Lauren Brusco

PURPOSE: We report the experience with 2,000 consecutive patients with advanced cancer who underwent testing on a genomic testing protocol, including the frequency of actionable alterations across tumor types, subsequent enrollment onto clinical trials, and the challenges for trial enrollment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Standardized hotspot mutation analysis was performed in 2,000 patients, using either an 11-gene (251 patients) or a 46- or 50-gene (1,749 patients) multiplex platform. Thirty-five genes were considered potentially actionable based on their potential to be targeted with approved or investigational therapies. RESULTS: Seven hundred eighty-nine patients (39%) had at least one mutation in potentially actionable genes. Eighty-three patients (11%) with potentially actionable mutations went on genotype-matched trials targeting these alterations. Of 230 patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN/BRAF mutations that returned for therapy, 116 (50%) received a genotype-matched drug. Forty patients (17%) were treated on a genotype-selected trial requiring a mutation for eligibility, 16 (7%) were treated on a genotype-relevant trial targeting a genomic alteration without biomarker selection, and 40 (17%) received a genotype-relevant drug off trial. Challenges to trial accrual included patient preference of noninvestigational treatment or local treatment, poor performance status or other reasons for trial ineligibility, lack of trials/slots, and insurance denial. CONCLUSION: Broad implementation of multiplex hotspot testing is feasible; however, only a small portion of patients with actionable alterations were actually enrolled onto genotype-matched trials. Increased awareness of therapeutic implications and access to novel therapeutics are needed to optimally leverage results from broad-based genomic testing.

Rapidly improving understanding of molecular oncology, emerging novel therapeutics, and increasingly available and affordable next-generation sequencing have created an opportunity for delivering genomically informed personalized cancer therapy. However, to implement genomically informed therapy requires that a clinician interpret the patient's molecular profile, including molecular characterization of the tumor and the patient's germline DNA. In this Commentary, we review existing data and tools for precision oncology and present a framework for reviewing the available biomedical literature on therapeutic implications of genomic alterations. Genomic alterations, including mutations, insertions/deletions, fusions, and copy number changes, need to be curated in terms of the likelihood that they alter the function of a "cancer gene" at the level of a specific variant in order to discriminate so-called "drivers" from "passengers." Alterations that are targetable either directly or indirectly with approved or investigational therapies are potentially "actionable." At this time, evidence linking predictive biomarkers to therapies is strong for only a few genomic markers in the context of specific cancer types. For these genomic alterations in other diseases and for other genomic alterations, the clinical data are either absent or insufficient to support routine clinical implementation of biomarker-based therapy. However, there is great interest in optimally matching patients to early-phase clinical trials. Thus, we need accessible, comprehensive, and frequently updated knowledge bases that describe genomic changes and their clinical implications, as well as continued education of clinicians and patients.

Estrogens play a crucial role in regulating the growth and differentiation of breast cancers, with approximately two thirds of all breast tumors expressing the estrogen receptor alpha (ERalpha). Therefore, therapeutic strategies directed at inhibiting the action of ERalpha by using anti-estrogens such as tamoxifen, or reducing estrogens levels by using aromatase inhibitors, such as letrozole, anastrozole, or exemestane, are the standard treatments offered to women with ERalpha-positive cancer. However, not all patients respond to endocrine therapies (termed de novo resistance), and a large number of patients who do respond will eventually develop disease progression or recurrence while on therapy (acquired resistance). Recently, variant forms of the receptor have been identified owing to alternative splicing or gene mutation. This article reviews these variant receptors and their clinical relevance in resistance to endocrine therapy, by addressing their molecular cross-talk with growth factor receptors and signaling components. Understanding the complexity of receptor-mediated signaling has promise for new combined therapeutic options that focus on more efficient blockade of receptor cross-talk.

Purpose To determine the significant genomic alterations in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and survival outcomes in common genotypes. Patients and Methods High-depth next-generation sequencing was performed for 202 genes in tumor and normal DNA from 257 patients with MBC, including 165 with estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor–positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2 [hormone receptor positive (HR+)])–positive, 32 with HER2-positive, and 60 with triple-negative (estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor–negative and HER2-negative) disease. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed in the discovery set, in patients with breast cancer analyzed in The Cancer Genome Atlas, and in a separate cohort of 98 patients with MBC who underwent clinical genomic testing. Results Significantly mutated genes (SMGs) varied by histology and tumor subtype, but TP53 was an SMG in all three subtypes. The most SMGs in patients with HR+ cancer were PIK3CA (32%), TP53 (29%), GATA3 (15%), CDH1 (8%), MAP3K1 (8%), PTEN (5%), TGFBR2 (4%), AKT1 (4%), and MAP2K4 (4%). TP53 mutations were associated with shorter recurrence-free survival ( P = .004), progression-free survival ( P < .001), and overall survival ( P = .003). Furthermore, TP53 status was prognostic among patients with HR+ cancer with PIK3CA mutations. TP53 mutations were associated with poorer overall survival in the 442 patients with HR+ breast cancer analyzed in The Cancer Genome Atlas ( P = .042) and in an independent set of 96 patients with HR+ MBC who underwent clinical sequencing ( P < .001). Conclusion SMGs differ by tumor subtype, but TP53 is significantly mutated in all three breast cancer subtypes. TP53 mutations are associated with poor prognosis in HR+ breast cancer and should be considered in the design and interpretation of precision oncology trials.