2019 ASCO Annual Meeting!
Session: Lung Cancer—Non-Small Cell Metastatic
Type: Poster Session
Time: Sunday June 2, 8:00 AM to 11:00 AM
Location: Hall A
Identification and use of treatment (tx) options in patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) after comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP): A real-world study.
Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Lung Cancer—Non-Small Cell Metastatic
2019 ASCO Annual Meeting
Poster Board Number:
Poster Session (Board #399)
J Clin Oncol 37, 2019 (suppl; abstr 9076)
Author(s): Celine Mascaux, Lukas Bubendorf, Fabrice Barlesi, James W. Clendening, Qing Zhang, Kieran Mace, Adam Gondos, Stefan Foser, Lisa I. Wang, Luis G. Paz-Ares; Aix-Marseille University, CNRS, INSERM, CRCM, APHM, Marseille, France; University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Mississauga, ON, Canada; Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; Hospital Universitario Doce de Octubre, Medical Oncology Department, Madrid, Spain
Background: The number of targeted txs for NSCLC is increasing. By analyzing numerous molecular alterations, CGP may open more targeted tx options than single biomarker testing. Methods: We analyzed a database linking Flatiron Health electronic health record-based clinical and Foundation Medicine, Inc. (FMI) CGP genomic alteration (GA) data in US pts diagnosed from 1/2011 with aNSCLC, primarily from community practices, and with follow-up through 6/2018. We examined the prevalence and distribution of genomic findings, and agreement between tx received and CGP-directed tx options (approved for aNSCLC/other tumors) on the FMI report as a measure of clinical utility. The latter was evaluated in a subset of pts with sufficient tx and follow-up data after FMI testing. Results: Among 5112 FMI-tested pts (first test observed 8/2012), 49% had their FMI test before starting any line of tx, 97% had ≥ 1 GA with known/likely function (median = 5), and 85% had ≥ 1 potential tx option (52% had ≥ 1 option for aNSCLC and 33% had ≥ 1 for another tumor type only). In 1366 pts evaluable for tx agreement after FMI testing, 572 (42%) received a tx listed on the FMI report and 111 (8%) were enrolled in clinical trials. Pts with a tx option approved for aNSCLC were more likely to have a tx agreeing with an option on the FMI report (67% of 754) v pts with a tx option approved in another tumor type only (8% of 612). Among the 1366 pts, 14% had EGFR/ALK/ROS1/BRAF (EARB) tx options only. The remaining 1170 had a non-EARB tx option, either as their only option (1014; 87%), or in addition to an EARB tx option (156; 13%). The non-EARB tx options included 377 pts (32%) with a tumor mutational burden-associated tx option. In these 1170 pts, 341 (29%) had an agreeing tx besides EARB, and 100 (9%) were enrolled on trials. Conclusions: FMI CGP identified potential NSCLC-specific tx options/a clinical trial opportunity for 52% of pts with aNSCLC. Of the pts evaluated for tx agreement, almost ½ received a tx agreeing with an option on the FMI report and/or were enrolled in a clinical trial. FMI CGP adds value beyond single biomarker testing by identifying txs and trial options in a meaningful proportion of pts.