Abstract 825P
Background
MRD assessment in bone marrow (BM-MRD) is a relevant prognostic factor in multiple myeloma (MM). However, MRD is an established test in MM clinical trials but not in routine practice. Less invasive methods to monitor MRD in peripheral blood (PB) could facilitate its implementation.
Methods
This study enrolled 243 patients monitored in PETHEMA/GEM clinical trials. In all, BM-MRD was processed using NGF. In 83 patients, PB-MRD was examined in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) using CloneSight, a highly sensitive (>10-4) NGS method based on patient-specific multiplexed amplicon mini-panels covering somatic mutations identified at diagnosis. PB-MRD was then evaluated by BloodFlow, another high-sensitive method (10-7) that combines immunomagnetic enrichment with NGF.
Results
CloneSight was performed in 83 patients, 9 were excluded due to lack of suitable somatic mutations for PB-MRD tracking. A total of 194 samples were studied, 12 (6%) were PB-MRD positive, from 9 of the 74 (12%) patients. In 166 samples, BM-MRD was simultaneously analyzed using NGF. The concordance between PB-MRD using CloneSight and BM-MRD by NGF was 67% (62% double negative and 5% double positive). The frequency of CloneSight-/NGF+ and CloneSight+/NGF- discordant assessments was 31% and 2% respectively. Of note, only 3 of the 74 (4%) MRD negative patients relapsed thus far. Upon analyzing PB-MRD with both methods described, another 4/74 patients were CloneSight-/BloodFlow+, of whom 1 progressed. Of note, the only case being CloneSight+/BloodFlow- relapsed. The negative predictive value (NPV) of PB-MRD using BloodFlow was about 80%. CloneSight also offered a high PPV of 100%. The landmark median PFS of patients with negative vs positive PB-MRD using CloneSight was NR vs 14 months, respectively (HR:11.7, P<.001).
Conclusions
CloneSight and BloodFlow are empowered to assess PB-MRD with high sensitivity based on the respective detection of cfDNA and circulating tumor cells (CTCs). Presence of mutations and CTCs was associated with a shorter PFS. The high PPV achieved indicates that identification of such events in the group of BM-MRD-positive patients could stratify those at immediate risk of relapse.
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
202P - eIF4E inhibition exhibits anti-tumor activity and re-sensitizes acquired resistant KRAS G12C NSCLC to KRAS inhibitors
Presenter: Andrew Truong
Session: Poster session 09
203P - An innovative evidence-based laboratory medicine (EBLM) test to help doctors in multi-cancer early detection (MCED)
Presenter: Jose D Santotoribio
Session: Poster session 09
204P - Assessing biomarker testing awareness among patients and caregivers in NSCLC through an interdisciplinary global survey
Presenter: Rodrigo Paredes
Session: Poster session 09
205P - Detection and diagnosis of lung cancer by electronic nose analysis of exhaled breath: A multi-center prospective observational study
Presenter: Alessandra Buma
Session: Poster session 09
206P - Unveiling the link: How metabolic syndrome drives endometrial cancer progression
Presenter: Lirong Zhai
Session: Poster session 09
Resources:
Abstract
207P - Associations of diabetic background retinopathy and ER+ breast cancer risk: A Mendelian randomization study
Presenter: Shu Wang
Session: Poster session 09
208P - Role of plasma exosomes in crosstalk between immune system and hereditary ovarian cancer: Opportunity or challenge?
Presenter: Daniele Fanale
Session: Poster session 09
209P - A novel method for early evaluation of drug-specific predictive biomarker
Presenter: Gal Dinstag
Session: Poster session 09
210P - Therapeutic implications of phosphoproteomics in molecular cancer diagnostics
Presenter: Annika Schneider
Session: Poster session 09
211P - GynePDX: A new platform of preclinical models for endometrial and ovarian cancers
Presenter: Melek Denizli
Session: Poster session 09