Thai H Ho1, Toni K Choueiri2, Kai Wang3, Jose A Karam4, Zachary Chalmers3, Garrett Frampton3, Julia A Elvin3, Adrienne Johnson3, Xueli Liu5, Yulan Lin5, Richard W Joseph6, Melissa L Stanton7, Vincent A Miller3, Philip J Stephens3, Jeffrey S Ross8, Siraj M Ali3, Sumanta K Pal9. 1. Epigenomics Program, Center for Individualized Medicine, Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA. 2. Division of Medical Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Foundation Medicine, Cambridge, MA, USA. 4. Department of Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 5. Department of Medical Oncology and Experimental Therapeutics, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA. 6. Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA. 7. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA. 8. Foundation Medicine, Cambridge, MA, USA; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA. 9. Department of Medical Oncology and Experimental Therapeutics, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA. Electronic address: spal@coh.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)-directed therapies are the standard of care in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) but are not used based on molecular subclassifications of ccRCC. OBJECTIVE: To determine if an association exists between genomic alterations (GAs) detected by comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) in the course of clinical care and the response to anti-VEGF receptor (VEGFR) and anti-MTOR pathway targeted therapies in a cohort of patients with treated mccRCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: CGP, using a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified platform, was performed on 31 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue specimens (84% from cytoreductive nephrectomies) obtained from patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who had received VEGFR and/or mTOR inhibitors. Duration of treatment (DOT) and extent and duration of clinical response were obtained from review of medical records. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: All classes of GAs-base substitutions, short insertions, deletions, gene fusions, rearrangements, and copy number-were assessed via hybrid capture-based CGP. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the frequency of GAs in groups segregated by the DOT with VEGF-directed agents. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The most common GAs detected in this series were in VHL (70%), PBRM1 (48%), SETD2 (32%), TSC1 (29%), MLL (19%), TERT (16%), ARID1B (16%), and KDM5C (16%). Across 61 administrations of VEGF-directed therapy in 27 patients, exceptional responses (DOT >21 mo) were more frequent among patients with GAs in KDM5C, PBRM1, and VHL. Conversely, these patients also featured a lower frequency of GA associated with response to mTOR-directed therapy, such as TSC1. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular subclassifications may affect response to VEGF-directed therapy. The predictive and prognostic nature of these molecular subclassifications in the metastatic setting should be explored in an extended series. PATIENT SUMMARY: Comprehensive genomic profiling in the course of clinical care in the community oncology setting can delineate subgroups of patients with advanced kidney cancer who stand to benefit more from specific molecular-targeted agents.
BACKGROUND: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)-directed therapies are the standard of care in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) but are not used based on molecular subclassifications of ccRCC. OBJECTIVE: To determine if an association exists between genomic alterations (GAs) detected by comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) in the course of clinical care and the response to anti-VEGF receptor (VEGFR) and anti-MTOR pathway targeted therapies in a cohort of patients with treated mccRCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: CGP, using a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified platform, was performed on 31 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue specimens (84% from cytoreductive nephrectomies) obtained from patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who had received VEGFR and/or mTOR inhibitors. Duration of treatment (DOT) and extent and duration of clinical response were obtained from review of medical records. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: All classes of GAs-base substitutions, short insertions, deletions, gene fusions, rearrangements, and copy number-were assessed via hybrid capture-based CGP. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the frequency of GAs in groups segregated by the DOT with VEGF-directed agents. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The most common GAs detected in this series were in VHL (70%), PBRM1 (48%), SETD2 (32%), TSC1 (29%), MLL (19%), TERT (16%), ARID1B (16%), and KDM5C (16%). Across 61 administrations of VEGF-directed therapy in 27 patients, exceptional responses (DOT >21 mo) were more frequent among patients with GAs in KDM5C, PBRM1, and VHL. Conversely, these patients also featured a lower frequency of GA associated with response to mTOR-directed therapy, such as TSC1. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular subclassifications may affect response to VEGF-directed therapy. The predictive and prognostic nature of these molecular subclassifications in the metastatic setting should be explored in an extended series. PATIENT SUMMARY: Comprehensive genomic profiling in the course of clinical care in the community oncology setting can delineate subgroups of patients with advanced kidney cancer who stand to benefit more from specific molecular-targeted agents.
Authors: Daniel M Tennenbaum; Brandon J Manley; Emily Zabor; Maria F Becerra; Maria I Carlo; Jozefina Casuscelli; Almedina Redzematovic; Nabeela Khan; Maria E Arcila; Martin H Voss; Darren R Feldman; Robert J Motzer; Nicole E Benfante; Jonathan A Coleman; Paul Russo; James J Hsieh; Abraham Ari Hakimi Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2017-04-10 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Jingping Liu; Paul D Hanavan; Katon Kras; Yvette W Ruiz; Erik P Castle; Douglas F Lake; Xianfeng Chen; Daniel O'Brien; Huijun Luo; Keith D Robertson; Haiwei Gu; Thai H Ho Journal: J Proteome Res Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 4.466
Authors: James J Hsieh; Mark P Purdue; Sabina Signoretti; Charles Swanton; Laurence Albiges; Manuela Schmidinger; Daniel Y Heng; James Larkin; Vincenzo Ficarra Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2017-03-09 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: James J Hsieh; David Chen; Patricia I Wang; Mahtab Marker; Almedina Redzematovic; Ying-Bei Chen; S Duygu Selcuklu; Nils Weinhold; Nancy Bouvier; Kety H Huberman; Umesh Bhanot; Michael S Chevinsky; Parul Patel; Patrizia Pinciroli; Helen H Won; Daoqi You; Agnes Viale; William Lee; A Ari Hakimi; Michael F Berger; Nicholas D Socci; Emily H Cheng; Jennifer Knox; Martin H Voss; Maurizio Voi; Robert J Motzer Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-10-15 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: P Maroto; E Esteban; E Fernández Parra; M J Mendez-Vidal; M Domenech; B Pérez-Valderrama; V Calderero; J L Pérez-Gracia; E Grande; F Algaba Journal: Onco Targets Ther Date: 2017-09-20 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Jee Soo Park; Myung Eun Lee; Won Sik Jang; Koon Ho Rha; Seung Hwan Lee; Jongsoo Lee; Won Sik Ham Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 6.639