The growing prevalence of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assays for minimal residual illness (MRD) detection in non–small cell lung most cancers (NSCLC) helps the position of liquid biopsy in informing customized adjuvant remedy methods and predicting affected person outcomes post-surgery, in keeping with David R. Gandara, MD.
Throughout a presentation on the twenty fifth Annual Worldwide Lung Most cancers Congress, Gandara highlighted the objective of utilizing ctDNA assays to detect MRD within the adjuvant NSCLC setting, ways in which ctDNA assays could be prognostic for remedy outcomes with normal adjuvant regimens, and future instructions for MRD detection utilizing ctDNA.1
Gandara is the chief medical officer of the Worldwide Society of Liquid Biopsy, co-director of the Heart for Experimental Therapeutics in Most cancers, and senior advisor to the director of the College of California Davis Complete Most cancers Heart in Sacramento. He’s additionally an adjunct medical professor of the Translational and Medical Analysis Program on the College of Hawaii Most cancers Heart in Honolulu.
Defining the Function of ctDNA in Precision Oncology
Gandara started his presentation by explaining the methods wherein ctDNA evaluation can individualize affected person care, each throughout oncology specialties, and in sufferers with early-stage NSCLC. He famous the existence of a number of potential sources for liquid biopsy in sufferers with most cancers, together with saliva, cerebrospinal fluid, pleural effusion, urine, bile, ascites, and supernatant from cytological preparations. Nevertheless, he emphasised the prevalence of next-generation sequencing–derived blood-based assays in oncology medical follow. ctDNA stays a standard blood-based biopsy analyte, though different parts of the blood, corresponding to extracellular vesicles, are additionally below investigation, he mentioned. Finally, ctDNA evaluation can determine gene level mutations, amplifications, deletions, and rearrangements, though an growing variety of assays are in a position to detect epigenetic modifications, in keeping with Gandara.
“This seems to be crucial within the screening and early detection house and likewise within the MRD house,” he emphasised.
Utilizing Liquid Biopsy to Analyze MRD Ranges Publish-Surgical procedure
For the needs of his presentation, Gandara restricted the definition of MRD evaluation to the post-surgery setting in sufferers with early-stage NSCLC. He then outlined the algorithm for MRD assay evaluation, noting the significance of accumulating a baseline blood pattern pre-surgery for a plasma-informed evaluation. He went on to clarify that roughly 8 weeks post-surgery, one other liquid biopsy is performed to tell therapeutic decision-making.
“The aim of an MRD assay just isn’t…concerning the findings and what occurs 5 years later,” Gandara emphasised. “The MRD assay objective is so you’ll be able to resolve what to do post-surgery.”
Throughout tumor varieties, together with bladder most cancers, breast most cancers, and colorectal most cancers, detection of MRD post-surgery confers a poor prognosis, Gandara mentioned. In NSCLC, a research of 255 samples from 40 sufferers who obtained curative-intent remedy for stage I to III lung most cancers demonstrated that sufferers with detectable ctDNA on the MRD landmark evaluation had considerably worse progression-free survival and total survival outcomes vs these with no detectable ctDNA (P < .001).2
“The query, after all, is: Can we use this in a predictive vogue that’s useful to the [treatment] of that affected person?” Gandara requested.1
Extrapolating the Predictive and Prognostic Capabilities of Plasma ctDNA MRD Evaluation
Gandara then introduced the viewers’s consideration to MRD findings from 2 landmark part 3 adjuvant NSCLC trials: IMpower010 (NCT02486718) and ADAURA (NCT02511106). The aim of evaluating MRD in these trials was to find out whether or not plasma ctDNA MRD detection was solely prognostic, or whether or not it might be predictive of improved medical outcomes with particular therapeutic interventions, he famous.
Within the major evaluation of IMpower010, remedy with adjuvant atezolizumab (Tecentriq) improved disease-free survival (DFS) vs finest supportive care (BSC) in sufferers with resected stage II to IIIA NSCLC with PD-L1 expression on 1% or extra of tumor cells (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50-0.88; P = .0039).3 Nevertheless, amongst sufferers with PD-L1 expression on not less than 1% of tumor cells and detectable MRD, the median DFS was 21.8 months in sufferers who obtained atezolizumab (n = 36) vs 7.2 months in those that obtained BSC (n = 37; HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.31-0.93]).4 In distinction, amongst sufferers with PD-L1 expression on not less than 1% of tumor cells and undetectable MRD, the median DFS was not reached (NR) in sufferers who obtained atezolizumab (n = 124) vs 37.3 months in those that obtained BSC (n = 98; HR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.36-0.90]).
“In each circumstances, the information favored the group that acquired atezolizumab; that’s good,” Gandara mentioned.1 “The unhealthy [news] is which you could see fairly steady relapse in each…teams of sufferers. To me, this assay on this medical setting wouldn’t help you prospectively resolve who to escalate, who to de-escalate, and it doesn’t look from these curves that it could inform us who’s cured.”
Concerning ADAURA, within the major evaluation, the median DFS with adjuvant osimertinib (Tagrisso) was NR (95% CI, 38.8 months-not calculable) vs 19.6 months (95% CI, 16.6-24.5) with placebo (HR, 0.17; 99.06% CI, 0.11-0.26; P < .001) in sufferers with resected, EGFR-mutated stage II to IIIA NSCLC.5 Amongst 5 sufferers within the osimertinib arm with detectable MRD at baseline post-surgery, 4 cleared MRD at 5 years.6 Not one of the 13 sufferers within the placebo arm with detectable baseline MRD post-surgery cleared MRD at 5 years. MRD was ultimately detected in 13% of evaluable sufferers from the osimertinib arm (n = 112) and 49% of these from the placebo arm (n = 108).
“Over time…[patients] with optimistic MRD had a worse prognosis; that’s precisely what we might count on,” Gandara elucidated.1 “The MRD assays have been informative, however these long-term observations don’t enable us to make use of this assay on this medical setting to find out whether or not to escalate or de-escalate [therapy approximately 8 to 12 weeks after surgery].”
Gandara additionally shared information from the part 3 CheckMate 816 trial (NCT02998528). This trial confirmed that sufferers with stage IB to IIIA resectable NSCLC who obtained neoadjuvant nivolumab (Opdivo) plus chemotherapy and achieved ctDNA clearance (n = 24) had a median event-free survival (EFS) that was NR (95% CI, 16.8-NR) vs 18.9 months (95% CI, 8.3-NR) in those that obtained the mix however didn’t obtain ctDNA clearance (n = 19; HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.20-1.82]).7 Amongst sufferers who obtained chemotherapy alone, those that achieved ctDNA clearance (n = 15) had a median EFS that was NR (95% CI, 19.6-NR) vs 16.8 months (95% CI, 8.3-NR) in those that didn’t obtain ctDNA clearance (n = 28; HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.20-2.01]). The pathologic full response (pCR) charges amongst sufferers with ctDNA clearance have been 46% and 13% within the nivolumab and chemotherapy alone arms, respectively. The pCR charges amongst sufferers with out ctDNA clearance have been 0% and 4% in these respective arms.
“My opinion right here is that that is nonetheless analysis, and that the practising oncologist wouldn’t use this info to make therapeutic choices,” Gandara emphasised.1
Peering Into the Way forward for MRD-Associated Medical Trials
The longer term stays shiny for conducting potential medical trials that consider MRD throughout tumor varieties, Gandara defined. As an illustration, research may examine the escalation or de-escalation of adjuvant or consolidation remedy based mostly on MRD or the omission of standard-of-care remedy based mostly on MRD, he mentioned. Nevertheless, all these potential areas of future analysis necessitate the event of infallible ctDNA assays, he concluded.
Disclosures: Dr Gandara reviews institutional analysis grants from Amgen, Astex, and Genentech; institutional guide roles with Adagene, AstraZeneca, IO Biotech, Guardant Well being, and Oncocyte; and advisory board participation with Roche/Genentech, Merck, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Amgen.
References
- Gandara DR. Purposes for ctDNA in early-stage lung most cancers. Offered at: twenty fifth Annual Worldwide Lung Most cancers Congress; July 25-27, 2024; Huntington Seaside, CA.
- Chaudhuri AA, Chabon JJ, Lovejoy AF, et al. Early detection of molecular residual illness in localized lung most cancers by circulating tumor DNA profiling. Most cancers Discov. 2017;7(12):1394-1403. doi:10.1158/2159-8290.CD-17-0716
- Felip E, Altorki N, Zhou C, et al. Adjuvant atezolizumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in resected stage IB-IIIA non-small-cell lung most cancers (IMpower010): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, part 3 trial. Lancet. 2021;398(10308):1344-1357. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02098-5
- Zhou C, Das Thakur M, Srivastava MK, et al. IMpower010: biomarkers of disease-free survival (DFS) in a part III research of atezolizumab (atezo) vs finest supportive care (BSC) after adjuvant chemotherapy in stage IB-IIIA NSCLC. Ann Oncol. 2021;32(suppl 7):S1374. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2021.10.018
- Wu YL, Tsuboi M, He J, et al. Osimertinib in resected EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung most cancers. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(18):1711-1723. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2027071
- John T, Grohe C, Goldman JW, et al. Molecular residual illness (MRD) evaluation from the ADAURA trial of adjuvant (adj) osimertinib in sufferers (pts) with resected EGFR-mutated (EGFRm) stage IB-IIIA non-small cell lung most cancers (NSCLC). J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(suppl 16):8005. doi:10.1200/JCO.2024.42.16_suppl.8005
- Forde PM, Spicer J, Lu S, et al. Neoadjuvant nivolumab plus chemotherapy in resectable lung most cancers. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(21):1973-1985. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2202170