Circulating tumour DNA in metastatic breast cancer to guide clinical trial enrolment and precision oncology: A cohort study

Affiliations

PMID: 33001984
PMCID: PMC7529214
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003363

Free PMC article

Abstract

Background: Metastatic breast cancer (mBC) is a heterogenous disease with increasing availability of targeted therapies as well as emerging genomic markers of therapeutic resistance, necessitating timely and accurate molecular characterization of disease. As a minimally invasive test, analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) is well positioned for real-time genomic profiling to guide treatment decisions. Here, we report the results of a prospective testing program established to assess the feasibility of ctDNA analysis to guide clinical management of mBC patients.

Methods and findings: Two hundred thirty-four mBC patients (median age 54 years) were enrolled between June 2015 and October 2018 at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Median follow-up was 15 months (range 1-46). All patient samples at the time of enrolment were analysed in real time for the presence of somatic mutations. Longitudinal plasma testing during the course of patient management was also undertaken in a subset of patients (n = 67, 28.6%), according to clinician preference, for repeated molecular profiling or disease monitoring. Detection of somatic mutations from patient plasma was performed using a multiplexed droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) approach to identify hotspot mutations in PIK3CA, ESR1, ERBB2, and AKT1. In parallel, subsets of samples were also analysed via next-generation sequencing (targeted panel sequencing and low-coverage whole-genome sequencing [LC-WGS]). The sensitivity of ddPCR and targeted panel sequencing to identify actionable mutations was compared. Results were discussed at a multidisciplinary breast cancer meeting prior to treatment decisions. ddPCR and targeted panel sequencing identified at least 1 actionable mutation at baseline in 80/234 (34.2%) and 62/159 (39.0%) of patients tested, respectively. Combined, both methods detected an actionable alteration in 104/234 patients (44.4%) through baseline or serial ctDNA testing. LC-WGS was performed on 27 patients from the cohort, uncovering several recurrently amplified regions including 11q13.3 encompassing CCND1. Increasing ctDNA levels were associated with inferior overall survival, whether assessed by ddPCR, targeted sequencing, or LC-WGS. Overall, the ctDNA results changed clinical management in 40 patients including the direct recruitment of 20 patients to clinical trials. Limitations of the study were that it was conducted at a single site and that 31.3% of participants were lost to follow-up.

Conclusion: In this study, we found prospective ctDNA testing to be a practical and feasible approach that can guide clinical trial enrolment and patient management in mBC.

Conflict of interest statement

I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: M.A.D. has been a member of advisory boards for CTX CRC, Storm Therapeutics, Celgene, Cambridge Epigenetix, and GSK. S. L. receives research funding to her institution from Novartis, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Merk, Roche-Genentech, Puma Biotechnology, Pfizer, and Eli Lilly. She has acted as a consultant (not compensated) to Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, Novartis, BMS, Merck, AstraZeneca, and Roche-Genentech. She has acted as a consultant (paid to her institution) to Aduro Biotech. S.Q.W. has received travel support from BioRad. S-J. D. has received research funding to her institution from Roche-Genentech and CTX CRC. She has been a member of advisory boards for AstraZeneca.