The role of real-world evidence (RWE) registries using NGS testing to address cancer health disparities (CHD) in small community oncology practices.

Abstract

e18519 Background: CHD may result from multiple factors, including access to care, screening, and clinical trials; limited uptake of biomarker and next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing; and unfavorable social determinants of health. CHD may contribute to almost 34% of deaths among adult cancer patients and additional spending of $230 billion. Addressing CHD could result in an indirect savings of as much as $1 trillion over 3 years (AACR, CDR, 2020). Biomarker testing enables the option of targeted treatment, providing better outcomes and reduced toxicity. The NGS testing rate is very low in some regions and among minority populations, and underuse worsens disparities. Carolina Blood and Cancer Care Associates (CBCCA) has created best practices to improve biomarker testing and provide standard-of-care treatment in advanced cancer. Methods: As a part of a pledge to decrease CHD, CBCCA partnered with 2 national NGS testing vendors to create a RWE registry to identify appropriate patients and provide access to NGS biomarker tests for somatic mutations, including whole exome sequencing (WES). Liquid biopsy was made available when tissue was unavailable. Results: CBCCA has 1 suburban and 1 rural location, with an ethnically diverse population. Regular care was provided for 1466 of the 1786 unique cancer patients seen in 2021, and 442 participated in a RWE registry. Nonparticipants were survivors having routine follow-up care (n = 512), patients with early-stage or noninvasive disease (510), or patients who refused testing because they were responding to ongoing treatment or had reservations. NGS testing was obtained for 354 patients, 31% of whom were members of ethnic minority groups. Liquid biopsy was used for 133 samples, and the remaining 221 were analyzed with somatic NGS panels or WES. Of the liquid biopsies, 24 patients had actionable mutations; an additional 52 had findings of germline implications. Actionable mutations that could be treated with an FDA-approved drug were identified using tissue-based NGS testing in 38 pt. In tissue-based testing, WES detected more results with germline implications, compared to somatic testing alone. Another 64 tests found mutations treatable with an approved drug in another tumor type. The NGS and biomarker testing rate (either tissue or liquid biopsy) was 84% of eligible pt. Of the patients tested with NGS, clinically actionable variants that could be treated with an approved agent were found in 23% (same tumor type) and 28% (another tumor type). Another 40% of patients had results with germline implications, of which P53 deletion was the most common finding. Conclusions: It is feasible to increase the NGS testing rate in appropriate situations. In this study, actionable mutations impacting treatment selection were found in up to 25% of patients where targeted therapy could be offered.