TY - JOUR
T1 - Concordance of genomic alterations by next-generation sequencing in tumor tissue versus circulating tumor DNA in breast cancer
AU - Chae, Young Kwang
AU - Davis, Andrew A.
AU - Jain, Sarika
AU - Santa-Maria, Cesar
AU - Flaum, Lisa
AU - Beaubier, Nike
AU - Platanias, Leonidas C.
AU - Gradishar, William
AU - Giles, Francis J.
AU - Cristofanilli, Massimo
N1 - Funding Information:
Y.K. Chae is a consultant/advisory board member for Foundation Medicine and Guardant Health. C.A. Santa-Maria reports receiving a commercial research grant from Pfizer and MedImmune. N. Beaubier is director of pathology at Tempus Labs, Inc. M. Cristofanilli is a consultant/advisory board member for Vortex and Dompe. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed by the other authors. M. Cristofanilli received support from the Lynn Sage Cancer Research Foundation Breast OncoSET. The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Publisher Copyright:
©2017 AACR.
PY - 2017/7
Y1 - 2017/7
N2 - While identifying genomic alterations in tumor tissue is the current gold-standard technique for molecular profiling, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) represents a noninvasive method of assessing genomic alterations using peripheral blood. The concordance of genomic alterations between two commercially available ctDNA and tissue biopsies was compared in 45 patients with breast cancer using paired next-generation sequencing tissue and ctDNA biopsies. Across all genes, concordance between the two platforms was 91.0% to 94.2%. When only considering genomic alterations in either assay (e.g., excluding wild type/wild type genes), concordance was 10.8% to 15.1% with full plus partial concordance of 13.8% to 19.3%. Concordant mutations were associated with significantly higher variant allele frequency. Over half of mutations detected in either technique were not detected using the other biopsy technique. Including variants of unknown significance, the average number of alterations per patient was significantly higher for tissue (4.56) compared with ctDNA (2.16). When eliminating alterations not detectable in the ctDNA assay, mean number of alterations for tissue and ctDNA was similar (2.67 for tissue, 2.16 for ctDNA). Across five representative genes (TP53, PIK3CA, ERBB2, BRCA1, and BRCA2), sensitivity and specificity were 35.7% and 95.0%, respectively. Concordance when genomic alterations was detected in either tissue or ctDNA was low with each technique detecting a significant amount of nonoverlapping mutations. Potential explanations for the lack of concordance include tumor heterogeneity, different sequencing techniques, spatial and temporal factors, and potential germline DNA contamination. The study indicates that both tissue and blood-based NGS may be necessary to describe the complex biology of breast cancer.
AB - While identifying genomic alterations in tumor tissue is the current gold-standard technique for molecular profiling, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) represents a noninvasive method of assessing genomic alterations using peripheral blood. The concordance of genomic alterations between two commercially available ctDNA and tissue biopsies was compared in 45 patients with breast cancer using paired next-generation sequencing tissue and ctDNA biopsies. Across all genes, concordance between the two platforms was 91.0% to 94.2%. When only considering genomic alterations in either assay (e.g., excluding wild type/wild type genes), concordance was 10.8% to 15.1% with full plus partial concordance of 13.8% to 19.3%. Concordant mutations were associated with significantly higher variant allele frequency. Over half of mutations detected in either technique were not detected using the other biopsy technique. Including variants of unknown significance, the average number of alterations per patient was significantly higher for tissue (4.56) compared with ctDNA (2.16). When eliminating alterations not detectable in the ctDNA assay, mean number of alterations for tissue and ctDNA was similar (2.67 for tissue, 2.16 for ctDNA). Across five representative genes (TP53, PIK3CA, ERBB2, BRCA1, and BRCA2), sensitivity and specificity were 35.7% and 95.0%, respectively. Concordance when genomic alterations was detected in either tissue or ctDNA was low with each technique detecting a significant amount of nonoverlapping mutations. Potential explanations for the lack of concordance include tumor heterogeneity, different sequencing techniques, spatial and temporal factors, and potential germline DNA contamination. The study indicates that both tissue and blood-based NGS may be necessary to describe the complex biology of breast cancer.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85023764675&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0061
DO - 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0061
M3 - Article
C2 - 28446639
AN - SCOPUS:85023764675
SN - 1535-7163
VL - 16
SP - 1412
EP - 1420
JO - Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
JF - Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
IS - 7
ER -