Illustration of temporal evolution in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using both circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and tissue-based genomic data.

Abstract

347 Background: We have previously demonstrated the feasibility of ctDNA assessment in mRCC and preliminarily showed agreement between ctDNA and tissue-based genomic findings (Zengin et al ESMO 2020). Our data suggested that the degree of agreement is dependent upon the temporal separation of blood and tissue samples. We sought to further explore this temporal impact in a separate validation cohort. Methods: Patients (pts) with mRCC who underwent ctDNA genomic profiling were identified. ctDNA analysis was performed using a CLIA-certified 73-74 gene panel (Guardant360). From this cohort we identified a subset of pts who also underwent tissue-based genomic profiling using either a whole exome sequencing platform (GemExtra [TGen, Phoenix, AZ]) or a targeted next generation sequencing platform (Foundation Medicine [Cambridge, MA] or Tempus [Chicago, IL]). Only alterations covered by both assays were included for the current analysis. The difference in the proportion of alterations detected on tissue and ctDNA was compared between these cohorts and at a 6-mo landmark using the χ2 test. Results: In total, ctDNA and tissue based genomic profiling was assessed in 112 pts (M:F, 81:31); with most common histology was clear cell (85.7%). Median time between ctDNA and tissue assessments was 9.8 months (IQR 1.15-23.7). When examining paired samples in which >1 ctDNA alteration was detected, 32% (43/133) of alterations detected on tissue were also detected in ctDNA. This proportion increased to 43% (29/67) when samples collected within 6 months of each other, and was 51% (28/55) in samples collected within 3 months of each other. There was no significant difference in the frequency of shared mutations between the cohorts (P=0.09; Table). Conclusions: Our study confirms that ctDNA and tissue-based genomic profiling continue to provide consistently high levels of agreement. Notably, the percentage of samples with ≥1 ctDNA alteration detected was significantly lower in both cohorts compared to previous studies in RCC. More shared alterations were found on ctDNA when both ctDNA and tissue-based assessment were obtained at closer intervals. [Table: see text]