Abstract 5907
Background
The most recent consensus statement on the use of liquid biopsies (circulating tumor DNA – ctDNA testing) has been that it is not yet ready for prime time. However, in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), there is significantly more ‘shedding’ of DNA detectable in blood allowing this test to be of value. We aimed at reporting the concordance of liquid biopsies based on clonality and timing of testing in patients with mCRC.
Methods
A total of 92 mCRC patients were identified who had both a commercially available liquid and tissue next generation sequencing assay done from December 2016 to February 2019. Arbitrarily, mutations were classified as clonal or subclonal based on the 50% cutoff of the highest variant allele frequency (VAF) reported. Concordance rates, including clonal (BRAF-V600E/ RAS), subclonal and amplification concordance were calculated separately for patients for whom the liquid biopsy testing was done before initiation of treatment (n = 27) and after initiation of treatment (n = 65).
Results
Clonal concordance rates were 96.3% for patients when the liquid biopsy was done before initiation of treatment versus 64.6% for patients when the test was obtained after they were already on some systemic therapy (p value: 0.001). Similarly, subclonal and amplification concordance rates for patients in the test before treatment and test after treatment groups are summarized in the table. Moreover, the median of highest VAF% was noted to be 3.1% and 1.1% in test before treatment and test after treatment groups respectively (p value: 0.092).Table:
622P Summary of concordance rates by timing of liquid biopsy test
Test before treatment (N = 27) | Test after treatment (N = 65) | Total (N = 92) | P value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
*Clonal Concordance | 26: 96.3 (81.0, 99.9) | 42: 64.6 (51.8, 76.1) | 68: 73.9 (63.7, 82.5) | 0.001 |
BRAF | 27: 100.0 (87.2, 100.0) | 64: 98.5 (91.7, 100.0) | 91: 98.9 (94.1, 100.0) | 1.000 |
RAS | 26: 96.3 (81.0, 99.9) | 52: 80.0 (68.2, 88.9) | 78: 84.8 (75.8, 91.4) | 0.058 |
Subclonal Concordance | 21: 77.8 (57.7, 91.4) | 44: 67.7 (54.9, 78.8) | 65: 70.7 (60.2, 79.7) | 0.452 |
BRAF | 27: 100.0 (87.2, 100.0) | 65: 100.0 (94.5, 100.0) | 92: 100.0 (96.1, 100.0) | 1.000 |
RAS | 27: 100.0 (87.2, 100.0) | 62: 95.4 (87.1, 99.0) | 89: 96.7 (90.8, 99.3) | 0.553 |
Amplification Concordance | 22: 81.5 (61.9, 93.7) | 41: 63.1 (50.2, 74.7) | 63: 68.5 (58.0, 77.8) | 0.092 |
Highest Variant Allele Frequency (VAF)% | 3.1 (0.0, 84.6) | 1.1 (0.0, 90.1) | 1.5 (0.0, 90.1) | 0.092 |
Concordance rates are summarized by count: percent (95% binomial confidence interval). P values arise from Fisher’s exact tests; *Arbitrarily, 50% of the highest variant allele frequency (VAF)% value in the liquid biopsy results has been used to differentiate clonal from subclonal mutations. Highest VAF% is summarized by median (range). P values arise from Wilcoxon rank sum test
Conclusions
Liquid biopsies show a very high concordance rate in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. It is important to take the timing of the assay into consideration alongside relevant clonal mutations while assessing the concordance of liquid biopsies, not just for mCRC but for other malignancies.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
4732 - Progesterone Receptor Isoform Ratio Dictates Antiprogestins/Progestins Effects on Metastatic Breast Cancer Models
Presenter: Maria Abascal
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5737 - PAM50 and CGH-array genomic characterization of HER2-Equivocal Breast Cancers defined by the 2018 ASCO/CAP recommendations.
Presenter: Carine Ngo
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1096 - OncotypeDX® predictive nomogram for recurrence score output: a machine learning system based on quantitative immunochemistry analysis - ADAPTED01
Presenter: Fabio Marazzi
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5426 - Geriatric parameters predict both disease-related and patient-reported outcomes in older patients with breast cancer
Presenter: Willeke van der Plas-Krijgsman
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5865 - Patients with a 21-gene assay in South East London differ from the TAILORx trial population
Presenter: Charalampos Gousis
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1312 - Predictive tools in adjuvant breast cancer – what is the standard of evidence supporting their utility? A literature review examining validation of Adjuvant!, Cancermath and NHS Predict
Presenter: Alice Loft
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2445 - Oncologic outcome of invasive lobular carcinoma: Is it different from that of invasive ductal carcinoma?
Presenter: Hee Jun Choi
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2476 - Pathologic response and survival efficacy in patients with initial nodal involvement after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer
Presenter: SERAFIN MORALES Murillo
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3761 - Chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea: prognostic impact on premenopausal Egyptian patients with breast cancer
Presenter: Khaled Abdel Karim
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4687 - Predicting the presence of breast cancer using circulating small RNA in the serum
Presenter: Yumiko Koi
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract