Clinical applicability and cost of a 46-gene panel for genomic analysis of solid tumours: Retrospective validation and prospective audit in the UK National Health Service

Background Single gene tests to predict whether cancers respond to specific targeted therapies are performed increasingly often. Advances in sequencing technology, collectively referred to as next generation sequencing (NGS), mean the entire cancer genome or parts of it can now be sequenced at speed with increased depth and sensitivity. However, translation of NGS into routine cancer care has been slow. Healthcare stakeholders are unclear about the clinical utility of NGS and are concerned it could be an expensive addition to cancer diagnostics, rather than an affordable alternative to single gene testing. Methods and findings We validated a 46-gene hotspot cancer panel assay allowing multiple gene testing from small diagnostic biopsies. From 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2013, solid tumour samples (including non-small-cell lung carcinoma [NSCLC], colorectal carcinoma, and melanoma) were sequenced in the context of the UK National Health Service from 351 consecutively submitted prospective cases for which treating clinicians thought the patient had potential to benefit from more extensive genetic analysis. Following histological assessment, tumour-rich regions of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) sections underwent macrodissection, DNA extraction, NGS, and analysis using a pipeline centred on Torrent Suite software. With a median turnaround time of seven working days, an integrated clinical report was produced indicating the variants detected, including those with potential diagnostic, prognostic, therapeutic, or clinical trial entry implications. Accompanying phenotypic data were collected, and a detailed cost analysis of the panel compared with single gene testing was undertaken to assess affordability for routine patient care. Panel sequencing was successful for 97% (342/351) of tumour samples in the prospective cohort and showed 100% concordance with known mutations (detected using cobas assays). At least one mutation was identified in 87% (296/342) of tumours. A locally actionable mutation (i.e., available targeted treatment or clinical trial) was identified in 122/351 patients (35%). Forty patients received targeted treatment, in 22/40 (55%) cases solely due to use of the panel. Examination of published data on the potential efficacy of targeted therapies showed theoretically actionable mutations (i.e., mutations for which targeted treatment was potentially appropriate) in 66% (71/107) and 39% (41/105) of melanoma and NSCLC patients, respectively. At a cost of £339 (US$449) per patient, the panel was less expensive locally than performing more than two or three single gene tests. Study limitations include the use of FFPE samples, which do not always provide high-quality DNA, and the use of “real world” data: submission of cases for sequencing did not always follow clinical guidelines, meaning that when mutations were detected, patients were not always eligible for targeted treatments on clinical grounds. Conclusions This study demonstrates that more extensive tumour sequencing can identify mutations that could improve clinical decision-making in routine cancer care, potentially improving patient outcomes, at an affordable level for healthcare providers.

[1]  W. McGuire,et al.  Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. , 1987, Science.

[2]  Y. Hochberg A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance , 1988 .

[3]  Young Tae Kim,et al.  Predictive and prognostic impact of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation in non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with gefitinib. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[4]  H. Varmus,et al.  Acquired Resistance of Lung Adenocarcinomas to Gefitinib or Erlotinib Is Associated with a Second Mutation in the EGFR Kinase Domain , 2005, PLoS medicine.

[5]  William C Hahn,et al.  Oncogenic Transformation by Inhibitor-Sensitive and -Resistant EGFR Mutants , 2005, PLoS medicine.

[6]  J. Fletcher,et al.  Molecular correlates of imatinib resistance in gastrointestinal stromal tumors. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  C. Antonescu,et al.  Primary and secondary kinase genotypes correlate with the biological and clinical activity of sunitinib in imatinib-resistant gastrointestinal stromal tumor. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  E. Avizienyte,et al.  Comparison of the EGFR resistance mutation profiles generated by EGFR-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors and the impact of drug combinations. , 2008, The Biochemical journal.

[9]  S S Sommer,et al.  EGFR somatic doublets in lung cancer are frequent and generally arise from a pair of driver mutations uncommonly seen as singlet mutations: one-third of doublets occur at five pairs of amino acids , 2008, Oncogene.

[10]  A. Sihoe,et al.  The EML4‐ALK fusion gene is involved in various histologic types of lung cancers from nonsmokers with wild‐type EGFR and KRAS , 2009, Cancer.

[11]  E. Van Cutsem,et al.  Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  C. Bokemeyer,et al.  Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with and without cetuximab in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  G. Fontanini,et al.  KRAS codon 61, 146 and BRAF mutations predict resistance to cetuximab plus irinotecan in KRAS codon 12 and 13 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer , 2009, British Journal of Cancer.

[14]  P. Casali,et al.  Gastrointestinal stromal tumours: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. , 2010, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[15]  D. Kerr,et al.  Phase III randomized trial assessing rofecoxib in the adjuvant setting of colorectal cancer: final results of the VICTOR trial. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[16]  C Proudlove,et al.  Gefitinib for the first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. , 2010, Health technology assessment.

[17]  S. Tubeuf,et al.  Cetuximab for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. , 2010, Health technology assessment.

[18]  Masahiro Fukuoka,et al.  Biomarker analyses and final overall survival results from a phase III, randomized, open-label, first-line study of gefitinib versus carboplatin/paclitaxel in clinically selected patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in Asia (IPASS). , 2011, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  Jin Hyun Cho,et al.  Nilotinib in patients with metastatic melanoma harboring KIT gene aberration , 2012, Investigational New Drugs.

[20]  Jun Ma,et al.  Erlotinib versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (OPTIMAL, CTONG-0802): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 study. , 2011, The Lancet. Oncology.

[21]  A. Hauschild,et al.  Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  C. Peschel,et al.  The Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-L861Q Mutation Increases Kinase Activity without Leading to Enhanced Sensitivity Toward Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Kinase Inhibitors , 2011, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[23]  Nikhil Wagle,et al.  High-throughput detection of actionable genomic alterations in clinical tumor samples by targeted, massively parallel sequencing. , 2012, Cancer discovery.

[24]  Y. Saga,et al.  Cetuximab inhibits the growth of mucinous ovarian carcinoma tumor cells lacking KRAS gene mutations. , 2012, Oncology reports.

[25]  G. Pellacani,et al.  Overwhelming response to Dabrafenib in a patient with double BRAF mutation (V600E; V600M) metastatic malignant melanoma , 2012, Journal of Hematology & Oncology.

[26]  E. Felip,et al.  Erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for European patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (EURTAC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. , 2012, The Lancet. Oncology.

[27]  Jason Li,et al.  Reducing sequence artifacts in amplicon-based massively parallel sequencing of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded DNA by enzymatic depletion of uracil-containing templates. , 2013, Clinical chemistry.

[28]  Alex M. Fichtenholtz,et al.  Development and validation of a clinical cancer genomic profiling test based on massively parallel DNA sequencing , 2013, Nature Biotechnology.

[29]  S. O'toole,et al.  BRAF inhibitor activity in V600R metastatic melanoma. , 2013, European journal of cancer.

[30]  A. Enk,et al.  Vemurafenib therapy for stage IV melanoma with V600G‐mutation , 2013, Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG.

[31]  William Pao,et al.  AZD9291, an irreversible EGFR TKI, overcomes T790M-mediated resistance to EGFR inhibitors in lung cancer. , 2014, Cancer discovery.

[32]  Savita Shrivastava,et al.  Validation of a next-generation sequencing assay for clinical molecular oncology. , 2014, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.

[33]  Dirk Schadendorf,et al.  Safety and efficacy of vemurafenib in BRAF(V600E) and BRAF(V600K) mutation-positive melanoma (BRIM-3): extended follow-up of a phase 3, randomised, open-label study. , 2014, The Lancet. Oncology.

[34]  J. Larkin,et al.  DOC-MEK: a double-blind randomized phase II trial of docetaxel with or without selumetinib in wild-type BRAF advanced melanoma. , 2014, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[35]  Koichi Hagiwara,et al.  Effectiveness of Gefitinib against Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer with the Uncommon EGFR Mutations G719X and L861Q , 2014, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[36]  Rashmi Kanagal-Shamanna,et al.  Next-generation sequencing-based multi-gene mutation profiling of solid tumors using fine needle aspiration samples: promises and challenges for routine clinical diagnostics , 2014, Modern Pathology.

[37]  B. Tops,et al.  Next generation diagnostic molecular pathology: Critical appraisal of quality assurance in Europe , 2014, Molecular oncology.

[38]  Rodrigo Dienstmann,et al.  Standardized decision support in next generation sequencing reports of somatic cancer variants , 2014, Molecular oncology.

[39]  I. Torjesen Large personalised medicine trial in lung cancer heralds new research partnership , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[40]  B. Gottlieb,et al.  Changing genetic paradigms: creating next-generation genetic databases as tools to understand the emerging complexities of genotype/phenotype relationships , 2014, Human Genomics.

[41]  J. Larkin,et al.  364 First-in-human phase 1 study of MLN2480, an investigational oral pan-RAF kinase inhibitor, in patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, including BRAF/NRAS-mutant melanoma , 2014 .

[42]  Eva Maria Ciruelos Gil,et al.  Targeting the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer , 2014 .

[43]  R. Motzer,et al.  The impact of genetic heterogeneity on biomarker development in kidney cancer assessed by multiregional sampling , 2014, Cancer medicine.

[44]  C. Amos,et al.  Routine use of the Ion Torrent AmpliSeq™ Cancer Hotspot Panel for identification of clinically actionable somatic mutations , 2014, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[45]  W. Scheithauer,et al.  Mutations within the EGFR signaling pathway: Influence on efficacy in FIRE-3—A randomized phase III study of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab as first-line treatment for wild-type (WT) KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. , 2014 .

[46]  Christine M. Micheel,et al.  Beyond Histology: Translating Tumor Genotypes into Clinically Effective Targeted Therapies , 2014, Clinical Cancer Research.

[47]  J. Beyene,et al.  Improving diagnostic precision, care and syndrome definitions using comprehensive next-generation sequencing for the inherited bone marrow failure syndromes , 2015, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[48]  Colin C Pritchard,et al.  Next-Generation Sequencing Panels for the Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer and Polyposis Syndromes: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. , 2015, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[49]  M. Cowie National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. , 2015, European heart journal.

[50]  T. Ross,et al.  Use of panel tests in place of single gene tests in the cancer genetics clinic , 2015, Clinical genetics.

[51]  K. S. Hall,et al.  Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up (vol 25, pg iii21, 2014) , 2015 .

[52]  Caroline Robert,et al.  Safety and efficacy of vemurafenib in BRAF V 600 E and BRAF V 600 K mutation-positive melanoma ( BRIM-3 ) : extended follow-up of a phase 3 , randomised , open-label study , 2015 .

[53]  Lindsey E. Dayer,et al.  Treatment of metastatic melanoma with pazopanib: A report of five patient cases , 2015, Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners.

[54]  P. Lavori,et al.  The VA Point-of-Care Precision Oncology Program: Balancing Access with Rapid Learning in Molecular Cancer Medicine , 2016, Biomarkers in cancer.

[55]  Jeffrey A. Golden,et al.  Health Care Infrastructure for Financially Sustainable Clinical Genomics. , 2016, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.

[56]  D. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Principles for Best Practice in Clinical Audit , 2022 .