Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display session

3989 - Correlation of somatic genomic alterations between tissue genomics and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) employing next generation sequencing (NGS) analysis in lung and gastrointestinal cancers.

Date

11 Sep 2017

Session

Poster display session

Topics

Cancers in Adolescents and Young Adults (AYA);  Cancer Diagnostics;  Translational Research;  Gastrointestinal Cancers;  Thoracic Malignancies

Presenters

Muhammad Toor

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2017) 28 (suppl_5): v449-v452. 10.1093/annonc/mdx378

Authors

M.M. Toor1, W. bahaj1, Z. Ahmed1, L. Kujtan1, T.J. Pluard2, M.E. McNally3, L.S. Cummings3, E. Island3, J. Forster3, K.F. Kennedy4, J. Subramanian2, A. Masood2

Author affiliations

  • 1 Department Of Medicine, UMKC(University of Missouri Kansas City), 64108 - Kansas City/US
  • 2 Department Of Medical Oncology, Saint Luke’s Cancer Institute, Kansas City/US
  • 3 Department Of Surgery, UMKC(University of Missouri Kansas City), Kansas City/US
  • 4 Department Of Cardiovascular Research, Saint Luke’s Health System, Kansas City/US
More

Resources

Abstract 3989

Background

Peripheral blood circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and tumor tissue next-generation sequencing (NGS) is routinely performed to guide therapy in cancer patients. However, little is known about the concordance or discordance between commercially available tissue genomics testing panels and ctDNA. The aim of our study was to assess concordance between matched cancer tissue genomics and blood based ctDNA in lung and gastrointestinal (GI) cancers.

Methods

Tissue genomic analysis was performed with Paradigm® (n = 17)/Caris® (n = 11) and ctDNA was analyzed with Guardant360® (n = 28). Samples included, non-small cell lung cancer (n = 10), small cell lung cancer (n = 4), colorectal cancer (n = 5), hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 2), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 1), pancreatobiliary adenocarcinoma (n = 3), esophageal adenocarcinoma (n = 2) and gastric adenocarcinoma (n = 1).

Results

We identified 6 (21%) patients with at least one gene mutation that was detected by both tissue genomic and ctDNA analysis. Total number of gene mutations identified in 28 patients were 106, but only 8 (7.5%) were detected by both tissue and ctDNA panels. When this testing was done within 90 days the concordance increased to 10.20%. Table.Table:

1265P

Patients with at least one mutation detected by both platforms21% (n = 6/28)
Mutations detectable by both platforms7.54% (n = 8/106)
Mutations detectable by both platforms if interval between tissue and blood collection

Conclusions

We identified significant discordance between tissue and ctDNA mutational profiles in lung and GI cancers. Therefore, the results from NGS platforms should be interpreted with extreme caution. Our analysis reveals that these platforms should not be used interchangeably. The discordance rate may be due to tissue heterogeneity and/or spatial and temporal clonal evolution. Standardization of the sequencing techniques and education of practicing oncologists about the limitations of liquid biopsies needs to be highlighted.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Saint Luke’s Health System

Funding

None

Disclosure

J. Subramanian: Paradigm Advisory board. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.