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

Mini oral session on Gastrointestinal tumours 1

121MO - ctDNA and prognosis in resected esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC)

Date

20 Nov 2020

Session

Mini oral session on Gastrointestinal tumours 1

Topics

Tumour Site

Oesophageal Cancer

Presenters

Emma Ococks

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2020) 31 (suppl_6): S1287-S1318. 10.1016/annonc/annonc356

Authors

E. Ococks1, A.M. Frankell1, N. Masque Soler1, A. Northrop1, H. Coles1, N. Grehan2, A. Redmond1, C. Hughes2, G. Devonshire3, A. Blasko1, O. Oesophageal Cancer Clinical And Molecular Stratification Consortium1, R. Fitzgerald1, E. Smyth2

Author affiliations

  • 1 Hutchison/mrc Research Centre, University of Cambridge, CB2 0XZ - Cambridge/GB
  • 2 Medical Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Nhs Foundation Trust, Addenbrooke's Hospital, CB2 0QQ - Cambridge/GB
  • 3 Cancer Research Uk Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, CB2 0RE - Cambridge/GB

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 121MO

Background

Relapse after chemotherapy and surgery occurs in >50% of resected EAC patients (pts). ctDNA following resection is prognostic in multiple cancers, however false positive results due to clonal haematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP) may limit the accuracy of tumour-naive ctDNA panels. We investigated the prognostic value post-surgical ctDNA in resected EAC and optimised a pipeline to reduce the effect of CHIP.

Methods

Pts were identified from the prospective national UK OCCAMS consortium dataset. A 77 gene tumour naïve ctDNA panel was deployed. Plasma samples were sequenced to a mean depth of 7,062x (range: 2,196 – 28,524). Pipeline optimisation included: removal of variants which were synonymous, >0.05% frequency across germline databases; those which fall in untranslated or upstream gene regions and variants at >5% VAF if always confirmed as germline in COSMIC. Post-op ctDNA +ve is defined as at least 2 variants detected in the same sample. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.

Results

97 pts were identified; 83/97 (86%) male, median age 68 years (SD 9.5 years), 100% cT3/T4, 75% cN+. 96/97 (99.0%) had neoadjuvant chemotherapy. 78/97 (80.4%) had CHIP analyses; 18/78 (23.1%) had CHIP variants removed. Using stringent quality criteria 16/79 (20.3%) were ctDNA +ve post-resection; recurrence was observed in 12/16 (75.0%) of these. Median OS for ctDNA +ve pts 14.9 months (m) vs 29.5m for ctDNA -ve (HR 2.32, (95% CI 1.14- 4.73, p = 0.03). When CHIP was excluded 10/63 (16.9%) pts were ctDNA +ve and 9/10 of these (90.0%) recurred. With correction for CHIP median OS ctDNA +ve pts was 10.1m vs 29.5m ctDNA -ve. (HR 5.55, (95% CI 2.42- 12.71, p = 0.0003). One pt with short follow-up due to recent treatment (30 weeks) who was ctDNA +ve has not yet relapsed. Similar outcomes were observed for DFS.

Conclusions

We demonstrate in a large, national, prospectively collected dataset that the ctDNA in plasma following surgery for EAC is prognostic for relapse. Pipeline optimisation can reduce or eliminate false positives from CHIP. In future, post-operative ctDNA could be used to risk stratify patients into high and low risk groups for intensification or de-escalation of adjuvant chemotherapy.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Roche.

Disclosure

E. Ococks: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Roche. R. Fitzgerald: Advisory/Consultancy, Shareholder/Stockholder/Stock options: Cyted Ltd.; Licensing/Royalties: Cytosponge; Research grant/Funding (self): Roche; Research grant/Funding (self): AstraZeneca. E. Smyth: Honoraria (self): Zymeworks; Honoraria (self): Astellas; Honoraria (self): AstraZeneca; Honoraria (self): Bristol-Myers Squibb; Honoraria (self): Merck; Honoraria (self): Celgene; Honoraria (self): Five Prime; Honoraria (self): Gritstone Oncology; Honoraria (self): Servier. 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.