Clinical utility of comprehensive circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing compared to standard-of-care (SoC) tissue testing in first-line (1L) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients (pts).

Authors

null

Manuel Benavides

Hospital Universitario Regional y Virgen de la Victoria, Málaga, Spain

Manuel Benavides , Julia Alcaide , Martina Alvarez , Esperanza Torres , Isabel Sevilla , Silvia Gil Calle , Carmen Reyna , Inmaculada Alés , Gema Durán , Roberto Wolman , Mireya Cazorla , Pedro Jimenez Gallego , Irene López , Alexandra Cantero , Ana Godoy , Richard B. Lanman , Iris Faull , Justin Odegaard , Il Jin Kim , Emilio Alba

Organizations

Hospital Universitario Regional y Virgen de la Victoria, Málaga, Spain, Hospital Costa del Sol, Málaga, Spain, Vithas Xanit Internacional, Málaga, Spain, Guardant Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA, Lifecode, San Francisco, CA, UCSF, Redwood City, CA

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company
Guardant Health

Background: Accurate genotyping is mandatory for the management of mCRC pts. Tissue-based testing is still the SoC; however, is not available for all pts. and may be exhausted by serial testing, resulting in incomplete genotyping. We aimed to establish the validity of comprehensive non-invasive ctDNA testing in 1L mCRC pts for whom SoC tissue genotyping was available. Methods: 1L mCRC pts were tested with a comprehensive ctDNA test (Guardant360), a RAS ctDNA test (OncoBeam), and SoC tissue testing at the time of diagnosis. The primary endpoint was NCCN guideline biomarker discovery rate (KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations, ERBB2 amplification, and microsatellite instability). Results: In 91 evaluable pts, the biomarker discovery rate was 54.9% (50/91) for SoC tissue testing, 59.3% (54/91) for comprehensive ctDNA testing (p= 0.0318 for non-inferiority vs. SoC), and 42.9% (39/91) for RAS ctDNA testing (inferiority not rejected vs. SoC). Both comprehensive and RAS ctDNA testing showed high positive agreement (85%, 44/52, and 86%, 31/36) and negative agreement (96%, 268/279, and 93%, 93/100) relative to SoC tissue testing at the gene level. Expanding genotyping beyond KRAS codon 12/13 mutations increased biomarker discovery rate by 56% for tissue testing (50/91 vs. 32/91, McNemar’s p< 0.0001) and by 64% for comprehensive ctDNA (54/91 vs. 33/91, McNemar’s p< 0.0001). Turnaround time was significantly shorter for comprehensive ctDNA testing vs. SoC tissue testing (mean 11.7 days vs. 23.0 days, paired T-test p= 0.0002). On retrospective analysis, 92% of biomarker-positive pts would have been identified at 2 weeks using the comprehensive ctDNA test for initial genotyping with reflex to tissue for biomarker-negative pts, whereas initial use of SoC tissue testing would have identified only 85% of positive pts at 4 weeks (Fisher’s exact p< 0.0001). Conclusions: As previously reported for lung cancer, comprehensive ctDNA testing in 1L mCRC identifies at least as many biomarker-positive pts as SoC tissue genotyping with high concordance to tissue and in half the turnaround time.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2020 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session C: Anal and Colorectal Cancer

Track

Colorectal Cancer,Anal Cancer

Sub Track

Diagnostics

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38, 2020 (suppl 4; abstr 15)

Abstract #

15

Poster Bd #

A9

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Benny Johnson

Abstract

2023 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Circulating tumor DNA–based genomic landscape of KRAS wild-type pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

First Author: Brendon Fusco

First Author: Takeshi Yamada