Impact of the 12-Gene Colon Cancer Assay on Clinical Decision Making for Adjuvant Therapy in Stage II Colon Cancer Patients.

Brenner B1, Geva R2, Rothney M3, Beny A4, Dror Y5, Steiner M6, Hubert A7, Idelevich E8, Gluzman A9, Purim O10, Shacham-Shmueli E11, Shulman K12,Mishaeli M5, Man S9, Soussan-Gutman L13, Tezcan H3, Chao C3, Shani A11, Liebermann N14.

Author information

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

To evaluate the impact of the 12-gene Colon Cancer Recurrence Score Assay-a clinically validated prognosticator in stage II colon cancer after surgical resection-on adjuvant treatment decisions in T3 mismatch repair proficient (MMR-P) stage II colon cancer in clinical practice.

METHODS:

This retrospective analysis included all patients with T3 MMR-P stage II colon cancer (Clalit Health Services members) with Recurrence Score results (time frame January 2011 to May 2012). Treatment recommendations pretesting were compared with the treatments received. Changes were categorized as decreased (to observation alone/removing oxaliplatin from the therapy) or increased (from observation alone/adding oxaliplatin to the therapy) intensity.

RESULTS:

The analysis included 269 patients; 58%, 32%, and 10% of the values were in the low (<30), intermediate (30-40), and high (≥41) score groups, respectively. In 102 patients (38%), treatment changed post-testing (decreased/increased intensity 76/26 patients). The overall impact was decreased chemotherapy use (45.0% to 27.9%; P < 0.001). Treatment changes occurred in all score groups, but more frequently in the high (change rate 63.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 42.3%-80.6%) than in the intermediate (30.6%; 95% CI 21.0%-41.5%) and low (37.6%; 95% CI 30.0%-45.7%) score groups. The direction of the change was consistent with the assay result, with increased intensity more common in higher score values and decreased intensity more common in lower score values.

CONCLUSIONS:

Testing significantly affected adjuvant treatment in T3 MMR-P stage II colon cancer in clinical practice. The study is limited by its design, which compared treatment recommendations pretesting to actual treatments received post-testing, lack of a control group, and nonassessment of confounding factors that may have affected treatment decisions.