JCO precision oncology · 2024
Concordance in Oncogenic Alterations Between the Primary Tumor and Advanced Disease: Insights Into the Heterogeneity of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
McIntyre Sarah M, Preston William A, Walch Henry, Sharib Jeremy, Kundra Ritika, Sigel Carlie, Lidsky Michael E, Allen Peter J, Morse Michael A, Chen Wei, Cercek Andrea, Harding James J, Abou-Alfa Ghassan K, O'Reilly Eileen M, Park Wungki, Balachandran Vinod P, Drebin Jeffrey, Soares Kevin C, Wei Alice, Kingham T Peter, D'Angelica Michael I, Iacobuzio-Donahue Christine, Jarnagin William R
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICCA) is characterized by significant phenotypic and clinical heterogeneities and poor response to systemic therapy, potentially related to underlying heterogeneity in oncogenic alterations. We aimed to characterize the genomic heterogeneity between primary tumors and advanced disease in patients with ICCA.
METHODS: Biopsy-proven CCA specimens (primary tumor and paired advanced disease [metastatic disease, progressive disease on systemic therapy, or postoperative recurrence]) from two institutions were subjected to targeted next-generation sequencing. Overall concordance (oncogenic driver mutations, copy number alterations, and fusion events) and mutational concordance (only oncogenic mutations) were compared across paired samples. A subgroup analysis was performed on the basis of exposure to systemic therapy. Patients with extrahepatic CCA (ECCA) were included as a comparison group.
RESULTS: Sample pairs from 65 patients with ICCA (n = 54) and ECCA (n = 11) were analyzed. The median time between sample collection was 19.6 months (range, 2.7-122.9). For the entire cohort, the overall oncogenic concordance was 49% and the mutational concordance was 62% between primary and advanced disease samples. Subgroup analyses of ICCA and ECCA revealed overall/mutational concordance rates of 47%/58% and 60%/84%, respectively. Oncogenic concordance was similarly low for pairs exposed to systemic therapy between sample collections (n = 50, 53% overall, 68% mutational). In patients treated with targeted therapy for IDH1/2 alterations (n = 6) or FGFR2 fusions (n = 3), there was 100% concordance between the primary and advanced disease specimens. In two patients, FGFR2 (n = 1) and IDH1 (n = 1) alterations were detected de novo in the advanced disease specimens.
CONCLUSION: The results reflect a high degree of heterogeneity in ICCA and argue for reassessment of the dominant driver mutations with change in disease status.
METHODS: Biopsy-proven CCA specimens (primary tumor and paired advanced disease [metastatic disease, progressive disease on systemic therapy, or postoperative recurrence]) from two institutions were subjected to targeted next-generation sequencing. Overall concordance (oncogenic driver mutations, copy number alterations, and fusion events) and mutational concordance (only oncogenic mutations) were compared across paired samples. A subgroup analysis was performed on the basis of exposure to systemic therapy. Patients with extrahepatic CCA (ECCA) were included as a comparison group.
RESULTS: Sample pairs from 65 patients with ICCA (n = 54) and ECCA (n = 11) were analyzed. The median time between sample collection was 19.6 months (range, 2.7-122.9). For the entire cohort, the overall oncogenic concordance was 49% and the mutational concordance was 62% between primary and advanced disease samples. Subgroup analyses of ICCA and ECCA revealed overall/mutational concordance rates of 47%/58% and 60%/84%, respectively. Oncogenic concordance was similarly low for pairs exposed to systemic therapy between sample collections (n = 50, 53% overall, 68% mutational). In patients treated with targeted therapy for IDH1/2 alterations (n = 6) or FGFR2 fusions (n = 3), there was 100% concordance between the primary and advanced disease specimens. In two patients, FGFR2 (n = 1) and IDH1 (n = 1) alterations were detected de novo in the advanced disease specimens.
CONCLUSION: The results reflect a high degree of heterogeneity in ICCA and argue for reassessment of the dominant driver mutations with change in disease status.