Natasha B Leighl1, Natasha Rekhtman1, William A Biermann1, James Huang1, Mari Mino-Kenudson1, Suresh S Ramalingam1, Howard West1, Sara Whitlock1, Mark R Somerfield1. 1. Natasha B. Leighl, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Natasha Rekhtman and James Huang, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; William A. Biermann, Einstein Medical Center Montgomery, East Norriton, PA; Mari Mino-Kenudson, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Suresh S. Ramalingam, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; Howard West, Swedish Cancer Institute, Seattle, WA; Sara Whitlock, Free to Breathe, Madison, WI; and Mark R. Somerfield, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The College of American Pathologists (CAP), the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC), and the Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) guideline on molecular testing for the selection of patients with lung cancer for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitors was considered for endorsement. METHODS: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) staff reviewed the CAP/IASLC/AMP guideline for developmental rigor; an ASCO ad hoc review panel of experts reviewed the guideline content. RESULTS: The ASCO panel concurred that the recommendations are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence in this content area and present options that will be acceptable to patients. The CAP/IASLC/AMP guideline comprises 37 recommendations (evidence grade A or B), expert consensus opinions, or suggestions that address the following five principal questions: (1) When should molecular testing be performed? (2) How should EGFR testing be performed? (3) How should ALK testing be performed? (4) Should other genes be routinely tested in lung adenocarcinoma? (5) How should molecular testing be implemented and operationalized? CONCLUSION: The ASCO review panel endorses the CAP/IASLC/AMP guideline. This guideline represents an important advance toward standardization of EGFR and ALK testing practices and is of major clinical relevance in advancing the care of patients with lung cancer. In the Discussion section, the ASCO review panel highlights three evolving areas: advances in ALK testing methodology, considerations for selecting appropriate populations for molecular testing, and emergence of other targetable molecular alterations.
PURPOSE: The College of American Pathologists (CAP), the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC), and the Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) guideline on molecular testing for the selection of patients with lung cancer for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitors was considered for endorsement. METHODS: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) staff reviewed the CAP/IASLC/AMP guideline for developmental rigor; an ASCO ad hoc review panel of experts reviewed the guideline content. RESULTS: The ASCO panel concurred that the recommendations are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence in this content area and present options that will be acceptable to patients. The CAP/IASLC/AMP guideline comprises 37 recommendations (evidence grade A or B), expert consensus opinions, or suggestions that address the following five principal questions: (1) When should molecular testing be performed? (2) How should EGFR testing be performed? (3) How should ALK testing be performed? (4) Should other genes be routinely tested in lung adenocarcinoma? (5) How should molecular testing be implemented and operationalized? CONCLUSION: The ASCO review panel endorses the CAP/IASLC/AMP guideline. This guideline represents an important advance toward standardization of EGFR and ALK testing practices and is of major clinical relevance in advancing the care of patients with lung cancer. In the Discussion section, the ASCO review panel highlights three evolving areas: advances in ALK testing methodology, considerations for selecting appropriate populations for molecular testing, and emergence of other targetable molecular alterations.
Authors: Neal I Lindeman; Philip T Cagle; Mary Beth Beasley; Dhananjay Arun Chitale; Sanja Dacic; Giuseppe Giaccone; Robert Brian Jenkins; David J Kwiatkowski; Juan-Sebastian Saldivar; Jeremy Squire; Erik Thunnissen; Marc Ladanyi Journal: Arch Pathol Lab Med Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 5.534
Authors: C Lim; H S Sekhon; J C Cutz; D M Hwang; S Kamel-Reid; R F Carter; G da Cunha Santos; T Waddell; M Binnie; M Patel; N Paul; T Chung; A Brade; R El-Maraghi; C Sit; M S Tsao; N B Leighl Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2017-04-27 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Anil Vachani; Yu-Ning Wong; Jennifer Israelite; Nandita Mitra; Sakhena Hin; Lin Yang; Aaron Smith-McLallen; Katrina Armstrong; Peter W Groeneveld; Andrew J Epstein Journal: Med Care Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: James H Suh; Alexa B Schrock; Adrienne Johnson; Doron Lipson; Laurie M Gay; Shakti Ramkissoon; Jo-Anne Vergilio; Julia A Elvin; Abdur Shakir; Peter Ruehlman; Karen L Reckamp; Sai-Hong Ignatius Ou; Jeffrey S Ross; Philip J Stephens; Vincent A Miller; Siraj M Ali Journal: Oncologist Date: 2018-03-14
Authors: Gregory A Masters; Sarah Temin; Christopher G Azzoli; Giuseppe Giaccone; Sherman Baker; Julie R Brahmer; Peter M Ellis; Ajeet Gajra; Nancy Rackear; Joan H Schiller; Thomas J Smith; John R Strawn; David Trent; David H Johnson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-08-31 Impact factor: 44.544