Lin Lawrence Hsu, Allison Douglas H R, Feng Yang, Jour George, Park Kyung, Zhou Fang, Moreira Andre L, Shen Guomiao, Feng Xiaojun, Sabari Joshua, Velcheti Vamsidhar, Snuderl Matija, Cotzia Paolo
Departments of Pathology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Department of Biostatistics, School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA.
Mod Pathol. 2021 Dec;34(12):2168-2174. doi: 10.1038/s41379-021-00880-0. Epub 2021 Aug 6.
Screening for therapeutic targets is standard of care in the management of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. However, most molecular assays utilize tumor tissue, which may not always be available. "Liquid biopsies" are plasma-based next generation sequencing (NGS) assays that use circulating tumor DNA to identify relevant targets. To compare the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of a plasma-based NGS assay to solid-tumor-based NGS we retrospectively analyzed sequencing results of 100 sequential patients with lung adenocarcinoma at our institution who had received concurrent testing with both a solid-tissue-based NGS assay and a commercially available plasma-based NGS assay. Patients represented both new diagnoses (79%) and disease progression on treatment (21%); the majority (83%) had stage IV disease. Tissue-NGS identified 74 clinically relevant mutations, including 52 therapeutic targets, a sensitivity of 94.8%, while plasma-NGS identified 41 clinically relevant mutations, a sensitivity of 52.6% (p < 0.001). Tissue-NGS showed significantly higher sensitivity and accuracy across multiple patient subgroups, both in newly diagnosed and treated patients, as well as in metastatic and nonmetastatic disease. Discrepant cases involved hotspot mutations and actionable fusions including those in EGFR, ALK, and NTRK1. In summary, tissue-NGS detects significantly more clinically relevant alterations and therapeutic targets compared to plasma-NGS, suggesting that tissue-NGS should be the preferred method for molecular testing of lung adenocarcinoma when tissue is available. Plasma-NGS can still play an important role when tissue testing is not possible. However, given its low sensitivity, a negative result should be confirmed with a tissue-based assay.
在晚期非小细胞肺癌的管理中,筛查治疗靶点是标准治疗方法。然而,大多数分子检测利用肿瘤组织,而肿瘤组织并非总是可得。“液体活检”是基于血浆的下一代测序(NGS)检测,其使用循环肿瘤DNA来识别相关靶点。为了比较基于血浆的NGS检测与基于实体肿瘤的NGS检测的敏感性、特异性和准确性,我们回顾性分析了我院100例连续的肺腺癌患者的测序结果,这些患者同时接受了基于实体组织的NGS检测和市售的基于血浆的NGS检测。患者包括新诊断病例(79%)和治疗期间疾病进展病例(21%);大多数(83%)为IV期疾病。组织NGS检测到74个临床相关突变,包括52个治疗靶点,敏感性为94.8%,而血浆NGS检测到41个临床相关突变,敏感性为52.6%(p<0.001)。在多个患者亚组中,包括新诊断和接受治疗的患者以及转移性和非转移性疾病患者中,组织NGS均显示出显著更高的敏感性和准确性。存在差异的病例涉及热点突变和可操作的融合,包括EGFR、ALK和NTRK1中的突变。总之,与血浆NGS相比,组织NGS检测到的临床相关改变和治疗靶点显著更多,这表明当有组织可用时,组织NGS应是肺腺癌分子检测的首选方法。当无法进行组织检测时,血浆NGS仍可发挥重要作用。然而,鉴于其低敏感性,阴性结果应以基于组织的检测进行确认。