug. In large tumor cell panels of diverse lineage, we show that MEK inhibitor response does not have an absolute correlation with mutational or phospho-protein markers of BRAF/MEK, RAS, or phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) activity. We aimed to enhance predictivity by measuring pathway output through coregulated gene networks displaying differential mRNA expression exclusive to resistant cell subsets and correlated to mutational or dynamic pathway activity. We discovered an 18-gene signature enabling measurement of MEK functional output independent of tumor genotype. Where the MEK pathway is activated but the cells remain resistant to selumetinib, we identified a 13-gene signature that implicates the existence of compensatory signaling from RAS effectors other than PI3K. The ability of these signatures to stratify samples according to functional activation of MEK and/or selumetinib sensitivity was shown in multiple independent melanoma, colon, breast, and lung tumor cell lines and in xenograft models. Furthermore, we were able to measure these signatures in fixed archival melanoma tumor samples using a single RT-qPCR-based test and found intergene correlations and associations with genetic markers of pathway activity to be preserved. These signatures offer useful tools for the study of MEK biology and clinical application of MEK inhibitors, and the novel approaches taken may benefit other targeted therapies.

First-line gefitinib in Caucasian EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC patients: a phase-IV, open-label, single-arm study.

Background:Phase-IV, open-label, single-arm study (NCT01203917) to assess efficacy and safety/tolerability of first-line gefitinib in Caucasian patients with stage IIIA/B/IV, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Methods:Treatment: gefitinib 250 mg day−1 until progression. Primary endpoint: objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints: disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety/tolerability. Pre-planned exploratory objective: EGFR mutation analysis in matched tumour and plasma samples.Results:Of 1060 screened patients with NSCLC (859 known mutation status; 118 positive, mutation frequency 14%), 106 with EGFR sensitising mutations were enrolled (female 70.8%; adenocarcinoma 97.2%; never-smoker 64.2%). At data cutoff: ORR 69.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 60.5–77.7), DCR 90.6% (95% CI 83.5–94.8), median PFS 9.7 months (95% CI 8.5–11.0), median OS 19.2 months (95% CI 17.0–NC; 27% maturity). Most common adverse events (AEs; any grade): rash (44.9%), diarrhoea (30.8%); CTC (Common Toxicity Criteria) grade 3/4 AEs: 15%; SAEs: 19%. Baseline plasma 1 samples were available in 803 patients (784 known mutation status; 82 positive; mutation frequency 10%). Plasma 1 EGFR mutation test sensitivity: 65.7% (95% CI 55.8–74.7).Conclusion:First-line gefitinib was effective and well tolerated in Caucasian patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC. Plasma samples could be considered for mutation analysis if tumour tissue is unavailable.

Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutation Status in Circulating Free DNA in Serum: From IPASS, a Phase III Study of Gefitinib or Carboplatin/Paclitaxel in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

Introduction: In IPASS (IRESSA Pan-Asia Study), clinically selected patients with pulmonary adenocarcinoma received first-line gefitinib or carboplatin/paclitaxel. This preplanned, exploratory analysis was conducted to increase understanding of the use of surrogate samples, such as serum, versus tumor biopsy samples for determining EGFR mutation status in the Japanese cohort (n = 233). Methods: EGFR mutations were assessed using tumor tissue-derived DNA (n = 91) and circulating free (cf) DNA from pretreatment serum samples (n = 194). Results: Fewer patients were EGFR mutation positive when assessed using pretreatment cfDNA (23.7%) versus tumor tissue-derived DNA (61.5%). cfDNA results identified no false positives but a high rate of false negatives (56.9%). There was a significant interaction between cfDNA EGFR mutation status and treatment for progression-free survival (PFS) (p = 0.045). PFS was significantly longer and objective response rate (ORR) higher with gefitinib than carboplatin/paclitaxel in the cfDNA EGFR mutation-positive subgroup (PFS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.14–0.60; p < 0.001; ORR: odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95% CI, 0.48–6.09; 75.0% versus 63.6%; p = 0.40). There was a slight numerical advantage in PFS and ORR for gefitinib over carboplatin/paclitaxel in the cfDNA EGFR mutation-negative subgroup, likely due to the high rate of false negatives within this subgroup. Conclusions: These results merit further investigation to determine whether alternative sources of tumor DNA, such as cfDNA in serum, could be used for determining EGFR mutation status in future; currently, where a sample is available, analysis of tumor material is recommended.

An evaluation study of EGFR mutation tests utilized for non-small-cell lung cancer in the diagnostic setting

BACKGROUND Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation is predictive for the efficacy of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment. We evaluated the performance, sensitivity, and concordance between five EGFR tests. MATERIALS AND METHODS DNA admixtures (n = 34; 1%-50% mutant plasmid DNA) and samples from NSCLC patients [116 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue, 29 matched bronchofiberscopic brushing (BB) cytology, and 20 additional pleural effusion (PE) cytology samples] were analyzed. EGFR mutation tests were PCR-Invader®, peptide nucleic acid-locked nucleic acid PCR clamp, direct sequencing, Cycleave™, and Scorpion Amplification Refractory Mutation System (ARMS)®. Analysis success, mutation status, and concordance rates were assessed. RESULTS All tests except direct sequencing detected four mutation types at ≥1% mutant DNA. Analysis success rates were 91.4%-100% (FFPE) and 100% (BB and PE cytology), respectively. Inter-assay concordance rates of successfully analyzed samples were 94.3%-100% (FFPE; kappa coefficients: 0.88-1.00), 93.1%-100% (BB cytology; 0.86-1.00), and 85.0%-100% (PE cytology; 0.70-1.00), and 93.1%-96.6% (0.86-0.93) between BB cytology and matched FFPE. CONCLUSIONS All EGFR assays carried out comparably in the analysis of FFPE and cytology samples. Cytology-derived DNA is a viable alternative to FFPE samples for analyzing EGFR mutations.BACKGROUND Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation is predictive for the efficacy of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment. We evaluated the performance, sensitivity, and concordance between five EGFR tests. MATERIALS AND METHODS DNA admixtures (n = 34; 1%-50% mutant plasmid DNA) and samples from NSCLC patients [116 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue, 29 matched bronchofiberscopic brushing (BB) cytology, and 20 additional pleural effusion (PE) cytology samples] were analyzed. EGFR mutation tests were PCR-Invader, peptide nucleic acid-locked nucleic acid PCR clamp, direct sequencing, Cycleave, and Scorpion Amplification Refractory Mutation System (ARMS). Analysis success, mutation status, and concordance rates were assessed. RESULTS All tests except direct sequencing detected four mutation types at ≥1% mutant DNA. Analysis success rates were 91.4%-100% (FFPE) and 100% (BB and PE cytology), respectively. Inter-assay concordance rates of successfully analyzed samples were 94.3%-100% (FFPE; kappa coefficients: 0.88-1.00), 93.1%-100% (BB cytology; 0.86-1.00), and 85.0%-100% (PE cytology; 0.70-1.00), and 93.1%-96.6% (0.86-0.93) between BB cytology and matched FFPE. CONCLUSIONS All EGFR assays carried out comparably in the analysis of FFPE and cytology samples. Cytology-derived DNA is a viable alternative to FFPE samples for analyzing EGFR mutations.

The diagnostic accuracy of pleural effusion and plasma samples versus tumour tissue for detection of EGFR mutation in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: comparison of methodologies.

Aims To evaluate the suitability of malignant pleural effusion (MPE) and plasma as surrogate samples for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation detection, and compare three different detection methods. Methods Matched tissue and plasma samples were collected from patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (stage IIIB/IV adenocarcinoma/adenosquamous carcinoma), with matched MPE samples collected from a subgroup. DNA was extracted from tissue, MPE cell block, MPE supernatant and plasma before mutation detection by amplification refractory mutation system (ARMS) (all samples), Sanger sequencing and mutant-specific immunohistochemistry (IHC) (tissue and MPE cell blocks only). Results Sensitivity of MPE cell block, MPE supernatant and plasma versus tissue: 81.8% (9/11), 63.6% (7/11) and 67.5% (27/40); specificity was 80.0% (8/10), 100% (10/10) and 100% (46/46), respectively. Sensitivity of Sanger sequencing versus ARMS: 81.8% (27/33) for tissue, 40% (4/10) for MPE cell blocks; specificity was 100% (36/36 and 12/12) for both. Sensitivity of mutant-specific IHC versus ARMS: 54.8% (17/31) for tissue, 50.0% (6/12) for MPE cell blocks; specificity was 97.1% (34/35) and 100% (14/14), respectively. Conclusions MPE and plasma are valid surrogates for NSCLC tumour EGFR mutation detection when tissue is not available. ARMS is most suitable for mutation detection in tissue and MPE cell blocks; however, mutant-specific IHC could be a complementary method when DNA-based molecular testing is unavailable.

EGFR Mutation Testing Practices within the Asia Pacific Region: Results of a Multicenter Diagnostic Survey

Introduction: The efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors in EGFR mutation-positive non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients necessitates accurate, timely testing. Although EGFR mutation testing has been adopted by many laboratories in Asia, data are lacking on the proportion of NSCLC patients tested in each country, and the most commonly used testing methods. Methods: A retrospective survey of records from NSCLC patients tested for EGFR mutations during 2011 was conducted in 11 Asian Pacific countries at 40 sites that routinely performed EGFR mutation testing during that period. Patient records were used to complete an online questionnaire at each site. Results: Of the 22,193 NSCLC patient records surveyed, 31.8% (95% confidence interval: 31.2%–32.5%) were tested for EGFR mutations. The rate of EGFR mutation positivity was 39.6% among the 10,687 cases tested. The majority of samples were biopsy and/or cytology samples (71.4%). DNA sequencing was the most commonly used testing method accounting for 40% and 32.5% of tissue and cytology samples, respectively. A pathology report was available only to 60.0% of the sites, and 47.5% were not members of a Quality Assurance Scheme. Conclusions: In 2011, EGFR mutation testing practices varied widely across Asia. These data provide a reference platform from which to improve the molecular diagnosis of NSCLC, and EGFR mutation testing in particular, in Asia.

ctDNA Determination of EGFR Mutation Status in European and Japanese Patients with Advanced NSCLC: The ASSESS Study

Introduction: To offer patients with EGFR mutation–positive advanced NSCLC appropriate EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment, mutation testing of tumor samples is required. However, tissue/cytologic samples are not always available or evaluable. The large, noninterventional diagnostic ASSESS study (NCT01785888) evaluated the utility of circulating free tumor‐derived DNA (ctDNA) from plasma for EGFR mutation testing. Methods: ASSESS was conducted in 56 centers (in Europe and Japan). Eligible patients (with newly diagnosed locally advanced/metastatic treatment‐naive advanced NSCLC) provided diagnostic tissue/cytologic and plasma samples. DNA extracted from tissue/cytologic samples was subjected to EGFR mutation testing using local practices; designated laboratories performed DNA extraction/mutation testing of blood samples. The primary end point was level of concordance of EGFR mutation status between matched tissue/cytologic and plasma samples. Results: Of 1311 patients enrolled, 1288 were eligible. Concordance of mutation status in 1162 matched samples was 89% (sensitivity 46%, specificity 97%, positive predictive value 78%, and negative predictive value 90%). A group of 25 patients with apparent false‐positive plasma results was overrepresented for cytologic samples, use of less sensitive tissue testing methodologies, and smoking habits associated with high EGFR mutation frequency, indicative of false‐negative tumor results. In cases in which plasma and tumor samples were tested with identical highly sensitive methods, positive predictive value/sensitivity were generally improved. Conclusions: These real‐world data suggest that ctDNA is a feasible sample for EGFR mutation analysis. It is important to conduct mutation testing of both tumor and plasma samples in specialized laboratories, using robust/sensitive methods to ensure that patients receive appropriate treatments that target the molecular features of their disease.

Circulating tumour-derived predictive biomarkers in oncology

Molecular characterization of tumour material will become increasingly important in selecting patients for clinical trials and offering appropriate treatment for patients in clinical practice. Recent advances in the field have indicated that the molecular characteristics of a tumour can be determined from circulating tumour cells and circulating tumour DNA; thus, a simple blood sample could provide these data in a simple, convenient and efficient manner. This article discusses progress towards guiding treatment decisions through measuring tumour-derived factors in the circulation.