Abstract A004: Clinical test design affects tumor tissue and ctDNA FGFR gene status in metastatic urothelial cancer: a prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) gene alterations are common in urothelial cancer (UC) and targetable with erdafitinib. The co-approved companion diagnostic is an amplicon-based tumor tissue test that detects a limited number of recurrent FGFR alterations. However, FGFR status may change during disease progression, and rare FGFR alterations not typically covered by existing tests may be of clinical importance. Therefore, in a prospective pan-Canadian study (NCT06129084), we compared standard archival tissue testing to broad targeted sequencing of cell-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to detect FGFR alterations in UC. Eligible patients had progressing metastatic UC and were undergoing tissue FGFR testing. Blood was drawn at study enrollment and plasma cell-free DNA and matched white blood cell DNA underwent deep-targeted sequencing with a hybridization capture panel including the introns and exons of FGFR1-4 and the common breakpoint region of TACC3. Archival tissue selection and testing was initiated by the treating physician and typically used the Oncomine Focus assay. 210 patients were enrolled across 12 sites, and 140 patients have tissue and ctDNA results available for concordance assessment. 43/140 (31%) of cell-free DNA samples had low tumor fraction (<0.5%) and were considered inconclusive. For the remaining 97 same-patient tissue and ctDNA pairs, FGFR status was identical in 88 (91%). In 7 of 9 discordant cases, the tissue was negative, but ctDNA was positive for FGFR alterations: these were enriched for FGFR3-TACC3 fusions (4/7). Two discordant fusions had canonical breakpoints that can be identified by current amplicon-based companion diagnostics, indicating potential spatiotemporal heterogeneity in somatic FGFR status. The other two discordant (ctDNA-only) fusions had non-canonical breakpoints that are not amenable to detection by current amplicon-based companion diagnostics. In two mutation discordant cases (S249C positive in ctDNA only), lack of signal in tumor tissue could be explained by the presence of additional FGFR3 variants within 25bp of S249 and in cis - disrupting primer binding sites. There were only two cases of tissue-only FGFR alterations among the 97 evaluable pairs (FGFR3-TACC3 fusion, S249C). ctDNA testing of metastatic UC with a broad capture-based approach covering all exons and introns of FGFR genes can identify additional alterations not detected with current amplicon-based companion diagnostics applied to archival tissue. Our results support ctDNA testing as a valuable adjunct to tissue testing, but not as a replacement due to the high frequency of inconclusive ctDNA results, secondary to tumor fraction below the threshold. Assay design, including target enrichment technique, is a significant source of variability in tissue and ctDNA FGFR status and should be carefully considered in future clinical biomarker testing strategies. Citation Format: David C. Müller, Gillian Vandekerkhove, Andrew J. Murtha, Jack V.W. Bacon, Carlos Vasquez-Rios, Maria Stephenson, Kimia Rostin, Elena Schönlau, Connor Wells, Sunil Parimi, Krista Noonan, Naveen S. Basappa, Jenny J. Ko, Daygen Finch, Nimira Alimohamed, Tarek A. Bismar, Gang Wang, Andreas Papadakis, Lucia Nappi, Matti Annala, Cecily Q. Bernales, Alan Spatz, Kim N. Chi, Alexander W. Wyatt, Bernhard J. Eigl. Clinical test design affects tumor tissue and ctDNA FGFR gene status in metastatic urothelial cancer: a prospective study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Bladder Cancer: Transforming the Field; 2024 May 17-20; Charlotte, NC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2024;30(10_Suppl):Abstract nr A004.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".