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: Biomarkers, Gynaecological cancers, Haematological malignancies, Immunotherapy of cancer, New diagnostic tools, NSCLC - early stage, locally advanced & metastatic, SCLC, Thoracic malignancies, Translational research

2437 - Clinical utility of complex multi-platform profiling in metastatic cancer patients

Date

20 Oct 2018

Session

Poster display session: Biomarkers, Gynaecological cancers, Haematological malignancies, Immunotherapy of cancer, New diagnostic tools, NSCLC - early stage, locally advanced & metastatic, SCLC, Thoracic malignancies, Translational research

Presenters

Jesus Garcia Foncillas

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2018) 29 (suppl_8): viii479-viii482. 10.1093/annonc/mdy294

Authors

J. Garcia Foncillas1, P.G. Aftimos2, P. Barthelemy3, J. Bellmunt4, G. Berchem5, C. Camps6, R. de las Peñas7, A. Finzel8, J.P. Hervonen9, T. Joensuu9, A. Kong10, J. Mackay11, C. Mikropoulos12, K. Mokbel13, J. Mouysset14, T.J. Perren15, G. Guitti16, J. Laes8

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Oncology, University Hospital "Fundacion Jimenez Diaz", 28040 - Madrid/ES
  • 2 Oncology, Institute Jules Bordet, 1000 - Brussels/BE
  • 3 Medical Oncology, C.H.U. Strasbourg-Nouvel Hopital Civil, 67000 - Strasbourg/FR
  • 4 Medical Oncology, Hospital del Mar, 28023 - Barcelona/ES
  • 5 Medical Oncology, Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg, L-1210 - Luxembourg/LU
  • 6 Medical Oncology, Consorcio Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, 46014 - Valencia/ES
  • 7 Medical Oncology, Consorcio Hospitalario Provincial de Castellón, 12002 - Castellón/ES
  • 8 Scientific, OncoDNA, 6041 - Gosselies/BE
  • 9 Medical Oncology, International Comprehensive Cancer Centre Docrates, 180 - Helsinki/FI
  • 10 Medical Oncology, The University of Birmingham Institute for Cancer Studies, B15 2TT - Birmingham/GB
  • 11 Medical Oncology, University College London Cancer Institute, WC1E6BT - London/GB
  • 12 Medical Oncology, Kent Oncology Centre, ME16 9QQ - Kent/GB
  • 13 Medical Oncology, The Princess Grace Hospital, W1U 5NY - London/GB
  • 14 Medical Oncology, Clinique Rambot-Provençale, 13100 - Aix-en-Provence/FR
  • 15 Medical Oncology, St. James's University Hospital Leeds, LS9 7TF - Leeds/GB
  • 16 It, OncoDNA, 6041 - Gosselies/BE
More

Resources

Abstract 2437

Background

Precision medicine using multi-platform profiling of metastatic cancers is becoming increasingly used. However, its clinical utility in guiding patients’ treatment remains unknown.

Methods

Here we assessed whether molecular profiling helps physicians in their treatment decision by analysing the molecular profile of 1657 advanced cancer patient samples who had failed at least one standard of care treatment using a combination of next generation sequencing (NGS), immunohistochemistry (IHC) and other specific tests. The results were interpreted, and personalized treatments for each patient were suggested. After a minimum of three months, using internet surveys, we investigated how our recommendations influenced treatment choice of the oncologist.

Results

Our data showed that NGS alone provided the oncologist with useful information in 10-50% of cases (depending on cancer type), whereas the addition of IHC/other tests extensively increased the usefulness of the information provided. For patients who were still alive after the provision of the molecular information (76.8%), 60.4% of their oncologists followed our recommendations. Most decisions (93.4%) were made based on the combination of NGS and IHC/other tests, and an approved drug -rather than clinical trial enrolment- was the main treatment choice. Most common reasons given by physicians to explain the non-adherence to recommendations were drug availability and cost, which remain barriers to precision medicine. Finally, we observed that 27% of patients treated with the suggested therapies had an overall survival >12 months.

Conclusions

Our study demonstrates that the combination of NGS and IHC/other tests provides the most useful information in aiding treatment decisions by oncologists in routine clinical practice. However, barriers to full implementation of this approach remain, and include drug availability, cost and low participation in clinical trials.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

OncoDNA, S.A.

Funding

OncoDNA SA.

Editorial Acknowledgement

Disclosure

A. Finzel, G. Guitti, J-F. Laes: Employee: OncoDNA. 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.