Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘liquid biopsy’

Real Time Conference Coverage: Advancing Precision Medicine Conference,Morning Session Track 1 October 3 2025

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD

Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intellegence will be covering this conference LIVE over X.com at

@pharma_BI

@StephenJWillia2

@AVIVA1950

@AdvancingPM

using the following meeting hashtags

#AdvancingPM #precisionmedicine #WINSYMPO2025

 

Agenda Track 1: WIN Symposium

8:40 – 9:00

Welcome and Introduction

William G Kaelin, Jr, MD

Source: https://winconsortium.org/ 

WIN was formed on the premise that we can accomplish more together than each organization can achieve working alone. We aim to improve cancer patients’ survival and quality of life. View WIN’s history and unique attributes:


Clinical trials, projects and publications

WIN members collaboratively design and carry out global studies designed to achieve breakthroughs for patients worldwide. Our distinguished Scientific Advisory Board oversees WIN studies. Current trials include:

 

 

William G Kaelin, Jr, MD

Nigel RussellFounder and CEOAdvancing Precision Medicine

William G Kaelin, Jr, MD

Christopher P. MolineauxPresident & Chief Executive OfficerLife Science Pennsylvania

Life Sciences Pennsylvania (LSPA) is the statewide trade association for the commonwealth’s life sciences industry. Founded in 1989, LSPA works to ensure Pennsylvania has a business and public policy climate that makes the commonwealth the most attractive location to open and operate a life sciences company. Our membership is comprised of organizations statewide, representing the entire ecosystem of the life sciences: research institutions, biotechnology, medical device, diagnostic, pharmaceutical, and investment entities, along with service providers who support the industry. Together, we unify Pennsylvania’s innovators to make the Commonwealth a global life sciences leader.

As president & CEO of Life Sciences Pennsylvania, Christopher Molineaux serves as the chief advocate and spokesman for the life sciences industry that calls Pennsylvania home. Molineaux oversees the strategic direction for the association, assuring Life Sciences Pennsylvania continues to be the catalyst that makes Pennsylvania the top location for life sciences companies.

Molineaux brings to Life Sciences Pennsylvania more than 25 years of experience in the bio-pharmaceutical and health care industries, with front-line experience in developing and executing strategies to navigate a shifting economic and political environment.

9:00-9:40

Keynote Lecture – WIN Consortium

Targeting the Achilles’ Heel of Cancer: Synthetic Lethality and Hypoxia in Precision Oncology

William Kaelin was born in New York City. He studied chemistry and mathematics at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, and received his doctor of medicine degree there in 1982. He then did his residency at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. In 2002 he became a professor at Harvard Medical School in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Work

 

Animals need oxygen for the conversion of food into useful energy. The importance of oxygen has been understood for centuries, but how cells adapt to changes in levels of oxygen has long been unknown. William Kaelin, Peter Ratcliffe, and Gregg Semenza discovered how cells can sense and adapt to changing oxygen availability. During the 1990s they identified a molecular machinery that regulates the activity of genes in response to varying levels of oxygen. The discoveries may lead to new treatments of anemia, cancer and many other diseases.

To cite this section
MLA style: William G. Kaelin Jr – Facts – 2019. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach 2025. Fri. 3 Oct 2025. <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2019/kaelin/facts/>

From his Nobel award ceremony:

Gregg Semenza and Sir Peter Ratcliffe decided, independently, to find out how the erythropoietin gene can have such an extraordinary ability to react when oxygen levels drop. Semenza discovered an essential DNA element. Ratcliffe was on the same track and they showed that the element is active in all cells. Oxygen sensing thus takes place everywhere in our bodies. Semenza then discovered the critical player that acti- vates our defense genes. It was named HIF. HIF was subjected to an advanced form of control. It is continuously produced, but when oxygen is ample, it disappears. Only when oxygen levels drop, HIF will remain and can mobilise our defense.

William Kaelin studied a different problem, von Hippel- Lindau disease, with inherited increased risk of certain types of cancer. Cancer cells without the gene, VHL, had activated genes normally controlled by HIF. Sir Peter Ratcliffe proved, in a crucial experiment, that VHL is required for HIF to be removed.

But what was the signal to VHL that HIF needs to disappear?
In the early 2000s, Kaelin and Ratcliffe both solved this mystery. The signal was formed by attaching oxygen atoms onto HIF.
Without oxygen, no signal to VHL, HIF is left intact and can activate our defense.

Piece by piece of the puzzle, the Laureates explained a sensitive machinery that compensates when the vital oxygen is not available in exactly the right amount.

Today we know that the machinery affects a vast range of functions.
When oxygen is lacking, oxygen transport is enhanced by generation of new blood vessels and red blood cells. Our cells are also instructed to economize with the oxygen available, by reprogramming their energy metabolism. Oxygen sensing is also involved in many diseases. As a result of the Laureates’ discoveries, intense activities are under way to develop treatments against for example anemia and cancer.

Professors Semenza, Ratcliffe and Kaelin,
Your groundbreaking discoveries have shed light on a beautiful mechanism explaining our ability to sense and react to fluctuating oxygen levels. The system you have clarified is of fundamental importance for all aspects of physiology and for many human diseases. Without it, animal life would not be possible on this planet.

On behalf of the Nobel Assembly at Karolinska Institutet, it is my great privilege to convey to you our warmest congratulations. I now ask you to step forward to receive the Nobel Prize from the hands of His Majesty the King.

TRACK 1  204BC

 

WIN SYMPOSIUM

MULTI-OMICS

9:40 – 10:40

SESSION 1

From Base Pairs To Better Care:

AI and Omics in Precision Oncology

9:40-10:00

Multi-Omic Profiling and Clinical Decision Support in Precision Oncology

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

David Spetzler, PhD, MBA, MS,  President, Caris Life Sciences

10:00-10:20

Integrating Omics and AI for Next-Gen Precision Oncology

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

Keith T. Flaherty, MD, FAACR, Director of Clinical Research, Massachusetts General Cancer CenterProfessor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School;
President-Elect: 2025-2026, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) 

10:20-10:40

Real-World Data and AI in Precision Oncology: Making Data Work for Patients – Q&A

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

MODERATOR: Jeff Elton, PhD, Vice Chairman, Founding CEO
ConcertAI

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

PANELISTS: David Spetzler, PhD, MBA, MS, President, Caris Life Sciences

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

Keith T. Flaherty, MD, FAACR, Director of Clinical Research, Massachusetts General Cancer CenterProfessor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School;
President-Elect: 2025-2026, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) 

0:40 – 11:10

Break and Exhibits

TRACK 1  204BC

TRACK 2  204A

WIN SYMPOSIUM

MULTI-OMICS

11:10 – 1:10

SESSION 2

The Evolution of Precision Oncology:

Integrating MRD, AI, and Beyond

11:10-12:00

Precision Cancer Consortium

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez
Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

Shruti Mathur, MSPharma Diagnostic Strategy Leader, Global Product Strategy (GPS), Genentech

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

Daryl Pritchard, PhD, Interim President, Personalized Medicine Coalition

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

Keith T. Flaherty, MD, FAACR, Director of Clinical Research, Massachusetts General Cancer CenterProfessor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School;
President-Elect: 2025-2026, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) 

SESSION 3

The Shifting Landscape:

Tumor Plasticity and Resistance

12:00-12:20

Mathematical and Evolutionary Modeling in Precision Radiation Oncology

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

Jacob Scott, MD, DPhil, Professor and Staff Physician-Scientist, CWRU School of Medicine and Cleveland Clinic

12:20-12:40

Plasticity and Persistence: The Role of EMT in Cancer Progression and Therapy Resistance

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

Sendurai A. Mani, PhD, Professor of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Brown University; Associate Director of Translational Oncology, Brown University Legorreta Cancer Center

12:40-1:00

Targeting Molecularly Defined Subsets: Challenges in Translational Oncology

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez

Benedito A. Carneiro, MD, MS, Director, Clinical Research
Director, Cancer Drug Development; Associate Director, Division of Hematology/Oncology
Legorreta Cancer Center, Brown University Health

Read Full Post »

Conference Coverage 2025 Advancing Precision Medicine Conference, Philadelphia PA October 3-4 2025

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD

The Annual Advanced Precision Medicine Conference will be held at the Pennsylvania Convention Center October 3-4 2025 in Philadelphia PA.   Advancing Precision Medicine is an organization dedicated to provide education and discourse among medical professionals to advance the field of precision therapeutics and diagnostics in cancer, cardiovascular, and other diseases.  The Annual symposium is held in Philadelphia.

The event will consist of two parallel tracks composed of keynote addresses, panel discussions and fireside chats which will encourage audience participation. Over the course of the two-day event leaders from industry, healthcare, regulatory bodies, academia and other pertinent stakeholders will share an intriguing and broad scope of content.

This event will consist of three immersive tracks, each crafted to explore the multifaceted dimensions of precision medicine. Delve into Precision Oncology, where groundbreaking advancements are reshaping the landscape of cancer diagnosis and treatment. Traverse the boundaries of Precision Medicine Outside of Oncology, as we probe into the intricate interplay of genetics, lifestyle, and environment across a spectrum of diseases and conditions including rare disease, cardiology, ophthalmology, and neurodegenerative disease. Immerse yourself in AI for Precision Medicine, where cutting-edge technologies are revolutionizing diagnostics, therapeutics, and patient care. Additionally, explore the emerging frontiers of Spatial Biology and Mult-Omics, where integrated approaches are unraveling the complexities of biological systems with unprecedented depth and precision.

https://www.advancingprecisionmedicine.com/ 

Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intellegence will be covering this conference LIVE over X.com at

@pharma_BI

@StephenJWillia2

@AVIVA1950

@AdvancingPM

using the following meeting hashtags

#AdvancingPM #precisionmedicine #WINSYMPO2025

APM is a mission-driven team dedicated to advancing clinical practice through education in precision medicine, oncology, and pathology. Our expert-led programs bring together clinicians, pathologists, pharmacists, nurses, and researchers from across the country.

What We Offer

In 2025, we’re proud to offer three specialized event series—each tailored to a different corner of the healthcare ecosystem:

Register here for the 2025 Conference: https://www.advancingprecisionmedicine.com/apm-home/apm-annual-conference-and-exhibition-in-philadelphia/ 

Where discovery meets application – and science transforms lives.

What’s New in 2025?

Four Specialized Tracks:

Track 1 – 2025 WIN Symposium: Progress and Challenges in Precision Oncology
Presented in partnership with Advancing Precision Medicine

As the official 2025 WIN Symposium, this dedicated track will explore the evolving landscape of precision oncology, highlighting both groundbreaking advances and the ongoing challenges of translating molecular insights into clinical impact. Curated by the WIN Consortium, the program will feature global leaders in cancer research, diagnostics, and therapeutic innovation—offering a comprehensive view of how precision medicine is reshaping oncology across tumor types and care settings.

Track 2 – Day 1 – Multi-Omics Integration, Day 2 – Precision Medicine Outside of Oncology

From genomics and transcriptomics to proteomics and metabolomics—this track highlights how multi-layered data is revolutionizing systems biology and clinical decision-making.

Diving into applications across cardiovascular, neurology, rare disease, infectious disease, and other therapeutic areas where precision tools are reshaping clinical practice.

 

Why Attend?

  • Cutting-Edge Innovation: Explore AI-powered solutions, multi-omics workflows, clinical trial design, and real-world implementation.
  • Renowned Speakers: Hear from global thought leaders in translational research, biotech innovation, and personalized therapeutics.
  • Dynamic Format: Keynotes, fireside chats, panels, and audience-interactive discussions across four concurrent tracks.
  • Unmatched Networking: Collaborate with scientists, startups, executives, regulators, and investors shaping tomorrow’s care.
  • Philadelphia Advantage: Centrally located near premier academic institutions, hospitals, incubators, and venture capital networks.

Who Should Attend?

Researchers, clinicians, data scientists, regulatory experts, startup founders, investors, tech transfer professionals, and healthcare leaders.

Let’s advance a future that is more predictive, preventive, and precise—together.

Keynote Speaker

  • William Kaelin, Jr, MD

    2019 Nobel Laureate
    Sidney Farber Professor, Harvard Medical School and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute

2019 Nobel Laureate

Sidney Farber Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 

Senior Physician-Scientist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital

Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator

William Kaelin is the Sidney Farber Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Senior Physician-Scientist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator. He obtained his undergraduate and M.D. degrees from Duke University and completed his training in Internal Medicine at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, where he served as chief medical resident. He was a clinical fellow in Medical Oncology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and later a postdoctoral fellow in David Livingston’s laboratory, during which time he was a McDonnell Scholar.

A Nobel Laureate, Dr. Kaelin received the 2019 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the National Academy of Medicine, the American Society of Clinical Investigation, and the American College of Physicians. He previously served on the National Cancer Institute Board of Scientific Advisors, the AACR Board of Trustees, and the Institute of Medicine National Cancer Policy Board. He is a recipient of the Paul Marks Prize for cancer research from the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center; the Richard and Hinda Rosenthal Prize from the AACR; the Doris Duke Distinguished Clinical Scientist award; the 2010 Canada International Gairdner Award; ASCI’s Stanley J. Korsmeyer Award; the Scientific Grand Prix of the Foundation Lefoulon-Delalande; the Wiley Prize in Biomedical Sciences; the Steven C. Beering Award; the AACR Princess Takamatsu Award; the ASCO Science of Oncology Award; the Helis Award; the Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Prize; the Massry Prize; the Harriet P. Dustan Award for Science as Related to Medicine from the American College of Physicians.

Dr. Kaelin’s research seeks to understand how, mechanistically, mutations affecting tumor-suppressor genes cause cancer. His laboratory is currently focused on studies of the VHL, RB-1, and p53 tumor suppressor genes. His long-term goal is to lay the foundation for new anticancer therapies based on the biochemical functions of such proteins. His work on the VHL protein helped to motivate the eventual successful clinical testing of VEGF inhibitors for the treatment of kidney cancer. Moreover, this line of investigation led to new insights into how cells sense and respond to changes in oxygen, and thus has implications for diseases beyond cancer, such as anemia, myocardial infarction, and stroke. His group also showed that leukemic transformation by mutant IDH was reversible, setting the stage for the development and approval of mutant IDH inhibitors, and discovered how thalidomide-like drugs kill myeloma cells by degrading two otherwise undruggable transcription factors,

2025 Steering Committee

Presentations

A diverse group of more than 90 key opinion leaders will convene to explore the critical forces shaping the future of healthcare. Representing a range of disciplines—including genomics, bioinformatics, clinical research, biopharma, technology, and investment—these experts will lead discussions on the latest advancements and challenges in precision medicine.

Topics will include the evolution of genomic sequencing technologies, ethical considerations in managing patient data, the integration of AI in diagnostics, and strategies for translating innovation into clinical practice. The inclusion of investors and strategic partners will also bring a vital perspective on funding models, commercialization pathways, and the acceleration of cutting-edge therapies. Together, these voices will offer a comprehensive view of the trends transforming personalized healthcare on a global scale.

Networking Opportunities

Our precision medicine event, hosting over 500 attendees, offers invaluable networking opportunities. Bringing together professionals, researchers, and industry leaders, the event facilitates engaging discussions, knowledge-sharing, and potential partnerships, driving advancements in precision medicine.

Why Exhibit

Exhibiting at the event provides a unique opportunity to showcase your cutting-edge solutions and connect with key stakeholders in the rapidly advancing field of personalized healthcare. As an exhibitor, you’ll gain visibility among industry leaders, researchers, and professionals, allowing you to forge strategic partnerships, highlight your contributions to precision medicine, and stay at the forefront of innovations shaping the future of healthcare. Don’t miss the chance to position your company as a leader in this dynamic and transformative space, driving meaningful collaborations and contributing to the advancement of precision medicine.

THE LOCATION

APM Annual Conference 2025

Pennsylvania Convention Center
1101 Arch Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107

Philadelphia

Registration Fees

Student – free
Academic/Government/Non-Profit  – free
Healthcare Providers – free 
Investors – free
Vendor/Technology Provider $999

Other Live Conference Proceedings can be found on this Online Open Access Journal at:

Press Coverage

including a list of previous conference at:

Part Two: List of BioTech Conferences 2013 to Present

including Live Coverage of the 2024 Advancing Precision Medicine conference at:

Real Time Coverage Advancing Precision Medicine Annual Conference, Philadelphia PA November 1,2 2024

 

Read Full Post »

Real Time Coverage Morning Session on Precision Oncology: Advancing Precision Medicine Annual Conference, Philadelphia PA November 2 2024

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

9:20-9:50

How Can We Close the Clinical Practice Gaps in Precision Medicine?

Susanne Munksted, Diaceutics

Studies are showing that genetic tests are being ordered at a sufficient rate however it appears there are problems in interpretation and developing treatment plans based on omics testing results

 

  • 30 % of patients in past and now currently half of all patients are not being given the proper treatment based on genomic testing results (ASCO)
  • E.g. only 1.5% with NTRK fusions received a NTRK based therapy (this was > 4000 patients receiving wrong therapy)
  • A lung oncologist may only see one patient with NTRK fusion in three years

 

Precision Medicine Practice Gaps

48% of oncologist surveyed  agreed pathologist needs to be more informed and relevant in the decision making process with regard to tests needing to be ordered

95% said need to flip cost issues ; what does it cost not to get a test … i.e. what is the cost of the wrong therapy

We need a new commercialization model for therapeutic development for this new era of “n of one” patient

9:50-10:15

Implementation of a CLIA-based Reverse Phase Protein Array Assay for Precision Oncology Applications: Proteomics and Phosphoproteomics at the Bedside (CME Eligible)

Emanuel Petricoin, George Mason University

There are some tumor markers approved by FDA that cant just be measured by NGS and are correlated with a pathologic complete response

 

  • Many point mutations will have no actionable drug
  • Many alterations are post-genomic meaning there is a post translational component to many prognostic biomarkers
  • Prevalence of point mutation with no actionable mutation is a limit of NGS
  • It is important to look at phospho protein spectrum as a potential biomarker

 

Reverse phase protein proteomic analysis

  • Made into CLIA based array
  • They trained centers around the US on the technology and analysis
  • Basing proteomics or protein markers by traditional IHC requires much antibody validation so if the mass spectrometry field can catch up it would be very powerful
  • With multiple MRM.MS there is too low abundance of phosphoproteins to allow for good detection

 

They  conducted the I-SPY2 trial for breast cancer and determining if phosphoproteins could be a good biomarker panel

  • They found they could predict a HER2 response better than NGS
  • There were patients who were predicted HER2 negative that actually had an activated HER2 signaling pathway by proteomics so NGS must have had a series of false negatives
  • HER2 co phosphorylation predicts pathologic complete response and predicts therapy by herceptin
  • They found patients classified as HER2 negative by FISH were HER2 positive by proteomics and had HER2 activation

10:15-11:10

Liquid Biopsy MRD to Escalate or De-escalate Therapy (CME Eligible)

Adrian Lee

Adrian Lee, UPMC

Marija Balic, UPMC

Howard McLeod

Howard McLeod, Utah Tech University

Muhammed, Murtaza, University of Wisconsin-Madison

 

11:15-11:25  PRODUCT PRESENTATION  204A

SpaceIQ™ – Powering Next Generation Precision Therapeutics with AI-Driven Spatial Biomarkers

Dusty Majumdar, PredxBio 

Single Cell and Spatial Omics

 

  • Single cell transcriptomics technology have been scaled up very nicely over the past ten years
  • Spatial informatics field is lacking in innovations
  • Can get a terabyte worth of data from analysis of one slide

11:25-11:35  PRODUCT PRESENTATION  204C

10x Genomics

11:40-12:35

Transcriptomics and AI in Transforming Precision Diagnosis

Maher Albitar, Genomic Testing Cooperative

Transciptomica and AI:Transforming Precision diagnosis

-The Genomics Testing Coopererative at www.genomictestingcooperative.com

 

Advantages of transcriptomics

– mutation frequency and allele variant detection now at 80% (higher sensitivity in mutation detection)

 

– transcriptomics has good detection of chromosomal translocations

– great surrogate for IHC and detect splicing alterations

– can use AI to predict % of PDL1 in tumor cells versus immune cells

– they have developed a software UMAP (uniform manifold approximation and projection) to supervise cluster analysis

– the group has used AI to predict prognosis and survival using transcriptomics data

Marija Balic, UPMC

Andrew Pecora, Hackensack University Medical Center 

12:35-1:00

The Impact of Multi-Omics in the Context of the APOLLO-2 Moonshot Program (CME Eligible)

 

 

Read Full Post »

Real Time Coverage Morning Session on Precision Oncology: Advancing Precision Medicine Annual Conference, Philadelphia PA November 1 2024

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

Notes from Precision Medicine for Rare Diseases 9:00AM – 10:50

Precision Medicine and markers Cure models vs disease models  Dr Ekker from UT MD Anderson

 

  • UT MD Anderson zebrafish disease model program now focusing more on figuring the mechanisms by which a disease model is reverted to normal upon CRISPR screens
  • Traditional drug development process long and expensive
  • 2nd in class only takes 4 years while 3rd in class drugs take only 1.5 years
  • Health-in-a-fish: using a CRE system to go from disease to normal
  • The theory is making a CRE or CURE avatar; taking a diseased zebrafish and reverse engineering the disease genome
  • He used transposon based CRE mutational mutants with protein trap and 3’ exon trap (transposon based mutagenesis)
  • He reverted the diseased gene by CRE
  • He feels that can scale up to using organoids to develop more cure based models

 

FDA Christine Nguyen MD regulatory perspective of framework of drug approval for rare diseases

  • 1 in 10 Amercians have rare diseases; 70% genetic and half are children
  • Due to Orphan Drug Act in 2023 half of novel drugs approved for rare diseases
  • CDER and FDA 550 unique drugs for over 1000 rare diseases
  • Clinical and surrogate validated endpoints are important for traditional approvals
  • For accelerated approval need predictive surrogate endpoint of clinical benefit
  • For accelerated approval needs completion of a confirmatory trials so FDA has new authority under FDORA; FDA can dictate trial milestones
  • Candidate surrogate endpoints: known to predict (validated) for traditional approval but reasonably likely to predict for accelerated approval
  • Does surrogate endpoint associated with a causal pathway?  Also important to understand the magnitude of benefit so surrogate should be quantitative not just qualitative
  • RDEA is a series of 3 public workshops at FY2027 to promote innovation and novel endpoints and guidance

 

Frank Sasinowski FDA regulatory flexibility beyond One Positive Adequate and Well Controlled Trial

  •  As we move to rare diseases we may only have one well controlled study so FDA feels we need new regulatory frameworks and guidelines especially for rare disease clinical trails especially with precision medicine
  • Accelerated approval does not mean your evidence is any less stringent that traditional approval (only difference is endpoint but quality of evidence the same)

 

  • Confirmatory evidence is a primary concern
  • In 2021 FDA coordinated with the two divisions CBER and CDER
  • Sometimes a primary endpoint shows positive benefit but secondary endpoints may not; FDA now feels that results from one well designed AWC gives confirmatory evidence
  • FDA can be flexible by taking in consideration the quantity and quality of confirmatory evidence and the totality of evidence
  • So pharmacology studies, natural history etc.  can be enough
  • For a drug like Lamzede for mannosidosis there were no positive endpoint studies or for ADA SCID disease there was other compelling evidence
  • The FDA does have flexibility when it comes to advanced precision medicines and ultr rare diseases

10:50 Do we Really Need Liquid Biopsy? A Panel Discussion on the Issues Hampering the full Adoption of Liquid Biopsy

  • In Mexico leading cancer is colorectal but only have the FIT test and noone except one organization who issupplying health access
  • Access to precision medicine is a concern:  the communication between the patient, who is pushing this more than healthcare, needs to be coordinated better with all stakeholders in care
  • We also need to educate many physicians even oncologists (like in Virginia) a better understanding of genetics and omics
  • FT3 consortium does testing to therapy (multistakeholder group comprised of patient advocacy groups); focus on amplifying global efforts to increase access; they are trying to make a roadmap to help access in other countries; when it comes to precision medicine it is usually the nurses that are aksing for training because they are usually the first responders for the patient’s questions
  • In rural areas just getting access to liquid biopsy is a concern and maybe satellite sites might be useful because the time to schedule is getting worse (like 3 or more months)
  •  A recent paper showed that liquid biopsy may actually perpetuate health disparities and not ameliorate them
  • BloodPAC: there are barriers to LB access and adoption so consortium felt that there were many areas that need to be addressed: financial, access, disparities, education
  • ctDNA to define variants was the past focus; there is growing realization that there are representatives populations in your R&D studies
  • Submission of data to BloodPac is easier to do for tissue not for liquid biopsy;  there is lack of harmonization across many of these databanks
  • Reimbursement: is a barrier to access for liquid biopsy
  • Illumina: challenge finding clinical utility for payers; FDA approval is not as hard; show improved outcomes for patients; Medicare is starting to approve some tests but the criteria bar keeps changing with payers; 
  • How do we leverage the on-market data to support performance of your diagnostic test or genomic panel

 

This event will be covered by the LPBI Group on Twitter.  Follow on

@Pharma_BI

@StephenJWillia2

@Aviva1950

@AdvancingPM

using the following meeting hashtags

#AdvancingPM #precisionmedicine

Read Full Post »

Real Time Coverage Advancing Precision Medicine Annual Conference, Philadelphia PA November 1,2 2024

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

Source: https://www.advancingprecisionmedicine.com/apm-annual-conference-and-exhibition-in-philadelphia/ 

This event will be covered by the LPBI Group on Twitter.  Follow on

@Pharma_BI

@StephenJWillia2

@Aviva1950

@AdvancingPM

using the following meeting hashtags

#AdvancingPM #precisionmedicine

The Advancing Precision Medicine (APM) Annual Conference 2024 will take place at the Pennsylvania Convention Center in Philadelphia,  November 1-2, 2024. Located in the heart of the biopharma ecosystem and with easy access to some of the most renowned academic and research institutions in the world, the APM Annual Conference 2024 will attract all segments of the precision medicine landscape.

The event will consist of two parallel tracks composed of keynote addresses, panel discussions and fireside chats which will encourage audience participation. Over the course of the two-day event leaders from industry, healthcare, regulatory bodies, academia and other pertinent stakeholders will share an intriguing and broad scope of content.

his event will consist of three immersive tracks, each crafted to explore the multifaceted dimensions of precision medicine. Delve into Precision Oncology, where groundbreaking advancements are reshaping the landscape of cancer diagnosis and treatment. Traverse the boundaries of Precision Medicine Outside of Oncology, as we probe into the intricate interplay of genetics, lifestyle, and environment across a spectrum of diseases and conditions including rare disease, cardiology, ophthalmology, and neurodegenerative disease. Immerse yourself in AI for Precision Medicine, where cutting-edge technologies are revolutionizing diagnostics, therapeutics, and patient care. Additionally, explore the emerging frontiers of Spatial Biology and Mult-Omics, where integrated approaches are unraveling the complexities of biological systems with unprecedented depth and precision.

Whether you are a seasoned researcher, a dedicated clinician, or a visionary industry professional, this conference serves as a vibrant hub of knowledge exchange, collaboration, and innovation. Elevate your expertise, expand your network, and chart the course of your career trajectory amidst a community of like-minded individuals.  Join us as we embark on this transformative journey, where the possibilities are as limitless as the potential of precision medicine itself.

Agenda – What’s on when

7:30 – 8:25

Registration and Check-in          Meeting Room 203          Philadelphia Convention Center

8:25 – 8:30

Welcome and Introduction

8:30 – 9:00

Opening Keynote

Advancing Precision Medicine in the Prevention and Treatment of Cardiometabolic Disease (CME Eligible)

Daniel Rader

Daniel Rader, Penn Medicine and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia

9:00 – 10:20

9:00-10:20

Diagnosis to Treatment – A Case Study in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer

Jason Crites

Moderator: Jason Crites, Assurance Health Data

Miriam Bredella, NYU Lagone Health

Robert Dumanois

Rob Dumanois, Thermo Fisher Scientific

Joe Lennerz

Joe Lennerz, BostonGene

10:20 – 10:50

Networking, Exhibits and Product Presentations

10:25-10:35  PRODUCT PRESENTATION  204C

The Genexus Integrated Sequencer System:
NGS Results in 24 hours for Oncology Genomic Profiling

Jeff Smith,  Thermo Fisher Scientific

10:35-10:45  PRODUCT PRESENTATION  204A

Shifting the Paradigm in Patient Management with MRD Testing: Why Evidence-Generated Performance and Experience is Key

Karen Lin, Natera

10:50 – 12:50

10:50-11:50

Who Needs Liquid Biopsy? Opportunities to Increase Access and Improve Outcomes

Nicole St. Jean, GSK

Phil Febbo,  Veracyte, Inc.

Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez, Virginia Commonwealth University

Lauren Leiman, BloodPAC

Nicole Sheahan, Global Colon Cancer Association

11:50-12:50

Advancing Digital Pathology and Precision Medicine – Where Are We Now?

Shruti Mathur, Genentech

Luke Benko, Roche Diagnostics

Kimberly GasuadJK Life Sciences

Eric Walk, PathAI

10:50-11:10

Real World Data vs Multi Modal Omics Data for Therapeutic Discovery (CME Eligible)

Adam Resnick, CHOP

11:10-11:30

An Academic Perspective on Rare Disease Target Discovery to Commercial Treatment Development (CME Eligible)

Hakon Hakonarson

Hakon Hakonarson, CHOP

11:30-11:50

NCATS Perspective on Success and Failures of Drug Repurposing for Rare Disease (CME Eligible)

PJ Brooks, NIH

11:50-12:10

Pharma Perspective and Realities (CME Eligible)

Sundeep Dugar, Rarefy Therapeutics

12:10-12:50

A Panel Discussion: Scaling Precision Therapeutic Development for Rare Disease (CME Eligible)

Marni Falk

Marni Falk, CHOP

Stephen Ekker, University of Texas at Austin

Christine Nguyen, FDA

Frank Sasinowski, Hyman, Phelps & McNamara

Adam Resnick, CHOP

Hakon Hakonarson

Hakon Hakonarson, CHOP

Sundeep Dugar, Rarefy Therapeutics

PJ Brooks, NIH

12:50 – 1:50

Lunch & Product Presentations

1:10-1:25  PRODUCT PRESENTATION  204C

The Power of ctDNA Testing in Therapy Selection and Recurrence Monitoring

Taylor Jensen,  LabCorp

1:50 – 3:50

1:50-3:50

Unlocking the Next Quantum Leap in Precision Medicine – A Town Hall Discussion (CME Eligible)

Co-Chairs

Amanda Paulovich

Amanda Paulovich, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

Henry Rodriguez

Henry Rodriguez, NCI/NIH

Eric Schadt

Eric Schadt, Pathos

Participants

Ezra Cohen, Tempus

Jennifer Leib, Innovation Policy Solutions

Susan Monarez, ARPA-H

Nick Seddon, Optum Genomics 

Giselle Sholler, Penn State Hershey Children’s Hospital

Janet Woodcock

Janet Woodcock, Former FDA

1:50-2:50

Advancing Precision Medicine in Non-Oncology Therapeutic Areas

Moderator: Mike Montalto, Amgen

Scott Friedman, Mt. Sinai

Sana Syed, University of Virginia

Lei Zhao, Amgen

2:50-3:20

Towards a Precision Neuroimmunology Platform (CME Eligible)

Amit Bar-Or, Penn Medicine

3:20-3:50

3:50 – 4:20

Networking and Exhibits

4:20 – 6:15

4:20-4:45

Advancing Precision Medicine: Polygenic Risk Scores and Beyond (CME Eligible)

Dokyoon Kim, Penn Medicine

4:45-5:30

The Rocky Road to Clinical Trial Diversity (CME Eligible)

Ysabel Duron, The Latino Cancer Institute

Porscha Johnson, PJW Clinical Pharmacy Consulting

Victor LaGroon, Department of Veterans Affairs

5:30-6:15

In the Rising Age of Women’s Health, How Do We Build Diagnostics to Last?

Oriana Papin Zoghbi, AOADx

Sarah Huah, Johnson & Johnson

6:30 – 7:00

Evening Keynote

Reimagining Health Equity in the Era of Precision Medicine (CME Eligible)

Rick Kittles

Rick Kittles, Morehouse School of Medicine

7:00 – 7:45

Cocktail Networking Reception 

November 02, 2024

8:00-8:55

Registration and Check-in          Meeting Room 203          Philadelphia Convention Center

Read Full Post »

Live Notes, Real Time Conference Coverage 2020 AACR Virtual Meeting April 28, 2020 Session on Early Detection and ctDNA 1:35 – 3:55 PM

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD

Introduction
Alberto Bardelli

  • circulating tumor DNA has been around but with NGS now we can have more specificity in analyzing ctDNA
  • interest lately in using liquid biopsy to gain insight on tumor heterogeneity versus single needle biopsy of the solid tumor
  • these talks will however be on ctDNA as a diagnostic and therapeutic monitoring modality

Prediction of cancer and tissue of origin in individuals with suspicion of cancer using a cell-free DNA multi-cancer early detection test
David Thiel 

@MayoClinic

  • test has a specificity over 90% and intended to used along with guideline
  • The Circulating  Cell-free Genome Atlas Study (clinical trial NCT02889978) (CCGA) study divided into three substudies: highest performing assay, refining assay, validation of assays
  • methylation based assays worked better than sequencing (bisulfite sequencing)
  • used a machine learning algorithm to help refine assay
  • prediction was >90%; subgroup for high clinical suspicion of cancer
  • HCS sensitivity was 100% and specificity very high; but sensitivity on training set was 40% and results may have been confounded by including kidney cancer
  • TOO tissue of origin was predicted in greater than 99% in both training and validation sets

A first-of-its-kind prospective study of a multi-cancer blood test to screen and manage 10,000 women with no history of cancer

  • DETECT-A study: prospective interventional study; can multi blood test be used prospectively and can lead to a personalized care; can the screen be used to complement current therapy?
  • 10,000 women aged 65-75;  these women could not have previous cancer and conducted through Geisinger Health Network; multi test detects DNA and protein and standard of care screening
  • the study focused on safety so a committee was consulted on each case, and used a diagnostic PET-CT
  • blood test alone not good but combined with protein and CT scans much higher (5 fold increase) detection for breast cancer

Nickolas Papadopoulos

@HopkinsMedicine

Discussant
David Huntsman

  • there are mutiple opportunities yet at same time there are still challenges to utilize these cell free tests in therapeutic monitoring, diagnostic, and screening however sensitivities for some cancers are still too low to use in large scale screening however can supplement current screening guidelines
  • we have to ask about false positive rate and need to concentrate on prospective studies
  • we must consider how tests will be used, population health studies will need to show improved survival

 

Phylogenetic tracking and minimal residual disease detection using ctDNA in early-stage NSCLC: A lung TRACERx study
Chris Abbosh @ucl

  • TRACERx study in collaboration with Charles Swanton.
  • multiplex PCR to track 200 SNVs: correlate tumor tissue biopsy with ctDNA
  • spike in assay shows very good sensitivity and specificity for SNVs variants tracked, did over 400 TRACERx libraries
  • sensitivity increases when tracking more variants but specificity does go down a bit
  • tracking variants can show evidence of subclonal dynamics and evolution and copy number deletion events;  they also show neoantigen editing or changing of their neoantigens
  • this assay can detect low variants in a reproducible manner

The TRACERx (TRAcking Cancer Evolution through therapy (Rx)) lung study is a multi-million pound research project taking place over nine years, which will transform our understanding of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and take a practical step towards an era of precision medicine. The study will uncover mechanisms of cancer evolution by analysing the intratumour heterogeneity in lung tumours from approximately 850 patients and tracking its evolutionary trajectory from diagnosis through to relapse. At £14 million, it’s the biggest single investment in lung cancer research by Cancer Research UK, and the start of a strategic UK-wide focus on the disease, aimed at making real progress for patients.

Led by Professor Charles Swanton at UCL, the study will bring together a network of experts from different disciplines to help integrate clinical and genomic data and identify patients who could benefit from trials of new, targeted treatments. In addition, it will use a whole suite of cutting edge analytical techniques on these patients’ tumour samples, giving unprecedented insight into the genomic landscape of primary and metastatic tumours and the impact of treatment upon this landscape.

In future, TRACERx will enable us to define how intratumour heterogeneity impacts upon cancer immunity throughout tumour evolution and therapy. Such studies will help define how the clinical evaluation of intratumour heterogeneity can inform patient stratification and the development of combinatorial therapies incorporating conventional, targeted and immune based therapeutics.

Intratumour heterogeneity is increasingly recognised as a major hurdle to achieve improvements in therapeutic outcome and biomarker validation. Intratumour genetic diversity provides a substrate for tumour adaptation and evolution. However, the evolutionary genomic landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and how it changes through the disease course has not been studied in detail. TRACERx is a prospective observational study with the following objectives:

Primary Objectives

  • Define the relationship between intratumour heterogeneity and clinical outcome following surgery and adjuvant therapy (including relationships between intratumour heterogeneity and clinical disease stage and histological subtypes of NSCLC).
  • Establish the impact of adjuvant platinum-containing regimens upon intratumour heterogeneity in relapsed disease compared to primary resected tumour.

Key Secondary Objectives

  • Develop and validate an intratumour heterogeneity (ITH) ratio index as a prognostic and predictive biomarker in relation to disease-free survival and overall survival.
  • Infer a complete picture of NSCLC evolutionary dynamics – define drivers of genomic instability, metastatic progression and drug resistance by identifying and tracking the dynamics of somatic mutational heterogeneity, and chromosomal structural and numerical instability present in the primary tumour and at metastatic sites. Individual tumour phylogenetic tree analysis will:
    • Establish the order of somatic events in relation to genomic instability onset and metastatic progression
    • Decipher genetic “bottlenecking” events following metastasis and drug therapy
    • Establish dynamics of tumour evolution during the disease course from early to late stage NSCLC.
  • Initiate a longitudinal biobank of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) and circulating-free tumour DNA (cfDNA) to develop analytical methods for the early detection and monitoring of tumour evolution over time.
  • Develop a longitudinal tissue resource to serve as a platform to assess the relationship between genetic intratumour heterogeneity and the host immune response.
  • Define relationships between intratumour heterogeneity and targeted/cytotoxic therapeutic outcome.
  • Use a lung cancer specific gene panel in a certified Good Clinical Practice (GCP) laboratory environment to define clonally dominant disease drivers to address the role of clonal driver dominance in targeted therapeutic response and to guide stratification of lung cancer treatment and future clinical study inclusion (paired primary-metastatic site comparisons in at least 270 patients with relapsed disease).

 

 

Utility of longitudinal circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) modeling to predict RECIST-defined progression in first-line patients with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation-positive (EGFRm) advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
Martin Johnson

 

Impact of the EML4-ALK fusion variant on the efficacy of lorlatinib in patients (pts) with ALK-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
Todd Bauer

 

From an interview with Dr. Bauer at https://www.lungcancernews.org/2019/08/14/making-headway-with-lorlatinib/

Lorlatinib, a smallmolecule inhibitor of ALK and ROS1, was granted accelerated U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval in November 2018 for patients with ALK-positive metastatic NSCLC whose disease has progressed on crizotinib and at least one other ALK inhibitor or whose disease has progressed on alectinib or ceritinib as the first ALK inhibitor therapy for metastatic disease. Todd M. Bauer, MD, a medical oncologist and senior investigator at Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Tennessee Oncology, PLLC, in Nashville, has been very involved with the development of lorlatinib since the beginning. In the following interview, Dr. Bauer discusses some of lorlatinib’s unique toxicities, as well as his first-hand experiences with the drug.

For further reading: Solomon B, Besse B, Bauer T, et al. Lorlatinib in Patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a global phase 2 study. Lancet. 2018;19(12):P1654-1667.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lorlatinib is a potent, brain-penetrant, third-generation inhibitor of ALK and ROS1 tyrosine kinases with broad coverage of ALK mutations. In a phase 1 study, activity was seen in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, most of whom had CNS metastases and progression after ALK-directed therapy. We aimed to analyse the overall and intracranial antitumour activity of lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

METHODS: In this phase 2 study, patients with histologically or cytologically ALK-positive or ROS1-positive, advanced, non-small-cell lung cancer, with or without CNS metastases, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2, and adequate end-organ function were eligible. Patients were enrolled into six different expansion cohorts (EXP1-6) on the basis of ALK and ROS1 status and previous therapy, and were given lorlatinib 100 mg orally once daily continuously in 21-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall and intracranial tumour response by independent central review, assessed in pooled subgroups of ALK-positive patients. Analyses of activity and safety were based on the safety analysis set (ie, all patients who received at least one dose of lorlatinib) as assessed by independent central review. Patients with measurable CNS metastases at baseline by independent central review were included in the intracranial activity analyses. In this report, we present lorlatinib activity data for the ALK-positive patients (EXP1-5 only), and safety data for all treated patients (EXP1-6). This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01970865.

FINDINGS: Between Sept 15, 2015, and Oct 3, 2016, 276 patients were enrolled: 30 who were ALK positive and treatment naive (EXP1); 59 who were ALK positive and received previous crizotinib without (n=27; EXP2) or with (n=32; EXP3A) previous chemotherapy; 28 who were ALK positive and received one previous non-crizotinib ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor, with or without chemotherapy (EXP3B); 112 who were ALK positive with two (n=66; EXP4) or three (n=46; EXP5) previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors with or without chemotherapy; and 47 who were ROS1 positive with any previous treatment (EXP6). One patient in EXP4 died before receiving lorlatinib and was excluded from the safety analysis set. In treatment-naive patients (EXP1), an objective response was achieved in 27 (90·0%; 95% CI 73·5-97·9) of 30 patients. Three patients in EXP1 had measurable baseline CNS lesions per independent central review, and objective intracranial responses were observed in two (66·7%; 95% CI 9·4-99·2). In ALK-positive patients with at least one previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EXP2-5), objective responses were achieved in 93 (47·0%; 39·9-54·2) of 198 patients and objective intracranial response in those with measurable baseline CNS lesions in 51 (63·0%; 51·5-73·4) of 81 patients. Objective response was achieved in 41 (69·5%; 95% CI 56·1-80·8) of 59 patients who had only received previous crizotinib (EXP2-3A), nine (32·1%; 15·9-52·4) of 28 patients with one previous non-crizotinib ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EXP3B), and 43 (38·7%; 29·6-48·5) of 111 patients with two or more previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EXP4-5). Objective intracranial response was achieved in 20 (87·0%; 95% CI 66·4-97·2) of 23 patients with measurable baseline CNS lesions in EXP2-3A, five (55·6%; 21·2-86·3) of nine patients in EXP3B, and 26 (53·1%; 38·3-67·5) of 49 patients in EXP4-5. The most common treatment-related adverse events across all patients were hypercholesterolaemia (224 [81%] of 275 patients overall and 43 [16%] grade 3-4) and hypertriglyceridaemia (166 [60%] overall and 43 [16%] grade 3-4). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 19 (7%) of 275 patients and seven patients (3%) permanently discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events. No treatment-related deaths were reported.

INTERPRETATION: Consistent with its broad ALK mutational coverage and CNS penetration, lorlatinib showed substantial overall and intracranial activity both in treatment-naive patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, and in those who had progressed on crizotinib, second-generation ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors, or after up to three previous ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Thus, lorlatinib could represent an effective treatment option for patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer in first-line or subsequent therapy.

  • loratinib could be used for crizotanib resistant tumors based on EML4-ALK variants present in ctDNA

Reference:
1. Updated efficacy and safety data from the global phase III ALEX study of alectinib (ALC) vs crizotinib (CZ) in untreated advanced ALK+ NSCLCJ Clin Oncol 36, 2018 (suppl; abstr 9043).

Discussion

Corey Langer

 

Follow on Twitter at:

@pharma_BI

@AACR

@CureCancerNow

@pharmanews

@BiotechWorld

@HopkinsMedicine

#AACR20

Read Full Post »

Live Conference Coverage @Medcitynews Converge 2018 Philadelphia:Liquid Biopsy and Gene Testing vs Reimbursement Hurdles

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD

 

9:25- 10:15 Liquid Biopsy and Gene Testing vs. Reimbursement Hurdles

Genetic testing, whether broad-scale or single gene-testing, is being ordered by an increasing number of oncologists, but in many cases, patients are left to pay for these expensive tests themselves. How can this dynamic be shifted? What can be learned from the success stories?

Moderator: Shoshannah Roth, Assistant Director of Health Technology Assessment and Information Services , ECRI Institute @Ecri_Institute
Speakers:
Rob Dumanois, Manager – reimbursement strategy, Thermo Fisher Scientific
Eugean Jiwanmall, Senior Research Analyst for Medical Policy & Technology Evaluation , Independence Blue Cross @IBX
Michael Nall, President and Chief Executive Officer, Biocept

 

Michael: Wide range of liquid biopsy services out there.  There are screening companies however they are young and need lots of data to develop pan diagnostic test.  Most of liquid biopsy is more for predictive analysis… especially therapeutic monitoring.  Sometimes solid biopsies are impossible , limited, or not always reliable due to metastasis or tough to biopsy tissues like lung.

Eugean:  Circulating tumor cells and ctDNA is the only FDA approved liquid biopsies.  However you choose then to evaluate the liquid biopsy, PCR NGS, FISH etc, helps determines what the reimbursement options are available.

Rob:  Adoption of reimbursement for liquid biopsy is moving faster in Europe than the US.  It is possible in US that there may be changes to the payment in one to two years though.

Michael:  China is adopting liquid biopsy rapidly.  Patients are demanding this in China.

Reimbursement

Eugean:  For IBX to make better decisions we need more clinical trials to correlate with treatment outcome.  Most of the major cancer networks, like NCCN, ASCO, CAP, just have recommendations and not approved guidelines at this point.  From his perspective with lung cancer NCCN just makes a suggestion with EGFR mutations however only the companion diagnostic is approved by FDA.

Michael:  Fine needle biopsies are usually needed by the pathologist anyway before they go to liquid biopsy as need to know the underlying mutations in the original tumor, it just is how it is done in most cancer centers.

Eugean:  Whatever the established way of doing things, you have to outperform the clinical results of the old method for adoption of a newer method.

Reimbursement issues have driven a need for more research into clinical validity and utility of predictive and therapeutic markers with regard to liquid biopsies.  However although many academic centers try to partner with Biocept Biocept has a limit of funds and must concentrate only on a few trials.  The different payers use different evidence based methods to evaluate liquid biopsy markers.  ECRI also has a database for LB markers using an evidence based criteria.  IBX does sees consistency among payers as far as decision and policy.

NGS in liquid biopsy

Rob: There is a path to coverage, especially through the FDA.  If you have a FDA cleared NGS test, it will be covered.  These are long and difficult paths to reimbursement for NGS but it is feasible. Medicare line of IBX covers this testing, however on the commercial side they can’t cover this.  @IBX: for colon only kras or nras has clinical utility and only a handful of other cancer related genes for other cancers.  For a companion diagnostic built into that Dx do the other markers in the panel cost too much?

Please follow on Twitter using the following #hash tags and @pharma_BI

#MCConverge

#cancertreatment

#healthIT

#innovation

#precisionmedicine

#healthcaremodels

#personalizedmedicine

#healthcaredata

And at the following handles:

@pharma_BI

@medcitynews

Read Full Post »

Detecting Multiple Types of Cancer With a Single Blood Test

Reporter and Curator: Irina Robu, PhD

Monitoring cancer patients and evaluating their response to treatment can sometimes involve invasive procedures, including surgery.

The liquid biopsies have become something of a Holy Grail in cancer treatment among physicians, researchers and companies gambling big on the technology. Liquid biopsies, unlike traditional biopsies involving invasive surgery — rely on an ordinary blood draw. Developments in sequencing the human genome, permitting researchers to detect genetic mutations of cancers, have made the tests conceivable. Some 38 companies in the US alone are working on liquid biopsies by trying to analyze blood for fragments of DNA shed by dying tumor cells.

Premature research on the liquid biopsy has concentrated profoundly on patients with later-stage cancers who have suffered treatments, including chemotherapy, radiation, surgery, immunotherapy or drugs that target molecules involved in the growth, progression and spread of cancer. For cancer patients undergoing treatment, liquid biopsies could spare them some of the painful, expensive and risky tissue tumor biopsies and reduce reliance on CT scans. The tests can rapidly evaluate the efficacy of surgery or other treatment, while old-style biopsies and CT scans can still remain inconclusive as a result of scar tissue near the tumor site.

As recently as a few years ago, the liquid biopsies were hardly used except in research. At the moment, thousands of the tests are being used in clinical practices in the United States and abroad, including at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston; the University of California, San Diego; the University of California, San Francisco; the Duke Cancer Institute and several other cancer centers.

With patients for whom physicians cannot get a tissue biopsy, the liquid biopsy could prove a safe and effective alternative that could help determine whether treatment is helping eradicate the cancer. A startup, Miroculus developed a cheap, open source device that can test blood for several types of cancer at once. The platform, called Miriam finds cancer by extracting RNA from blood and spreading it across plates that look at specific type of mRNA. The technology is then hooked up at a smartphone which sends the information to an online database and compares the microRNA found in the patient’s blood to known patterns indicating different type of cancers in the early stage and can reduce unnecessary cancer screenings.

Nevertheless, experts warn that more studies are essential to regulate the accuracy of the test, exactly which cancers it can detect, at what stages and whether it improves care or survival rates.

SOURCE

https://www.fastcompany.com/3037117/a-new-device-can-detect-multiple-types-of-cancer-with-a-single-blood-test

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4356857/

Other related articles published in this Open Access Online Scientific Publishing Journal include the following:

Liquid Biopsy Chip detects an array of metastatic cancer cell markers in blood – R&D @Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Micro and Nanotechnology Lab

Reporters: Tilda Barliya, PhD and Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2016/12/28/liquid-biopsy-chip-detects-an-array-of-metastatic-cancer-cell-markers-in-blood-rd-worcester-polytechnic-institute-micro-and-nanotechnology-lab/

Liquid Biopsy Assay May Predict Drug Resistance

Curator: Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2015/11/06/liquid-biopsy-assay-may-predict-drug-resistance/

One blood sample can be tested for a comprehensive array of cancer cell biomarkers: R&D at WPI

Curator: Marzan Khan, B.Sc

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2017/01/05/one-blood-sample-can-be-tested-for-a-comprehensive-array-of-cancer-cell-biomarkers-rd-wpi

 

 

Read Full Post »

Programmed Cell Death and Cancer Therapy

Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP, Curator

LPBI

 

Programmed Death: A Cat and Mouse Game

 http://www.cancernetwork.com/blog/programmed-death-cat-and-mouse-game

Prologue: The world of cancer care has been shaken up by the news that patients with hard-to-treat tumors benefit from a new type of immunotherapy, called checkpoint inhibition. A key receptor, called programmed death 1 (PD-1), is charged with suppressing the ability of activated T cells and other immune cells to destroy cancer cells, all in the name of preventing damage to normal tissue via autoimmunity. When PD-1 receptors on T cells bind with PD-L1 and PD-L2, complimentary receptors expressed on tumor cells, the immune response (call it the assassination of the cell) is checked and the tumor lives on. The anti PD-1 monoclonal antibodies nivolumab and pembrolizumab keep PD-L1 from turning off T cells, which has produced durable responses in several tumor types including melanoma, lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma and represents a new hope for many.

Oncologists are excited to relay this news to patients, but is there a way to explain this without putting everyone in the room to sleep? Well, I like to use analogies to make seemingly complicated mechanisms easier to understand and the PD-1/PD-L1 relationship has inspired several colorful examples, to wit:

“Think of T cells as killers that use photographs to identify individual bad guys. Their weakness is that they will not act if the intended victim shakes their hand first. The bad guys used to be born without arms, but over time they evolved to grow arms and hands, thus avoiding elimination. The antibodies are boxing gloves that cover the hands of the T cells. Goodbye, bad guys.”

“Think of T cells as cats specially trained to eliminate mice wherever they hide. Their only weakness is if they smell catnip they will roll over and purr like idiots instead of doing their job. The mice then develop special glands that secrete catnip, thus pacifying the kitties. Solution: plug up the cats’ noses with nivolumab or pembrolizumab. Sayonara, Mr. Mouse.”

“Think of T cells as a fire sprinkler system designed to activate when a metal plug is heated to its melting point, releasing water from a pipe. The fire then emits a toxin that coats the fusible metal, keeping it below its melting point. By fitting a protective shield around the plug we block the toxic molecules and allow the plug to melt in a fire. The shield is the monoclonal antibody against PD-1 and thus the fire is successfully extinguished.”

This is getting exhausting, so I think I will stop, but don’t you agree that the concept of checkpoint inhibition lends itself to a plethora of metaphors? Now for the next lesson: how to explain chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy to patients. Hold on—I think I need to explain it to myself first.

 

As an clinical immunologist, i agree with the concept, looks pretty straightforward but definitely much more complex as our immune system work like a network. I would appreciate clinical trial data with statistical significance.

 

Much more confusing. Most people understand simplified concepts.

“Some cancer cells turn off your immune systems ability to recognise them. These drugs ramp up the immune system and prevent the cancer cells from hiding. This allows your cells to attack and kill cancer cells”

If i think patient seem to have better ability to understand I say “the drugs block the “off switch” that cancer cells use to escape their detection. This turns your immune systems ability to attack and kill cancer cells back on”

I haven’t had one patient that has looked confused since.

 

HDAC Inhibitors Enhance Immunotherapy Efficacy in Lung Cancer

http://www.oncotherapynetwork.com/lung-cancer-targets/hdac-inhibitors-enhance-immunotherapy-efficacy-lung-cancer

Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors like romidepsin might improve the efficacy of programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) blockade in lung cancer, suggest preclinical findings reported in the journal Clinical Cancer Research.

Most lung cancer patients’ tumors do not respond to immune checkpoint blockade agents like those that target PD-1. One possible mechanism underlying tumor resistance to PD-1 blockade is the failure of sufficient numbers of T cells to infiltrate tumor tissue.

Hypothesizing that upregulating T-cell chemokine expression and thereby T-cell infiltration of tumors would improve PD-1 blockade’s efficacy against lung tumors, the research team went hunting for FDA-approved oncology agents that induce chemokine expression. Screening 97 approved agents, they found one class that did: HDAC inhibitors.

The HDAC-inhibiting agent romidepsin significantly increased T-cell tumor infiltration and impacted lung tumor growth in mouse models, the team reported—and when romidepsin was subsequently combined with PD-1 blockade in several lung tumor models, the combination showed greater antitumor activity than either agent on its own.

“These results suggest that combination of HDAC inhibitors with PD-1 blockade represent a promising strategy for lung cancer treatment,” said senior study author Amer A. Beg, PhD, of the Moffitt Cancer Center’s Immunology Program, in a news release.

Romidepsin and other HDAC inhibitors have already been approved by the FDA for use against lymphoma and other hematologic cancers, Dr. Beg noted.

The combination will next be tested in several clinical trials, including a study of patients diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at Moffitt Cancer Center.

 

HDAC inhibitors enhance T cell chemokine expression and augment response to PD-1 immunotherapy in lung adenocarcinoma

Hong Zheng1,  weipeng zhao2Cihui Yan3Crystina C Watson4,…., Brian Ruffell13, and Amer A Beg4,*

Clin Cancer Res March 10, 2016; http://dx.doi.org:/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-2584

Purpose: A significant limitation of checkpoint blockade immunotherapy is the relatively low response rate (e.g. ~20% with PD-1 blockade in lung cancer). In this study, we tested whether strategies which increase T cell infiltration to tumors can be efficacious in enhancing immunotherapy response. Experimental Design: We performed an unbiased screen to identify FDA-approved oncology agents with ability to enhance T cell chemokine expression with the goal of identifying agents capable of augmenting immunotherapy response. Identified agents were tested in multiple lung tumor models as single agents and in combination with PD-1 blockade. Additional molecular and cellular analysis of tumors was used to define underlying mechanisms. Results: We found that histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors (HDACi) increased expression of multiple T cell chemokines in cancer cells, macrophages and T cells. Using the HDACi romidepsin in vivo, we observed increased chemokine expression, enhanced T cell infiltration, and T cell-dependent tumor regression. Importantly, romidepsin significantly enhanced the response to PD-1 blockade immunotherapy in multiple lung tumor models, including nearly complete rejection in two models. Combined romidepsin and PD-1 blockade also significantly enhanced activation of tumor-infiltrating T cells. Conclusions: These results provide evidence for a novel role of HDACs in modulating T cell chemokine expression in multiple cell types. In addition, our findings indicate that pharmacological induction of T cell chemokine expression represents a conceptually novel approach for enhancing immunotherapy response. Finally, these results suggest that combination of HDAC inhibitors with PD-1 blockade represents a promising strategy for lung cancer treatment.

 

Cancer Cell Survival Driven by Novel Metabolic Pathway

http://www.genengnews.com/gen-news-highlights/cancer-cell-survival-driven-by-novel-metabolic-pathway/81252584/

Researchers have identified a novel metabolic pathway that helps cancer cells thrive in conditions that are lethal to normal cells. [National Cancer Institute, NIH] http://www.genengnews.com/Media/images/GENHighlight/thumb_28216_large1422477191.jpg

Being attached to the extracellular matrix (ECM) provides cells with numerous advantages for survival, for instance, receiving much needed growth stimuli. However, for malignant cells to function, they must overcome their anchorage-dependent growth—a scenario that is associated with increased production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and altered glucose metabolism.

Now, researchers at the Children’s Medical Center Research Institute at UT Southwestern (CRI) believe they have uncovered a novel metabolic pathway that helps cancer cells thrive in conditions that would otherwise be lethal to healthy cells.

“It’s long been thought that if we could target tumor-specific metabolic pathways, it could lead to effective ways to treat cancer,” explained senior study author Ralph DeBerardinis, M.D., Ph.D.,  associate professor, and director of CRI’s Genetic and Metabolic Disease Program. “This study finds that two very different metabolic processes are linked in a way that is specifically required for cells to adapt to the stress associated with cancer progression.”

This new study describes an alternate version of two well-known metabolic pathways, the pentose phosphate pathway (PPP) and the Krebs cycle, to defend against ROS that destroy cells via oxidative stress.

The findings from this study were published recently in Nature in an article entitled “Reductive Carboxylation Supports Redox Homeostasis During Anchorage-Independent Growth.”

Previous work from Dr. DeBerardinis’ laboratory found that the Krebs cycle, a series of chemical reactions that cells use to generate energy, could reverse itself under certain conditions to nourish cancer cells.

Dr. DeBerardinis also noted that cells “are dependent on matrix attachment to receive growth-promoting signals and to regulate their metabolism in a way that supports cell growth, proliferation, and survival.” Detachment from the matrix results in a sudden increase in ROS that is lethal to normal cells. Yet, cancer cells seem to have evolved workaround.

A landmark study from 2009 elucidated that healthy cells were destroyed when detached from the ECM. Moreover, in the same study, investigators found that inserting an oncogene into a normal cell caused it to behave like a cancer cell and survive detachment.

“Another Nature study, this one from CRI Director Dr. Sean Morrison’s laboratory in November 2015, found that the rare skin cancer cells that were able to detach from the primary tumor and successfully metastasize to other parts of the body had the ability to keep ROS levels from getting dangerously high,” Dr. DeBerardinis remarked.

Dr. DeBerardinis and his team worked from the premise that the two findings were pieces of the same puzzle and that a crucial part of the picture seemed to be missing.

It had been well known that the PPP was an important source of nicotine adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH), which provides a source of reducing electrons to scavenge ROS; however, the PPP produces NADPH in the cytosol, whereas the ROS are generated primarily in another subcellular structure called the mitochondria.

“If you think of ROS as fire, then NADPH is like the water used by cancer cells to douse the flames,” Dr. DeBerardinis noted.  But how could NADPH from the PPP help deal with the stress of ROS produced in an entirely different part of the cell? “What we did was to discover how this happens.”

The CRI team was able to demonstrate that cancer cells use a “piggybacking” system to carry the reducing electron from the PPP into the mitochondria. This movement involves an unusual reaction in the cytosol that transfers reducing equivalents from NADPH to a molecule called citrate, similar to a reversed reaction of the Krebs cycle.The citrate then enters the mitochondria and stimulates another pathway that results in the release of reducing electrons to produce NADPH right at the location of ROS creation, allowing the cancer cells to survive and grow without the benefit of matrix attachment.

“We knew that both the PPP and Krebs cycle provide metabolic benefits to cancer cells. But we had no idea that they were linked in this unusual fashion,” Dr. DeBerardinis stated. “Strikingly, normal cells were unable to transport NADPH by this mechanism, and died as a result of the high ROS levels.”

The researchers stressed that their findings were based on cultured cell models and more research will be necessary to test the role of the pathway in living organisms.

“We are particularly excited to test whether this pathway is required for metastasis because cancer cells need to survive in a matrix-detached state in the circulation in order to metastasize,” Dr. DeBerardinis concluded.

 

Reductive carboxylation supports redox homeostasis during anchorage-independent growth

Lei JiangAlexander A. ShestovPamela SwainChendong Yang, …., Brian P. DrankaBenjamin Schwartz & Ralph J. DeBerardinis

Nature(2016)      http://dx.doi.org:/10.1038/nature17393

Cells receive growth and survival stimuli through their attachment to an extracellular matrix (ECM)1. Overcoming the addiction to ECM-induced signals is required for anchorage-independent growth, a property of most malignant cells2. Detachment from ECM is associated with enhanced production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) owing to altered glucose metabolism2. Here we identify an unconventional pathway that supports redox homeostasis and growth during adaptation to anchorage independence. We observed that detachment from monolayer culture and growth as anchorage-independent tumour spheroids was accompanied by changes in both glucose and glutamine metabolism. Specifically, oxidation of both nutrients was suppressed in spheroids, whereas reductive formation of citrate from glutamine was enhanced. Reductive glutamine metabolism was highly dependent on cytosolic isocitrate dehydrogenase-1 (IDH1), because the activity was suppressed in cells homozygous null for IDH1 or treated with an IDH1 inhibitor. This activity occurred in absence of hypoxia, a well-known inducer of reductive metabolism. Rather, IDH1 mitigated mitochondrial ROS in spheroids, and suppressing IDH1 reduced spheroid growth through a mechanism requiring mitochondrial ROS. Isotope tracing revealed that in spheroids, isocitrate/citrate produced reductively in the cytosol could enter the mitochondria and participate in oxidative metabolism, including oxidation by IDH2. This generates NADPH in the mitochondria, enabling cells to mitigate mitochondrial ROS and maximize growth. Neither IDH1 nor IDH2 was necessary for monolayer growth, but deleting either one enhanced mitochondrial ROS and reduced spheroid size, as did deletion of the mitochondrial citrate transporter protein. Together, the data indicate that adaptation to anchorage independence requires a fundamental change in citrate metabolism, initiated by IDH1-dependent reductive carboxylation and culminating in suppression of mitochondrial ROS.

 

Liquid Biopsy Accurately Detects Mutations in Advanced NSCLC

http://www.oncotherapynetwork.com/lung-cancer/liquid-biopsy-accurately-detects-mutations-advanced-nsclc#sthash.bEPxRkAq.dpuf

Droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR)-based plasma genotyping—referred to as liquid biopsy—exhibited perfect specificity in identifying EGFR and KRAS mutations in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), according to the results of a study published in JAMA Oncology.

“We see plasma genotyping as having enormous potential as a clinical test, or assay—a rapid, noninvasive way of screening a cancer for common genetic fingerprints, while avoiding the challenges of traditional invasive biopsies,” said senior author, Geoffrey Oxnard, MD, thoracic oncologist and lung cancer researcher at Dana-Farber and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, in a press release. “Our study was the first to demonstrate prospectively that a liquid biopsy technique can be a practical tool for making treatment decisions in cancer patients.”

According to the press release, the test proved so reliable in the study that the Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center this week became the first medical facility in the country to offer it to all patients with NSCLC, either at the time of first diagnosis or of relapse following previous treatment.

Oxnard and colleagues enrolled 180 patients with advanced NSCLC. Patients were either newly diagnosed with the disease (n = 120) or had acquired resistance to prior EGFR kinase inhibitors (n = 60) and were planned for rebiopsy. Patients underwent initial blood sampling and immediate plasma ddPCR screening for EGFR exon 19 deletion, L858R, the EGFR T790M acquired resistance mutation, or KRAS G12X. In addition, patients underwent biopsy for tissue genotyping used to compare the accuracy of ddPCR.

Among the enrolled patients, 80 had EGFR exon19/L858R mutations, 35 had T790M mutations and 25 had KRAS G12X mutations. The median test turnaround time for liquid biopsy was 3 days. In comparison, the median turnaround time for tissue genotyping was 12 days for newly diagnosed patients and 27 days for patients with acquired EGFR inhibitor resistance.

“This long turnaround time is due largely to the practical reality that many patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC require a repeat biopsy to obtain tissue for genotyping, as do all patients with acquired resistance,” the researchers noted.

The liquid biopsy showed 100% positive predictive value for detecting EGFR 19 deletion, L858R, and KRAS mutations. However, it had only a positive predictive value of 79% for T790M mutations. The sensitivity of the test was lower. ddPCR had a sensitivity of 82% for EGFR 19 deletion, 74% for L858R, 77% for T790M, and 64% for KRAS.

The researchers pointed out that “a key limitation of plasma ddPCR is that although this method is adept at rapidly detecting specific targetable mutations, it cannot easily detect copy number alterations and rearrangements. The ddPCR panel assessed in this study thus cannot currently detect targetable alterations in either ALK or ROS1,” two other common mutations in NSCLC.

In an editorial that accompanied the article, P. Mickey Williams, PhD, of Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, and Barbara A. Conley, MD, from the National Cancer Institute, questioned whether or not these results, and the rapid turnaround time for liquid biopsy, could be replicated widely by other institutions.

“However, if this performance were generally applicable, this would indeed be an advance in clinical care, reducing the proportion of patients requiring biopsy, at least in the resistance setting,” Williams and Conley wrote.

“This study is a step in the right direction of preparing needed clinical validation for the use of ctDNA for detection and serial monitoring of clinically relevant tumor mutations. Owing to low sensitivity and high positive predictive value and specificity, this approach is probably best suited for detection of resistance mutations and for serial plasma testing to assess treatment response, and should not replace tumor biopsy assessment for initial treatment decision-making,” they concluded.

 

Prospective Validation of Rapid Plasma Genotyping for the Detection of EGFR and KRAS Mutations in Advanced Lung Cancer

Adrian G. Sacher, MD1,2; Cloud Paweletz, PhD3; Suzanne E. Dahlberg, PhD4,5; Ryan S. Alden, BSc1; Allison O’Connell, BSc3; Nora Feeney, BSc3; Stacy L. Mach, BA1; Pasi A. Jänne, MD, PhD1,2,3; Geoffrey R. Oxnard, MD1,2

JAMA Oncol. Published online April 07, 2016.    http://dx.doi.org:/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.0173

Importance  Plasma genotyping of cell-free DNA has the potential to allow for rapid noninvasive genotyping while avoiding the inherent shortcomings of tissue genotyping and repeat biopsies.

Objective  To prospectively validate plasma droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) for the rapid detection of common epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and KRAS mutations, as well as the EGFR T790M acquired resistance mutation.

Design, Setting, and Participants  Patients with advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who either (1) had a new diagnosis and were planned for initial therapy or (2) had developed acquired resistance to an EGFR kinase inhibitor and were planned for rebiopsy underwent initial blood sampling and immediate plasma ddPCR for EGFR exon 19 del, L858R, T790M, and/or KRAS G12X between July 3, 2014, and June 30, 2015, at a National Cancer Institute–designated comprehensive cancer center. All patients underwent biopsy for tissue genotyping, which was used as the reference standard for comparison; rebiopsy was required for patients with acquired resistance to EGFR kinase inhibitors. Test turnaround time (TAT) was measured in business days from blood sampling until test reporting.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Plasma ddPCR assay sensitivity, specificity, and TAT.

Results  Of 180 patients with advanced NSCLC (62% female; median [range] age, 62 [37-93] years), 120 cases were newly diagnosed; 60 had acquired resistance. Tumor genotype included 80 EGFR exon 19/L858R mutants, 35 EGFR T790M, and 25 KRASG12X mutants. Median (range) TAT for plasma ddPCR was 3 (1-7) days. Tissue genotyping median (range) TAT was 12 (1-54) days for patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC and 27 (1-146) days for patients with acquired resistance. Plasma ddPCR exhibited a positive predictive value of 100% (95% CI, 91%-100%) for EGFR 19 del, 100% (95% CI, 85%-100%) for L858R, and 100% (95% CI, 79%-100%) for KRAS, but lower for T790M at 79% (95% CI, 62%-91%). The sensitivity of plasma ddPCR was 82% (95% CI, 69%-91%) for EGFR 19 del, 74% (95% CI, 55%-88%) for L858R, and 77% (95% CI, 60%-90%) for T790M, but lower for KRAS at 64% (95% CI, 43%-82%). Sensitivity for EGFR or KRAS was higher in patients with multiple metastatic sites and those with hepatic or bone metastases, specifically.

Conclusions and Relevance  Plasma ddPCR detected EGFR and KRAS mutations rapidly with the high specificity needed to select therapy and avoid repeat biopsies. This assay may also detect EGFR T790M missed by tissue genotyping due to tumor heterogeneity in resistant disease.

Plasma genotyping uses tumor-derived cell-free DNA (cfDNA) to allow for rapid noninvasive genotyping of tumors. This technology is currently poised to transition into a treatment decision-making tool in multiple cancer types. It is particularly relevant to the treatment of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), in which therapy hinges on rapid and accurate detection of targetable epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), and ROS1 alterations.1– 6Plasma genotyping is capable of circumventing many limitations of standard tissue genotyping including slow turnaround time (TAT), limited tissue for testing, and the potential for failed biopsies. It may be particularly useful in directing the rapid use of new targeted therapies for acquired resistance in advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC, where the need for a repeat biopsy to test for resistance mechanisms has amplified the inherent limitations of traditional genotyping.7,8

The need to carefully validate the test characteristics of each of the myriad individual plasma genotyping assays before use in clinical decision making is paramount. We have previously reported the development of a quantitative droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR)-based assay for the detection of EGFR kinase mutations andKRAS codon 12 mutations in plasma.9 The detection of these mutations has the potential to guide treatment by either facilitating targeted therapy with an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) or ruling out the presence of other potentially targetable alterations in the case of KRAS.5 Alternative platforms including Cobas, peptide nucleic acid–mediated PCR, multiplexed next-generation sequencing (NGS), high-performance liquid chromatography, and Scorpion–amplified refractory mutation system have also been examined in retrospective analyses of patient samples.10– 22 The test characteristics of these assays have been variable and may be attributable to differences in testing platforms, as well as the retrospective nature of these studies, their smaller size, and the timing of blood collection with respect to disease progression and therapy initiation. The absence of reliable prospective data on the use of specific plasma genotyping assays in advanced NSCLC has left key aspects of its utility largely undefined and slowed its uptake as a tool for clinical care in patients with both newly diagnosed NSCLC and EGFR acquired resistance.

To our knowledge, we have conducted the first prospective study of the use of ddPCR-based plasma genotyping for the detection of EGFR and KRAS mutations. This study was performed in the 2 settings where we anticipate clinical adoption of this assay: (1) patients with newly diagnosed advanced NSCLC and (2) those with acquired resistance to EGFR kinase inhibitors. The primary aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of this assay for the detection ofEGFR/KRAS mutations in patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC and EGFR T790M in patients with acquired resistance in a clinical setting. Additional end points included test TAT and the effect of sample treatment conditions on test accuracy.

Key Points
  • Question What is the sensitivity, specificity, turnaround time, and robustness of droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR)-based plasma genotyping for the rapid detection of targetable genomic alterations in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)?

  • Findings In this study of 180 patients with advanced NSCLC (120 newly diagnosed, 60 with acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR] kinase inhibitors), plasma genotyping exhibited perfect specificity (100%) and acceptable sensitivity (69%-80%) for the detection of EGFR-sensitizing mutations with rapid turnaround time (3 business days). Specificity was lower for EGFR T790M (63%), presumably secondary to tumor heterogeneity and false-negative tissue genotyping.

  • Meaning The use of ddPCR-based plasma genotyping can detect EGFR mutations with the rigor necessary to direct clinical care. This assay may obviate repeated biopsies in patients with positive plasma genotyping results.

CYP3A7*1C Allele Associated With Poor Outcomes in CLL, Breast, and Lung Cancer

 http://www.oncotherapynetwork.com/breast-cancer-targets/cyp3a71c-allele-associated-poor-outcomes-cll-breast-and-lung-cancer#sthash.7uiD8XFD.dpuf

Patients with the CYP3A7*1C allele suffer higher rates of cancer progression and mortality, possibly because of worse outcomes among patients treated with chemotherapy drugs that are broken down by the enzyme encoded by CYP3A7, according to authors of a retrospective study published in the journal Cancer Research.

“We found that individuals with breast cancer, lung cancer, or CLL [chronic lymphocytic leukemia] who carry one or more copy of the CYP3A7*1C allele tend to have worse outcomes,” said Olivia Fletcher, PhD, a senior investigator at the Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre at the Institute of Cancer Research in London, England, in an American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) news release.

Approximately 8% of cancer patients harbor the CYP3A7*1C allele, the coauthors noted. For these patients, it is possible that standard chemotherapy with CYP3A substrates “may not be optimal,” they cautioned.

The team analyzed DNA samples from 1,008 patients with breast cancer, 1,128 patients with lung cancer, and 347 patients with CLL. They found that the CYP3A7*1C-associated single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs45446698 is associated with increased breast cancer mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.74; P = .03), all-cause mortality among patients with lung cancer (HR 1.43; P = .009), and progression of CLL (HR 1.62; P = .03). The rs45446698 SNP is one of seven SNPs that form the CYP3A7*1C allele.

The CYP3A7*1C allele is expressed in adults, whereas other variants of CYP3A7 are expressed during fetal development. CYP3A7 encodes an enzyme that degrades estrogen and testosterone, and some anticancer drugs.

“We also found borderline evidence of a statistical interaction between the CYP3A7*1C allele, treatment of patients with a cytotoxic agent that is a CYP3A substrate, and clinical outcome (P = .06),” they noted.

“Even though we did not see a statistically-significant difference when stratifying patients by treatment with a CYP3A7 substrate, the fact that we see the same effect in three very different cancer types suggests to me that it is more likely to be something to do with treatment than the disease itself,” commented Dr. Fletcher. “However, we are looking at ways of replicating these results in additional cohorts of patients and types of cancer, as well as overcoming the limitations of this study.”

Limitations included the retrospective nature of the study and the absence of data on how quickly individual patients metabolized chemotherapeutic agents, she said.

 

Cytochrome P450 AlleleCYP3A7*1C Associates with Adverse Outcomes in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, Breast, and Lung Cancer

Nichola Johnson1,2Paolo De Ieso3Gabriele Migliorini4,….., Gillian Ross12Richard S. Houlston, and Olivia Fletcher1,2,*

Cancer Res March 10, 2016; http://dx.doi.org:/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-15-1410

CYP3A enzymes metabolize endogenous hormones and chemotherapeutic agents used to treat cancer, thereby potentially affecting drug effectiveness. Here, we refined the genetic basis underlying the functional effects of a CYP3A haplotype on urinary estrone glucuronide (E1G) levels and tested for an association betweenCYP3A genotype and outcome in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), breast, or lung cancers. The most significantly associated SNP was rs45446698, an SNP that tags the CYP3A7*1Callele; this SNP was associated with a 54% decrease in urinary E1G levels. Genotyping this SNP in 1,008 breast cancer, 1,128 lung cancer, and 347 CLL patients, we found that rs45446698 was associated with breast cancer mortality (HR, 1.74; P = 0.03), all-cause mortality in lung cancer patients (HR, 1.43; P = 0.009), and CLL progression (HR, 1.62; P= 0.03). We also found borderline evidence of a statistical interaction between the CYP3A7*1C allele, treatment of patients with a cytotoxic agent that is a CYP3A substrate, and clinical outcome (Pinteraction = 0.06). The CYP3A7*1C allele, which results in adult expression of the fetal CYP3A7 gene, is likely to be the functional allele influencing levels of circulating endogenous sex hormones and outcome in these various malignancies. Further studies confirming these associations and determining the mechanism by which CYP3A7*1C influences outcome are required. One possibility is that standard chemotherapy regimens that include CYP3A substrates may not be optimal for the approximately 8% of cancer patients who are CYP3A7*1C carriers. Cancer Res; 76(6); 1–9. ©2016 AACR.

 

​Specific Form of CYP3A7 Gene Associated With Poor Outcomes for Patients With Several Cancer Types

3/10/2016

PHILADELPHIA — Among patients with breast cancer, lung cancer, or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), those who had a specific form of the CYP3A7 gene (CYP3A7*1C) had worse outcomes compared with those who did not have CYP3A7*1C, and this may be related to how the patients metabolize, or break down, the therapeutics used to treat them, according to a study published in Cancer Research, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

“The CYP3A7 gene encodes an enzyme that breaks down all sorts of naturally occurring substances—such as sex steroids like estrogen and testosterone—as well as a wide range of drugs that are used in the treatment of cancer,” saidOlivia Fletcher, PhD, a senior investigator at the Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre at The Institute of Cancer Research in London. “The CYP3A7 gene is normally turned on in an embryo and then turned off shortly after a baby is born, but individuals who have one or more copy of the CYP3A7*1C form of the gene [the CYP3A7*1C allele] turn on their CYP3A7 gene in adult life.

“We found that individuals with breast cancer, lung cancer, or CLL who carry one or more copy of the CYP3A7*1C allele tend to have worse outcomes,” continued Fletcher. “One possibility is that these patients break down the drugs that they are given to treat their cancer too fast. However, further independent studies that replicate our findings in larger numbers of patients and rule out biases are needed before we could recommend any changes to the treatment that cancer patients with the CYP3A7*1C allele receive.”

To find out whether the CYP3A7*1C allele was associated with outcome for patients with breast cancer, lung cancer, or CLL, Fletcher and colleagues analyzed DNA samples from 1,008 breast cancer patients, 1,142 patients with lung cancer, and 356 patients with CLL for the presence of a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), rs45446698. Fletcher explained that a SNP is a type of genetic variant and that because of the way that we inherit our genetic material from our parents, we tend to inherit clusters of genetic variants. She went on to say that rs45446698 is one of seven SNPs that cluster together, forming the CYP3A7*1C allele.

The researchers found that among the breast cancer patients, rs45446698 (and, therefore, the CYP3A7*1C allele) was associated with a 74 percent increased risk of breast cancer mortality. Among the lung cancer patients, it was associated with a 43 percent increased risk of death from any cause, and among the CLL patients, it was associated with a 62 percent increased risk of disease progression.

Patients who were treated with a chemotherapeutic broken down by CYP3A7 tended to have worse outcomes compared with those treated with other chemotherapeutics, but the difference was not statistically significant.

“Even though we did not see a statistically significant difference when stratifying patients by treatment with a CYP3A7 substrate, the fact that we see the same effect in three very different cancer types suggests to me that it is more likely to be something to do with treatment than the disease itself,” said Fletcher. “However, we are looking at ways of replicating these results in additional cohorts of patients and types of cancer, as well as overcoming the limitations of this study.”

Fletcher explained that the main limitation of the study is that the researchers used samples and clinical information collected for other studies. Therefore, they did not have the same clinical information for each patient, and the samples were collected at different time points and for patients treated with various chemotherapeutics. She also noted that the team were not able to determine how quickly the patients broke down the therapeutics they received as treatment.

The study was supported by Breast Cancer Now, Leukaemia and Lymphoma Research (now known as Bloodwise), Cancer Research UK, the Medical Research Council, the Cridlan Trust, the Helen Rollason Cancer Charity, and Sanofi-Aventis. Funding for the authors’ institutions was received from the National Health Service of the United Kingdom. Fletcher declares no conflicts of interest.

 

Liquid Biopsy for NSCLC

‘Liquid biopsy’ blood test accurately detects key genetic mutations in most common form of lung cancer, study finds.

http://www.technologynetworks.com/Diagnostics/news.aspx?ID=190276

A simple blood test can rapidly and accurately detect mutations in two key genes in non-small cell lung tumors, researchers at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and other institutions report in a new study – demonstrating the test’s potential as a clinical tool for identifying patients who can benefit from drugs targeting those mutations.

The test, known as a liquid biopsy, proved so reliable in the study that Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center (DF/BWCC) expects to offer it soon to all patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), either at the time of first diagnosis or of relapse following previous treatment.

…….

“Our study was the first to demonstrate prospectively that a liquid biopsy technique can be a practical tool for making treatment decisions in cancer patients. The trial was such a success that we are transitioning the assay into a clinical test for lung cancer patients at DF/BWCC.”

The study involved 180 patients with NSCLC, 120 of whom were newly diagnosed, and 60 of whom had become resistant to a previous treatment, allowing the disease to recur. Participants’ cell-free DNA was tested for mutations in the EGFR and KRAS genes, and for a separate mutation in EGFR that allows tumor cells to become resistant to front-line targeted drugs. The test was performed with a technique known as droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR), which counts the individual letters of the genetic code in cell-free DNA to determine if specific mutations are present. Each participant also underwent a conventional tissue biopsy to test for the same mutations. The results of the liquid biopsies were then compared to those of the tissue biopsies.

The data showed that liquid biopsies returned results much more quickly. The median turnaround time for liquid biopsies was three days, compared to 12 days for tissue biopsies in newly diagnosed patients and 27 days in drug-resistant patients.

Liquid biopsy was also found to be highly accurate. In newly diagnosed patients, the “predictive value” of plasma ddPCR was 100 percent for the primary EGFR mutation and the KRAS mutation – meaning that a patient who tested positive for either mutation was certain to have that mutation in his or her tumor. For patients with the EGFR resistance mutation, the predictive value of the ddPCR test was 79 percent, suggesting the blood test was able to find additional cases with the mutation that were missed using standard biopsies.

Prospective Validation of Rapid Plasma Genotyping for the Detection of EGFRand KRAS Mutations in Advanced Lung Cancer

Adrian G. Sacher, MD1,2; Cloud Paweletz, PhD3; Suzanne E. Dahlberg, PhD, et al.       JAMA Oncol. Published online April 07, 2016.  http://dx.doi.org::/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.0173

Importance  Plasma genotyping of cell-free DNA has the potential to allow for rapid noninvasive genotyping while avoiding the inherent shortcomings of tissue genotyping and repeat biopsies.

Objective  To prospectively validate plasma droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) for the rapid detection of common epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and KRAS mutations, as well as the EGFR T790M acquired resistance mutation.

Design, Setting, and Participants  Patients with advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who either (1) had a new diagnosis and were planned for initial therapy or (2) had developed acquired resistance to an EGFR kinase inhibitor and were planned for rebiopsy underwent initial blood sampling and immediate plasma ddPCR for EGFR exon 19 del, L858R, T790M, and/or KRAS G12X between July 3, 2014, and June 30, 2015, at a National Cancer Institute–designated comprehensive cancer center. All patients underwent biopsy for tissue genotyping, which was used as the reference standard for comparison; rebiopsy was required for patients with acquired resistance to EGFR kinase inhibitors. Test turnaround time (TAT) was measured in business days from blood sampling until test reporting.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Plasma ddPCR assay sensitivity, specificity, and TAT.

Results  Of 180 patients with advanced NSCLC (62% female; median [range] age, 62 [37-93] years), 120 cases were newly diagnosed; 60 had acquired resistance. Tumor genotype included 80 EGFR exon 19/L858R mutants, 35 EGFR T790M, and 25 KRASG12X mutants. Median (range) TAT for plasma ddPCR was 3 (1-7) days. Tissue genotyping median (range) TAT was 12 (1-54) days for patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC and 27 (1-146) days for patients with acquired resistance. Plasma ddPCR exhibited a positive predictive value of 100% (95% CI, 91%-100%) for EGFR 19 del, 100% (95% CI, 85%-100%) for L858R, and 100% (95% CI, 79%-100%) for KRAS, but lower for T790M at 79% (95% CI, 62%-91%). The sensitivity of plasma ddPCR was 82% (95% CI, 69%-91%) for EGFR 19 del, 74% (95% CI, 55%-88%) for L858R, and 77% (95% CI, 60%-90%) for T790M, but lower for KRAS at 64% (95% CI, 43%-82%). Sensitivity for EGFR or KRAS was higher in patients with multiple metastatic sites and those with hepatic or bone metastases, specifically.

Conclusions and Relevance  Plasma ddPCR detected EGFR and KRAS mutations rapidly with the high specificity needed to select therapy and avoid repeat biopsies. This assay may also detect EGFR T790M missed by tissue genotyping due to tumor heterogeneity in resistant disease.

 

In this prospective study, we demonstrate the highly specific and rapid nature of plasma genotyping. No false-positive test results were seen for driver mutations inEGFR or KRAS, and TAT from when the specimen was obtained to result was a matter of days. This assay exhibited 100% positive predictive value for the detection of these mutations. Sensitivity was more modest and was directly correlated with both number of metastatic sites and the presence of liver or bone metastases. This newly demonstrated relationship is likely related to increased cfDNA shed in the setting of more extensive disease where tumor cfDNA shed is the chief driver of assay sensitivity and determines its upper limit. The characteristics of plasma ddPCR prospectively demonstrated in this study were similar or improved compared with previous retrospective reports of other cfDNA genotyping assays.10– 13,15,16,24,25 These retrospective studies are smaller, frequently examined a mix of tumor types and/or stages, and lack the careful prospective design needed to demonstrate the readiness of this technology to transition to a tool for selecting therapy. Studies that use retrospective samples from clinical trials that enrolled only EGFR-mutant patients are further limited by an inability to both blind laboratory investigators to tissue genotype and to generalize their assay test characteristics to a genetically heterogeneous real-world patient population.11 These differences and the multiple platforms examined previously have led to variable test characteristics and uncertainty regarding the clinical application of these technologies. This study is the first to prospectively demonstrate the ability of a ddPCR-based plasma genotyping assay to rapidly and accurately detect EGFR and KRAS mutations in a real-world clinical setting with the rigor necessary to support the assertion that use of this assay is capable of directing clinical care.

Even with a diagnostic sensitivity of less than 100%, such a rapid assay with 100% positive predictive value carries the potential for immense clinical utility. The 2- to 3-day TAT contrasts starkly with the 27-day TAT for tumor genotyping seen in patients needing a new tumor biopsy. This long TAT is due largely to the practical reality that many patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC require a repeat biopsy to obtain tissue for genotyping, as do all patients with acquired resistance. Consider the case of 1 study participant, an octogenarian with metastatic NSCLC who had developed acquired resistance to erlotinib with painful bone metastases (Figure 3). Due to the patient’s age and comorbidities, significant concerns existed about the risks of a biopsy and further systemic therapy. A plasma sample was obtained, and within 24 hours ddPCR demonstrated 806 copies/mL of EGFR T790M. A confirmatory lung biopsy was performed, which confirmed EGFR T790M. Treatment with a third-generation EGFR kinase inhibitor, osimertinib mesylate, was subsequently initiated and the patient had a partial response to therapy that was maintained for more than 1 year. The potential of this technology to obviate repeated biopsy in both patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC with insufficient tissue, as well as patients with acquired resistance, is considerable.

A key limitation of plasma ddPCR is that although this method is adept at rapidly detecting specific targetable mutations, it cannot easily detect copy number alterations and rearrangements. The ddPCR panel assessed in this study thus cannot currently detect targetable alterations in either ALK or ROS1. This limitation may potentially be addressed by using targeted NGS of cfDNA for broad, multiplexed detection of complex genomic alterations including ALK and ROS1 rearrangements, although this method is potentially slower than ddPCR-based methods and has been less thoroughly evaluated.23 The potential exists to use these technologies in tandem in advanced NSCLC to facilitate rapid initiation of therapy. Tissue genotyping and repeated biopsy would be specifically used to direct therapy in cases in which plasma genotyping was uninformative due to limitations of assay sensitivity. This approach would be particularly useful in cases of EGFR acquired resistance in which a repeated biopsy for T790M testing could be avoided entirely in many patients. Beyond detecting targetable alterations in order to drive therapy, the identification of nontargetable oncogenic drivers such as KRAS mutations that preclude the presence of other targetable alterations may guide a clinician to rapidly initiate alternative therapies such as chemotherapy or immunotherapy.5 The finding that assay sensitivity is highest in patients with more extensive metastatic disease suggests that those patients most in need of rapid treatment initiation would also be least likely to have false-negative results.

One surprising result of our study was evidence of recurrent false-positive results forEGFR T790M in patients with acquired resistance, despite no false-positive test results for other mutations studied. The sensitivity of the EGFR T790M assay was comparable to that of the EGFR sensitizing mutation assays and similarly related to both disease burden and the presence of liver or bone metastases, which are likely predictive of increased tumor cfDNA shed. We hypothesize that the lower assay specificity is due to the genomic heterogeneity whereby the T790M status of the biopsied site is not representative of all metastatic sites in a patient, a phenomenon supported by mounting evidence in the acquired resistance setting.26,27 This is consistent with the finding that a minority of patients with apparently EGFR T790M tissue-negative disease respond to therapy with third-generation EGFR kinase inhibitors.7,8,28 These observations raise questions regarding the fallibility of tissue-based genotyping as the reference standard for T790M status. The use of plasma genotyping to detect EGFR T790M thus has great potential to identify patients who would benefit from newly approved third-generation EGFR kinase inhibitors but would be unable to access them based on falsely negative tissue genotyping results. Indeed, plasma genotyping may allow more reliable assessment of both T790M status as well as the mechanisms of resistance across all sites of a heterogeneous cancer as opposed to a tissue biopsy and is likely to be an essential tool for future trials targeting drug resistance. The potential to avoid a repeat biopsy entirely in patients in whom plasma ddPCR detects T790M further strengthens the utility of this technology, although a repeat biopsy would still be needed in patients with uninformative plasma ddPCR due to limitations with respect to assay sensitivity.

This study also examined the potential of the quantitative nature of ddPCR-based plasma genotyping to allow for the early prediction of treatment response. Distinct patterns of change in mutant allele copy number were observed as early as 2 weeks after treatment and were similar to those reported in other tumor types.19,20 We hypothesize that these distinct patterns of change in this study will correlate with specific patterns of radiographic response and emergence of acquired resistance and plan to report these data once mature. The observed differences in treatment discontinuation rates observed in this study comparing patients with complete resolution of detectable mutant cfDNA with those with incomplete resolution support this hypothesis. The use of this technology to monitor disease status in real time has potential utility for both routine clinical care, as well as use as an integrated biomarker in early-phase clinical trials.10

Read Full Post »

Prognostic biomarker for NSCLC and Cancer Metastasis

Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP, Curator

LPBI

 

Membranous CD24 expression as detected by the monoclonal antibody SWA11 is a prognostic marker in non-small cell lung cancer patients

Michael MajoresAnne SchindlerAngela FuchsJohannes SteinLukas HeukampPeter Altevogt and Glen Kristiansen

BMC Clinical Pathology201515:19   http://dx.doi.org:/10.1186/s12907-015-0019-z

Background    Lung cancer is one of the most common malignant neoplasms worldwide and has a high mortality rate. To enable individualized therapy regimens, a better understanding of the molecular tumor biology has still to be elucidated. The expression of the cell surface protein CD24 has already been claimed to be associated with shorter patient survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), however, the prognostic value and applicability of CD24 immunostaining in paraffin embedded tissue specimens has been questioned due to the recent acknowledgement of restricted epitope specificity of the commonly used antibody SN3b.   Methods    A cohort of 137 primary NSCLC cases was immunostained with a novel CD24 antibody (clone SWA11), which specifically recognizes the CD24 protein core and the resulting expression data were compared with expression profiles based on the monoclonal antibody SN3b. Furthermore, expression data were correlated to clinico-pathological parameters. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were conducted with Kaplan Meier estimates and Cox regression, respectively. Results    CD24 positivity was found in 34 % resp. 21 % (SN3b) of NSCLC with a membranous and/or cytoplasmic staining pattern. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed that membranous, but not cytoplasmic CD24 expression (clone SWA11) was associated with lympho-nodular spread and shorter overall survival times (both p < 0.05). CD24 expression established by SN3b antibodies did not reveal significant clinicopathological correlations with overall survival, neither for cytoplasmic nor membranous CD24 staining.  Conclusions    Membranous CD24 immunoreactivity, as detected with antibody clone SWA11 may serve as a prognostic factor for lymphonodular spread and poorer overall survival. Furthermore, these results corroborate the importance of a careful distinction between membranous and cytoplasmic localisation, if CD24 is to be considered as a potential prognostic biomarker.

 

Lung cancer is a major cause of carcinoma related death, being responsible for 17.8 % of all cancer deaths and accounting for more than a million deaths worldwide per year [1]. Despite intense studies to improve therapy options, its prognosis has remained poor with a 5-year overall survival rate of less than 15 % [2].

In the past decade, the largest subgroup of lung cancer, i.e. non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), has been subjected to exerted research for a better understanding of the underlying molecular biology of lung cancer. More than ten years ago, CD24 has already been suggested as a novel and promising biomarker for carcinoma progression in NSCLC [3] and several groups have confirmed this finding on protein and transcript level [2, 4]. CD24 is a highly glycosylated protein, that binds to the cell surface through a GPI (glycosyl-phosphatidylinositol)-anchor and functions as a cell adhesion molecule and is involved in cell-cell-interaction via its P-selectin binding site [5]. CD24 has been found to be expressed by pre-B-lymphocytes [5]. It is assumed that CD24-positive cells can attach more easily to platelets and activated endothelial cells [6, 7]. Notably, CD24 has also been observed in many human carcinomas, such as ovarian cancer, renal cell cancer, breast cancer and NSCLC [3, 812]. In epithelial ovarian cancer high scores of cytoplasmic CD24 were highly predictive of shorter patient survival times (mean 97.8 vs. 36.5 months), whereas membranous CD24 expression seemed to have no influence on survival times. Interestingly, CD24 positivity (membranous or cytoplasmic) of prostate cancer samples was significantly associated to younger patient age and higher pT stages and a higher 3-year prostate-specific antigen (PSA) relapse rate compared with CD24-negative tumours.

In patients with gallbladder carcinoma, tumors with up-regulation of CD24 revealed lymph node metastasis and lymphovascular invasion more frequently. Moreover, up-regulation of CD24 tended to show deeper invasion depth and higher TNM stage [13]. Together, these findings support CD24 as a prognostic marker for carcinoma progression and poorer survival.

Despite these intriguing findings, major concerns regarding a lack of epitope specificity of the commonly used monoclonal antibody SN3b have been raised [14]. Recent findings indicate that the mAb (monoclonal antibody) SN3b does not bind to the protein core itself, but binds to a glycan structure that decorates the CD24 molecule. On the one hand, this motif is not present on all forms of CD24 and—on the other hand—it can be present in other epitopes irrespective of CD24 [14]. These limitations underline the need for more specific CD24 antibodies, such as the mAb SWA11 antibody that has been suggested to be more specific as it binds to the protein core [14].

As CD24 is a promising biomarker for the risk assessment of disease progression, the goal of the present study was to investigate CD24 expression in NSCLC using the novel, more specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) SWA11. Special emphasis was put on the comparison of SN3b- and SWA11-mediated CD24 detection regarding a) the subcellular distribution of CD24 expression (i.e. membranous versus cytoplasmic expression) and b) its correlation with various clinicopathological features including patient survival times.

Table 1

Clinicopathological characteristics of the NSCLC cohort

  AC SCC
N (%) N (%)
Tumour stage (pT)
1 29 (21.2 %) 5 (3.6)
2 51 (37.2 %) 23 (16.8 %)
3 6 (4.4 %) 6 (4.4 %)
4 1 (0.7 %) 0 (0 %)
Nodal Status (pN) 0 37 (27.0 %) 15 (10.9 %)
1 15 (10.9 %) 9 (6.6 %)
2 14 (10.2 %) 3 (2.2 %)
3 1 (0.7 %) 0 (0.0 %)
Grading (G) 1 5 (3.6 %) 0 (0.0 %)
2 41 (29.9 %) 16 (11.6 %)
3 44 (32.1 %) 17 (12.4 %)
Mean age at surgery 64,2 64,56
(median age) (65) (67)
Sex (m:w) 68:34 30:5
Median OS (months) 52 24
(SD; 95 % CI [months]) (±23.7; 5.5– 98.5) (± 12.8;0.0– 49.0)

 

Immunohistochemical detection of CD24 expression using clone SWA11 and SN3b

Using the mAb SWA11, 47 of 137 (34.3 %) NSCLC revealed CD24 expression (either cytoplasmic or membranous) (Table 2). CD24 expression was observed more frequently in adenocarcinomas (AC) than in squamous cell carcinomas (SCC). In AC cytoplasmic expression was observed more frequently than membranous expression. In SCC, both cyptoplasmic and membranous expression was rare. Normal lung parenchyma (i.e. alveolar surface cells) showed no expression of CD24. Bronchial epithelium showed a strong membranous and cytoplasmic staining of the brush border (Fig. 1).

Table 2

Cytoplasmic and membranous expression of CD24

SWA11 (mAb clone) SN3b (mAB clone)
  AC SCC   AC SCC
Cytoplasmic N (%) N (%) Cytoplasmic N (%) N (%)
0 45 (32.6 %) 19 (13.8 %) 0 76 (55.1 %) 31 (22.5 %)
1 22 (15.9 %) 8 (5.8 %) 1 12 (8.7 %) 1 (0.7 %)
2 17 (12.3 %) 4 (2.9 %) 2 7 (5.1 %) 2 (1.4 %)
3 18 (13.0 %) 4 (2.9 %) 3 1 (0.7 %) 0 (0 %)
AC SCC AC SCC
Membranous N (%) N (%) Membranous N (%) N (%)
0 68 (49.3 %) 21 (15.2 %) 0 64 (46.4 %) 30 (21.7 %)
1 21 (15.2 %) 5 (3.6 %) 1 10 (7.2 %) 2 (1.4 %)
2 8 (5.8 %) 4 (2.9 %) 2 12 (8.7 %) 2 1.4 %)
3 5 (3.6 %) 5 (3.6 %) 3 10 (7.2 %) 0 (0 %)

Staining intensities are determined as follows:

0: negative or equivocal, 1: weak, 2: moderate and 3: strong CD24 staining

 

https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs12907-015-0019-z/MediaObjects/12907_2015_19_Fig1_HTML.gif

Fig 1

The immunohistochemical characterization reveals membranous and/or cytoplasmic CD24 (mAb SWA11) expression. Strong cytoplasmic CD24 expression is found in a proportion of both AC (a) and SCC (b, d) specimens. Membranous CD24 expression can be pronounced with only scant or even absent cytoplasmic staining as shown in the AC (c). Also, both membranous and cytoplasmic CD24 detection can be found in some instances (d), the insert is showing the corresponding squamous carcinoma in-situ with membranous staining. Simultaneous membranous and cytoplasmic CD24 expression is also found in AC specimens (e, f). In normal tissue, alveolar epithelial cells do not express CD24 (g), whereas CD24 staining is found at the apical cell membrane of bronchial respiratory epithelia (h)

Using the mAb SN3b, 29 of 137 (21.2 %) NSCLC revealed CD24 expression (either cytoplasmic or membranous) (Table 2). As above, CD24 expression was observed more frequently in adenocarcinomas (AC) than in squamous cell carcinomas (SCC). However, in contrast to mAb SWA11 cytoplasmic expression was observed less frequently than membranous expression in AC. In SCC, both cytoplasmic and membranous expression was rare. Normal lung parenchyma (i.e. alveolar surface cells) showed a distinct membranous immunoreactivity. Bronchial epithelium revealed both membranous and cytoplasmic staining of CD24.

Correlation between SWA11 and SN3b: As SWA11 and SN3b detect different epitopes, we evaluated the correlation of the immunohistochemical staining patterns. Of 132 NSCLC specimens with matched expression data, only 9 specimens (6.8 %) revealed a concordant CD24 expression. Of these cases, 4 cases revealed a concordant cytoplasmic staining and another 5 cases revealed a concordant membranous CD24 expression. Statistically, no significant correlation between the two mAb could be observed (cc = −0.63, p = 0.470; Fisher’s exact test p = 0.665). The correlation of cytoplasmic and membranous expression (for each antibody) was as follows: cc = 0.475 (p < 0.05) for SWA11 (n = 108) and cc = 0.140 (p = 0.11) for SN3b (n = 103).

Survival analyses

Recent studies indicate that CD24 expression is associated with tumor progression and poorer survival rates. Therefore, we performed follow up analyses with a special emphasis on 1) the prognostic value of mAb SWA11 in dependence on subcellular staining characteristics and 2) the prognostic values of different clinicopathological parameters:

Prognostic value of CD24 in Kaplan Meier Analyses

Only membranous CD24 (SWA11) staining revealed significantly poorer survival rates (median overall survival 21 vs. 52 months; p = 0.005) as illustrated in Fig. 2. In contrast, cytoplasmic CD24 (SWA11) staining did not affect the survival rates (median OS 34 vs. 35 months; p = 0.884) (Table 3). When stratifying the cohort into SCC (n = 35) and AC (n = 102) in Kaplan Meier analyses, membranous CD24 (SWA11) expression did not affect patients’ survival, neither in SCC (p = 0.243) nor AC (p = 0.135) (Table 3), probably due to the small number of observations (Fisher exact test: p > 0.05). After stratification for AC subtypes, membranous CD24 expression (SWA11) showed a tendency towards an association with poorer survival in acinar subtype AC, but failed significance (p = 0.328).
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs12907-015-0019-z/MediaObjects/12907_2015_19_Fig2_HTML.gif

Fig 2

Survival analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves according to SWA11 expression. Cases with moderate to strong expression were bundled in a ‘high expression’ and cases with negative or weak expression in a ‘low expression’ group. Membranous expression of CD24 detected by SWA11 proved to be an independent marker for shorter survival times in NSCLC (p = 0.005)

Table 3

Univariate survival analysis

SWA11 No. of cases Mean survival time Median survival time p-value
(months +/− s.e.) (months +/− s.e.)
Mem CD24
Negative 76 84.833 +/− 10.395 52.000 +/− 27.030 0.005
Positive 16 27.925 +/− 6.379 21.000 +/− 4.000
Cyto CD24
Negative 66 75.209 +/− 10.577 35.000 +/− 12.422 0.884
Positive 26 60.540 +/− 11.551 34.000 +/− 12.196
Total CD24
Negative 64 76.972 +/− 10.841 35.000 +/− 13.726 0.633
Positive 28 57.535 +/− 10.895 34.000 +/− 9.303
SCC
Mem CD24 negative 16 52.063 +/− 14.668 16.000 +/− 16.000 0.243
Mem CD24 positive 7 21.571 +/− 7.201 24.000 +/− 23.568
AC
Mem CD24 negative 59 88.953 +/− 11.631 56.000 +/− 22.885 0.135
Mem CD24 positive 8 39.167 +/− 11.674 21.000 +/− 8.485
pN0 31 103.641 +/− 14.940 93.000 +/− 28.224 0.012
pN1+ 30 54.911 +/− 10.646 26.000 +/− 0.983

 

…..

Univariate survival analysis according to the Cox regression model (mAb SWA11)

  Beta HR (hazard ratio) 95 % CI of HR P-value
SWA11 mem all 0.856 2.353 1.268–4.364 0.007
pN 0.963 2.620 1.389–4.943 0.003
pT 0.844 2.325 1.279–4.224 0.006
Tumour type 0.975 2.651 1.999–3.517 0.000

Table 5

Multivariate survival analysis according to the Cox regression model (mAb SWA11)

  Beta HR (hazard ratio) 95 % CI of HR P-value
SWA11 mem all 0.944 2.571 1.211–5.458 0.014
pN 0.737 2.091 1.087–4.021 0.027
pT 0.587 1.799 0.755–4.283 0.185

 

…..

In the present study, we have analyzed immunohistochemical staining characteristics and the prognostic value of CD24 expression in NSCLC with a special emphasis on the comparison of the CD24 antibodies SWA11 and SN3b. The most important result of our study is that the prognostic relevance of CD24 is critically dependent on the careful consideration of sub-cellular compartments and the epitope specificity of the antibody used.

Overall, about one third of the NSCLC cohort revealed a significant CD24 expression (either cytoplasmic or membranous). These results are in line with the findings of other studies. In another NSCLC cohort, CD24 (SN3b) expression was found in 33 % of the samples (87 of 267 cases) [2]. Consistent with those results, we have found similar rates of high CD24 expression levels (35 % of the cases) for SWA11. Originally, we would have expected lower rates than those found by Lee et al, as they used the antibody SN3b, that also recognizes yet unidentified other glycoproteins next to CD24. Furthermore, they used whole mount sections instead of tissue microarrays. A possible explanation for rather equal detection rates would be the fact that it has been demonstrated that the epitope recognized by SN3b is indeed present in CD24, but is not found in all glycoforms of CD24 [14]. In contrast to the commonly used mAb SN3b, mAb SWA11 binds to the protein core of CD24 and does not depict other glycan moieties next to CD24. The protein core of CD24 is linear, consisting of the amino acid sequence leucine-proline-alanine (LAP) next to a glycosyl-phosphatidylinositol anchor [15].

CD24 expression has been associated with disease progression and cancer-related death in the majority of malignant tumors [2, 3, 16, 17], although a caveat to these data is that most of these studies are based on the supposedly less specific CD24 clone SN3b. Lee et al demonstrated a significant association between CD24-high expression (SN3b) and shorter patient survival times. Furthermore, Lee and colleagues and ourselves in former studies referred the results to cytoplasmic CD24 expression [2, 3].

Switching Off Cancers’ Ability to Spread

http://www.technologynetworks.com/rnai/news.aspx?ID=189704

A key molecule in breast and lung cancer cells can help switch off the cancers’ ability to spread around the body.

The findings by researchers at Imperial College London, published in the journal EMBO Reports, may help scientists develop treatments that prevent cancer travelling around the body – or produce some kind of test that allows doctors to gauge how likely a cancer is to spread. During tumour growth, cancer cells can break off and travel in the bloodstream or lymph system to other parts of the body, in a process called metastasis.

Patients whose cancers spread tend to have a worse prognosis, explains Professor Justin Stebbing, senior author of the study from the Department of Surgery and Cancer at Imperial: “The ability of a cancer to spread around the body has a large impact on a patient’s survival. However, at the moment we are still in the dark about why some cancers spread around the body – while others stay in one place. This study has given important insights into this process.”

The researchers were looking at breast and lung cancer cells and they found that a protein called MARK4 enables the cells to break free and move around to other parts of the body, such as the brain and liver. Although scientist are still unsure how it does this, one theory is it affects the cell’s internal scaffolding, enabling it to move more easily around the body. The team found that a molecule called miR-515-5p helps to silence, or switch off, the gene that produces MARK4.

In the study, the team used human breast cancer and lung cancer cells to show that the miR-515-5p molecule silences the gene MARK4. They then confirmed this in mouse models, which showed that increasing the amount of miR-515-5p prevents the spread of cancer cells. The findings also revealed that the silencer molecule was found in lower levels in human tumours that had spread around the body. The team then also established that patients with breast and lung cancers whose tumours had low amounts of these silencer molecules – or high amounts of MARK4 – had lower survival rates.

Researchers are now investigating whether either the MARK4 gene or the silencer molecule could be targeted with drugs. They are also investigating whether these molecules could be used to develop a test to indicate whether a patient’s cancer is likely to spread. Professor Stebbing said: “In our work we have shown that this silencer molecule is important in the spread of cancer. This is very early stage research, so we now need more studies to find out more about this molecule, and if it is present in other types of cancer.”

Dr Olivier Pardo, lead author of the paper, also from the Department of Surgery and Cancer at Imperial, added: “Our work also identified that MARK4 enables breast and lung cancer cells to both divide and invade other parts of the body. These findings could have profound implications for treating breast and lung cancers, two of the biggest cancer killers worldwide.” The study was supported by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, the Medical Research Council, Action Against Cancer and the Cancer Treatment and Research Trust.

 

‘Silencer molecules’ switch off cancer’s ability to spread around body

by Kate Wighton

main image

Scientists have revealed that a key molecule in breast and lung cancer cells can help switch off the cancers’ ability to spread around the body

The findings by researchers at Imperial College London, published in the journal EMBO Reports, may help scientists develop treatments that prevent cancer travelling around the body – or produce some kind of test that allows doctors to gauge how likely a cancer is to spread.

During tumour growth, cancer cells can break off and travel in the bloodstream or lymph system to other parts of the body, in a process called metastasis.

Patients whose cancers spread tend to have a worse prognosis, explains Professor Justin Stebbing, senior author of the study from the Department of Surgery and Cancer at Imperial: “The ability of a cancer to spread around the body has a large impact on a patient’s survival. However, at the moment we are still in the dark about why some cancers spread around the body – while others stay in one place. This study has given important insights into this process.”

The researchers were looking at breast and lung cancer cells and they found that a protein called MARK4 enables the cells to break free and move around to other parts of the body, such as the brain and liver. Although scientist are still unsure how it does this, one theory is it affects the cell’s internal scaffolding, enabling it to move more easily around the body.

 

miR‐515‐5p controls cancer cell migration through MARK4 regulation

Olivier E Pardo, Leandro Castellano, Catriona E Munro, Yili Hu, Francesco Mauri,Jonathan Krell, Romain Lara, Filipa G Pinho, Thameenah Choudhury, Adam EFrampton, Loredana Pellegrino, Dmitry Pshezhetskiy, Yulan Wang, JonathanWaxman, Michael J Seckl, Justin Stebbing    

EMBO reports http://embor.embopress.org/content/early/2016/02/10/embr.201540970     http://dx.doi.org:/
Here, we show that miR‐515‐5p inhibits cancer cell migration and metastasis. RNA‐seq analyses of both oestrogen receptor receptor‐positive and receptor‐negative breast cancer cells overexpressing miR‐515‐5p reveal down‐regulation of NRAS, FZD4, CDC42BPA, PIK3C2B and MARK4 mRNAs. We demonstrate that miR‐515‐5p inhibits MARK4 directly 3′ UTR interaction and that MARK4 knock‐down mimics the effect of miR‐515‐5p on breast and lung cancer cell migration. MARK4 overexpression rescues the inhibitory effects of miR‐515‐5p, suggesting miR‐515‐5p mediates this process through MARK4 down‐regulation. Furthermore, miR‐515‐5p expression is reduced in metastases compared to primary tumours derived from both in vivo xenografts and samples from patients with breast cancer. Conversely, miR‐515‐5p overexpression prevents tumour cell dissemination in a mouse metastatic model. Moreover, high miR‐515‐5p and low MARK4 expression correlate with increased breast and lung cancer patients’ survival, respectively. Taken together, these data demonstrate the importance of miR‐515‐5p/MARK4 regulation in cell migration and metastasis across two common cancers.
Embedded Image

miR‐515‐5p inhibits cancer progression, cell migration and metastasis through its direct target MARK4, a regulator of the cytoskeleton and cell motility. Moreover, reduced miR‐515‐5p and increased MARK4 levels in metastatic lung and breast cancer correlate with poor patient prognosis.

  • MARK4 down‐regulation promotes microtubule polymerisation.

  • Increased cell spreading downstream of miR‐515‐5p overexpression or MARK4 silencing hinders cell motility and invasiveness.

  • miR‐515‐5p overexpression or MARK4 silencing prevent organ colonisation by circulating tumour cells.

  • MARK4 inhibitors may represent novel therapeutic agents to control cancer dissemination.breasat cancer

 

Liquid Biopsy for NSCLC

http://www.technologynetworks.com/Diagnostics/news.aspx?ID=190276

‘Liquid biopsy’ blood test accurately detects key genetic mutations in most common form of lung cancer, study finds.

A simple blood test can rapidly and accurately detect mutations in two key genes in non-small cell lung tumors, researchers at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and other institutions report in a new study – demonstrating the test’s potential as a clinical tool for identifying patients who can benefit from drugs targeting those mutations.

The test, known as a liquid biopsy, proved so reliable in the study that Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center (DF/BWCC) expects to offer it soon to all patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), either at the time of first diagnosis or of relapse following previous treatment.

NSCLC is the most common form of lung cancer, diagnosed in more than 200,000 people in the United States each year, according to the American Cancer Society. An estimated 30 percent of NSCLC patients have mutations in either of the genes included in the study, and can often be treated with targeted therapies. The study is being published online today by the journal JAMA Oncology.

The liquid biopsy tested in the study – technically known as rapid plasma genotyping – involves taking a test tube-full of blood, which contains free-floating DNA from cancer cells, and analyzing that DNA for mutations or other abnormalities. (When tumor cells die, their DNA spills into the bloodstream, where it’s known as cell-free DNA.) The technique, which provides a “snapshot” of key genetic irregularities in a tumor, is a common tool in research for probing the molecular make-up of different kinds of cancers.

“We see plasma genotyping as having enormous potential as a clinical test, or assay – a rapid, noninvasive way of screening a cancer for common genetic fingerprints, while avoiding the challenges of traditional invasive biopsies,” said the senior author of the study, Geoffrey Oxnard, MD, thoracic oncologist and lung cancer researcher at Dana-Farber and Brigham and Women’s Hospital. “Our study was the first to demonstrate prospectively that a liquid biopsy technique can be a practical tool for making treatment decisions in cancer patients. The trial was such a success that we are transitioning the assay into a clinical test for lung cancer patients at DF/BWCC.”

The study involved 180 patients with NSCLC, 120 of whom were newly diagnosed, and 60 of whom had become resistant to a previous treatment, allowing the disease to recur. Participants’ cell-free DNA was tested for mutations in the EGFR and KRAS genes, and for a separate mutation in EGFR that allows tumor cells to become resistant to front-line targeted drugs. The test was performed with a technique known as droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR), which counts the individual letters of the genetic code in cell-free DNA to determine if specific mutations are present. Each participant also underwent a conventional tissue biopsy to test for the same mutations. The results of the liquid biopsies were then compared to those of the tissue biopsies.

The data showed that liquid biopsies returned results much more quickly. The median turnaround time for liquid biopsies was three days, compared to 12 days for tissue biopsies in newly diagnosed patients and 27 days in drug-resistant patients.

Liquid biopsy was also found to be highly accurate. In newly diagnosed patients, the “predictive value” of plasma ddPCR was 100 percent for the primary EGFR mutation and the KRAS mutation – meaning that a patient who tested positive for either mutation was certain to have that mutation in his or her tumor. For patients with the EGFR resistance mutation, the predictive value of the ddPCR test was 79 percent, suggesting the blood test was able to find additional cases with the mutation that were missed using standard biopsies.

“In some patients with the EGFR resistance mutation, ddPCR detected mutations missed by standard tissue biopsy,” Oxnard remarked. “A resistant tumor is inherently made up of multiple subsets of cells, some of which carry different patterns of genetic mutations. A single biopsy is only analyzing a single part of the tumor, and may miss a mutation present elsewhere in the body. A liquid biopsy, in contrast, may better reflect the distribution of mutations in the tumor as a whole.”

When ddPCR failed to detect these mutations, the cause was less clear-cut, Oxnard says. It could indicate that the tumor cells don’t carry the mutations or, alternatively, that the tumor isn’t shedding its DNA into the bloodstream. This discrepancy between the test results and the presence of mutations was less common in patients whose cancer had metastasized to multiple sites in the body, researchers found.

The ddPCR-based test, or assay, was piloted and optimized for patients at the Translational Resarch lab of the Belfer Center for Applied Cancer Science at Dana-Farber. It was then validated for clinical use at Dana-Farber’s Lowe Center for Thoracic Oncology.

An advantage of this form of liquid biopsy is that it can help doctors quickly determine whether a patient is responding to therapy. Fifty participants in the study had repeat testing done after starting treatment for their cancer. “Those whose blood tests showed a disappearance of the mutations within two weeks were more likely to stay on the treatment than patients who didn’t see such a reduction,” said the study’s lead author, Adrian Sacher, MD, of Dana-Farber and Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

And because tumors are constantly evolving and acquiring additional mutations, repeated liquid biopsies can provide early detection of a new mutation – such as the EGFR resistance mutation – that can potentially be treated with targeted agents.

“The study data are compelling,” said DF/BWCC pathologist Lynette Sholl, MD, explaining the center’s decision to begin offering ddPCR-based liquid biopsy to all lung cancer patients. “We validated the authors’ findings by cross-comparing results from liquid and tissue biopsies in 34 NSCLC patients. To work as a real-world clinical test, liquid biopsy needs to provide reliable, accurate data and be logistically practical. That’s what we’ve seen with the ddPCR-based blood test.

“The test has great utility both for patients newly diagnosed with NSCLC and for those with a recurrence of the disease,” she continued. “It’s fast, it’s quantitative (it indicates the amount of mutant DNA in a sample), and it can be readily employed at a cancer treatment center.”

The co-authors of the study are Cloud Paweletz, PhD, Allison O’Connell, BSc, and Nora Feeney, BSc, of the Belfer Center for Applied Cancer Science at Dana-Farber; Ryan S. Alden BSc, and Stacy L. Mach BA, of Dana-Farber; Suzanne E. Dahlberg, PhD, of Dana-Farber and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health; and Pasi A. Jänne, MD, PhD, of Dana-Farber, the Belfer Center, and Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »