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
1173P - Combining mass spectrometry with quantitative continuous scoring to unlock the full quantitative potential of immunohistochemistry
Presenter: Ana Hidalgo-Sastre
Session: Poster session 09
1174P - FLAMINGO: Accurate cancer detection from ultra-low-pass whole genome sequencing of cell-free DNA
Presenter: Daan Vessies
Session: Poster session 09
1175P - Universal circulating tumor DNA quantification using deep learning
Presenter: Anders Skanderup
Session: Poster session 09
Resources:
Abstract
1176P - Potential utility of ctDNA to detect false positive PET/CT in the evaluation of lymphoma response
Presenter: Alejandro martín-muñoz
Session: Poster session 09
1177P - FRESH: The Gustave Roussy program to facilitate access to liquid biopsy for precision oncology in France
Presenter: Etienne Rouleau
Session: Poster session 09
1178P - EGFR evaluation in non-small cell lung cancer: An artificial intelligence approach to pre-molecular analysis
Presenter: Chad Vanderbilt
Session: Poster session 09
1179P - WomEC: a novel diagnostic test for the detection of endometrial cancer in uterine fluids
Presenter: Antonio Gil-Moreno
Session: Poster session 09
1180P - An integrated metabolomics-based platform for early-stage detection of multiple cancers
Presenter: imliwati longkumer
Session: Poster session 09
1181P - Diagnostic target product profiles for cancer: A demand signaling tool to stimulate innovation in early cancer diagnosis
Presenter: Sonja Marjanovic
Session: Poster session 09