Somatic genomic landscape of over 15,000 patients with advanced-stage cancer from clinical next-generation sequencing analysis of circulating tumor DNA.

Abstract

LBA11501 Background: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) enables non-invasive profiling of solid tumor cancers. Liquid biopsy studies to date have been limited to modest-size cohorts and case studies. Methods: Somatic genomic profiles of over 15,000 patients with advanced-stage clinical cancer were determined by a highly accurate, deep-coverage (15,000x) ctDNA NGS test targeting 70 genes (Guardant360). Frequencies of somatic ctDNA alterations per gene were compared to those previously described in tissue sequencing projects (e.g., TCGA). Accuracy of ctDNA sequencing (PPV) was assessed by comparing with matched tissue tests for 386 patients. Results: The cohort consisted of lung (37%), breast (14%), colorectal (10%) and other cancers (38%), with ctDNA clinical sensitivity of 86%, 83%, 85%, and 78%, respectively. Cancer-type-specific frequencies and mutual exclusivity patterns among major driver alterations largely recapitulated those seen in tissue sequencing studies. Mutation frequencies per codon correlated well between ctDNA and published tissue data, both for commonly altered tumor suppressors and for oncogenes (Pearson correlations: TP53, r = 0.94; KRAS, r = 0.99; PIK3CA, r = 0.99). The overall accuracy of ctDNA sequencing in comparison with matched tissue tests was 87% (336/386). The accuracy increased to 98% when blood and tumor were collected less than six months apart. Four distinct classes of clinical outcome benefits have been observed by liquid biopsy: 1) actionable mutations in cases with tissue QNS ( ALK fusion, or EGFR or BRAF activating mutations in lung; ERBB2 amp in gastric), 2) actionable resistance mutations at time of progression ( MET amp or EGFRT790M in lung), 3) evolution of sensitivity upon progression ( ERBB2-amplified metastatic breast cancer with triple negative primary), 4) under-genotyped tumors ( BRAFV600E or ERBB2indel in lung). Conclusions: Somatic alteration patterns in ctDNA samples largely agree with tissue alteration patterns, with the exception of resistance mutations. Clinical outcome benefits have been observed for patients treated based on ctDNA findings.