ESMO Recommendations on clinical reporting of genomics test results for solid cancers
Authors: J. van de Haar, P. Roepman, F. Andre, …, C.B. Westphalen, D. Tamborero, J. Mateo
Show all authors
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2024.06.018
Highlights
- These ESMO Recommendations cover the preparation of genomics reports intended to inform clinical decisions for patients with solid cancers.
- Recommendations are based on consensus from a multidisciplinary group of experts after reviewing available evidence.
- The manuscript provides guidance on structuring genomic reports, and the optimal presentation of content for each section.
- These recommendations are relevant to most NGS assays utilised in clinical practice and clinical research.
- Recommendations are categorised into priority levels (A, B) to facilitate adaptation to diverse clinical and laboratory contexts.
Background
Genomic tumour profiling has a crucial role in the management of patients with solid cancers, as it helps selecting and prioritising therapeutic interventions based on prognostic and predictive biomarkers, as well as identifying markers of hereditary cancers. Harmonised approaches to interpret the results of genomic testing are needed to support physicians in their decision-making, prevent inequalities in precision medicine and maximise patient benefit from available cancer management options.
Methods
The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Translational Research and Precision Medicine Working Group assembled a group of international experts to propose recommendations for preparing clinical genomics reports for solid cancers. These recommendations aim to foster best practices in integrating genomics testing within clinical settings. After review of available evidence, several rounds of surveys and focused discussions were conducted to reach consensus on the recommendation statements. Only consensus recommendations were reported. Recommendation statements were graded in two tiers based on their clinical importance: level A (required to maintain common standards in reporting) and level B (optional but necessary to achieve ideal practice).
Results
Genomics reports should present key information in a front page(s) followed by supplementary information in one or more appendices. Reports should be structured into sections: 1) Assay and data analysis characteristics; 2) Sample-specific assay performance and quality control; 3) Genomic alterations and their functional annotation; 4) Clinical actionability assessment and matching to potential therapy indications; and 5) Summary of the main findings. Specific recommendations to prepare each of these sections are made.
Conclusions
We present a set of recommendations aimed at structuring genomics reports to enhance physician comprehension of genomic profiling results for solid cancers. Communication between ordering physicians and professionals reporting genomic data is key to minimise uncertainties and to optimise the impact of genomics tests in patient care.