Center for Thoracic Oncology, The Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Department of Oncology, University of Turin, San Luigi Hospital, Orbassano, Italy.
J Thorac Oncol. 2021 Oct;16(10):1647-1662. doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2021.06.017. Epub 2021 Jul 8.
Although precision medicine has had a mixed impact on the clinical management of patients with advanced-stage cancer overall, for NSCLC, and more specifically for lung adenocarcinoma, the advances have been dramatic, largely owing to the genomic complexity and growing number of druggable oncogene drivers. Furthermore, although tumor tissue is historically the "accepted standard" biospecimen for these molecular analyses, there are considerable innate limitations. Thus, liquid biopsy represents a practical alternative source for investigating tumor-derived somatic alterations. Although data are most robust in NSCLC, patients with other cancer types may also benefit from this minimally invasive approach to facilitate selection of targeted therapies. The liquid biopsy approach includes a variety of methodologies for circulating analytes. From a clinical point of view, plasma circulating tumor DNA is the most extensively studied and widely adopted alternative to tissue tumor genotyping in solid tumors, including NSCLC, first entering clinical practice for detection of EGFR mutations in NSCLC. Since the publication of the first International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) liquid biopsy statement in 2018, several additional advances have been made in this field, leading to changes in the therapeutic decision-making algorithm for advanced NSCLC and prompting this 2021 update. In view of the novel and impressive technological advances made in the past few years, the growing clinical application of plasma-based, next-generation sequencing, and the recent Food and Drug and Administration approval in the United States of two different assays for circulating tumor DNA analysis, IASLC revisited the role of liquid biopsy in therapeutic decision-making in a recent workshop in October 2020 and the question of "plasma first" versus "tissue first" approach toward molecular testing for advanced NSCLC. Moreover, evidence-based recommendations from IASLC provide an international perspective on when to order which test and how to interpret the results. Here, we present updates and additional considerations to the previous statement article as a consensus from a multidisciplinary and international team of experts selected by IASLC.
尽管精准医学对晚期癌症患者的临床管理总体上产生了混合影响,但对于 NSCLC 来说,尤其是对于肺腺癌,其进展是巨大的,这主要归因于基因组的复杂性和不断增加的可用药的致癌基因驱动因素。此外,尽管肿瘤组织在历史上一直是这些分子分析的“公认标准”生物标本,但它具有相当大的固有局限性。因此,液体活检代表了一种用于研究肿瘤源性体细胞改变的实用替代来源。尽管 NSCLC 数据最为可靠,但其他癌症类型的患者也可能受益于这种微创方法,以促进靶向治疗的选择。液体活检方法包括用于循环分析物的多种方法。从临床角度来看,血浆循环肿瘤 DNA 是最广泛研究和广泛采用的替代组织肿瘤基因分型的方法,包括 NSCLC,首先用于检测 NSCLC 中的 EGFR 突变,进入临床实践。自 2018 年首次发表国际肺癌研究协会(IASLC)液体活检声明以来,该领域取得了多项其他进展,改变了晚期 NSCLC 的治疗决策算法,并促使了 2021 年的更新。鉴于过去几年中取得的新颖而令人印象深刻的技术进步,基于血浆的下一代测序的临床应用不断增加,以及美国食品和药物管理局最近批准了两种用于循环肿瘤 DNA 分析的不同检测方法,IASLC 在 2020 年 10 月的一次最近的研讨会上重新审视了液体活检在晚期 NSCLC 治疗决策中的作用,以及“血浆优先”与“组织优先”方法在分子检测中的问题。此外,IASLC 的循证建议为何时进行哪种测试以及如何解释结果提供了国际视角。在这里,我们呈现了对之前声明文章的更新和其他考虑因素,作为 IASLC 选择的多学科和国际专家团队的共识。