MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924379719 · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdz046

Ultra-deep next-generation sequencing of plasma cell-free DNA in patients with advanced lung cancers: results from the Actionable Genome Consortium

2019· article· en· W2924379719 on OpenAlexfundno aff
B.T. Li, Filip Jankú, B. Jung, C. Hou, Kiran Madwani, Ryan S. Alden, Pedram Razavi, Jorge S. Reis‐Filho, Ronglai Shen, James M. Isbell, Alexander W. Blocker, Nicholas Eattock, Sante Gnerre, Ravi Vijaya Satya, Hui Xu, Chen Zhao, Megan P. Hall, Yuebi Hu, Amy J. Sehnert, David N. Brown, Marc Ladanyi, Charles M. Rudin, Nathan Hunkapiller, Nora Feeney, Gordon B. Mills, Cloud P. Paweletz, Pasi A. Jänne, David B. Solit, Gregory J. Riely, Alexander M. Aravanis, Geoffrey R. Oxnard

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDaiichi-SankyoProspect Creek FoundationAgios PharmaceuticalsBayer FundBristol-Myers SquibbFUJIFILM Pharmaceuticals U.S.A.GenentechOvarian Cancer Research FundValeant Pharmaceuticals InternationalComprehensive Cancer Center, City of HopeTakeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A.Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Chicago Medical CenterMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterDaiichi Sankyo EuropeIlluminaNational Cancer InstituteAbbVieNovartisAstraZenecaNational Institutes of HealthBreast Cancer Research FoundationU.S. Department of DefenseBoehringer IngelheimPfizer
KeywordsKRASConcordanceGenotypingMedicineLung cancerDigital polymerase chain reactionLiquid biopsyCOLD-PCRGenotypeROS1Cell-free fetal DNACancer researchOncologyCancerInternal medicineMutationGenePoint mutationBiologyAdenocarcinomaGeneticsPolymerase chain reactionColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive genotyping using plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) has the potential to obviate the need for some invasive biopsies in cancer patients while also elucidating disease heterogeneity. We sought to develop an ultra-deep plasma next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay for patients with non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC) that could detect targetable oncogenic drivers and resistance mutations in patients where tissue biopsy failed to identify an actionable alteration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Plasma was prospectively collected from patients with advanced, progressive NSCLC. We carried out ultra-deep NGS using cfDNA extracted from plasma and matched white blood cells using a hybrid capture panel covering 37 lung cancer-related genes sequenced to 50 000× raw target coverage filtering somatic mutations attributable to clonal hematopoiesis. Clinical sensitivity and specificity for plasma detection of known oncogenic drivers were calculated and compared with tissue genotyping results. Orthogonal ddPCR validation was carried out in a subset of cases. RESULTS: In 127 assessable patients, plasma NGS detected driver mutations with variant allele fractions ranging from 0.14% to 52%. Plasma ddPCR for EGFR or KRAS mutations revealed findings nearly identical to those of plasma NGS in 21 of 22 patients, with high concordance of variant allele fraction (r = 0.98). Blinded to tissue genotype, plasma NGS sensitivity for de novo plasma detection of known oncogenic drivers was 75% (68/91). Specificity of plasma NGS in those who were driver-negative by tissue NGS was 100% (19/19). In 17 patients with tumor tissue deemed insufficient for genotyping, plasma NGS identified four KRAS mutations. In 23 EGFR mutant cases with acquired resistance to targeted therapy, plasma NGS detected potential resistance mechanisms, including EGFR T790M and C797S mutations and ERBB2 amplification. CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-deep plasma NGS with clonal hematopoiesis filtering resulted in de novo detection of targetable oncogenic drivers and resistance mechanisms in patients with NSCLC, including when tissue biopsy was inadequate for genotyping.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations157
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207