Cancers of Unknown Primary Origin: Real-World Clinical Outcomes and Genomic Analysis at the European Institute of Oncology.

cancer of unknown primary genomic profiling immunotherapy treatment options

Journal

The oncologist
ISSN: 1549-490X
Titre abrégé: Oncologist
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9607837

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
23 Mar 2024
Historique:
received: 19 12 2023
accepted: 14 02 2024
medline: 23 3 2024
pubmed: 23 3 2024
entrez: 23 3 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Cancer of unknown primary origin (CUP) poses a significant challenge due to poor clinical outcomes and limited treatment options. As such, further definition of clinicopathological factors and genomic profile to better adapt treatment strategies is required. Medical records were interrogated to retrospectively include CUP with available clinical and genomics data at the European Institute of Oncology. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) included targeted panels. Statistical analyses were conducted with R Software 4.2.2. A total of 44 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 39.46 months (interquartile range [IQR] 35.98-47.41 months), median PFS (mPFS) to first-line regimen was 3.98 months (95% CI 3.22-5.98), with a clinical benefit rate of 26% (95% CI 14%-49%), and disease control rate (DCR) limited to 48.28%. Most patients (26 of 31, 83.87%) received platinum-doublet chemotherapy, with no statistically significant difference between first-line treatment regimens. Median OS (mOS) was 18.8 months (95% CI 12.3-39.9), with a 12-month OS rate of 66% (95% CI 50%-85%). All patients received comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). For 11 patients, NGS was unsuccessful due to low sample quantity and/or quality. For the remaining, TP53 (n = 16, 48%) and KRAS (n = 10, 30%) represented the most altered (alt) genes. No microsatellite instability was observed (0 of 28), while 6 of 28 (21.43%) tumors carried high TMB (≥10 mutation per megabase). Eight of 33 tumors (24.2%) displayed at least one actionable alteration with potential clinical benefit according to ESCAT. Only 2 of them received targeted therapy matched to genomic alterations, with a combined mPFS of 2.63 months (95% CI 1.84-not evaluable) as third-line regimens. Six patients received anti-PD1/PD-L1 therapy, showing a meaningful mPFS of 13 months (95% CI 2.04-not evaluable). CUP exhibits poor prognosis with limited benefits from standard treatment regimens. A significant proportion of CUPs carry actionable alterations, underscoring the importance of genomic profiling to gather additional treatment opportunities. In addition, immunotherapy might represent a valuable treatment option for a subset of CUP. Finally, accurate definition of sequencing methods and platforms is crucial to overcome NGS failures.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Cancer of unknown primary origin (CUP) poses a significant challenge due to poor clinical outcomes and limited treatment options. As such, further definition of clinicopathological factors and genomic profile to better adapt treatment strategies is required.
METHODS METHODS
Medical records were interrogated to retrospectively include CUP with available clinical and genomics data at the European Institute of Oncology. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) included targeted panels. Statistical analyses were conducted with R Software 4.2.2.
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 44 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 39.46 months (interquartile range [IQR] 35.98-47.41 months), median PFS (mPFS) to first-line regimen was 3.98 months (95% CI 3.22-5.98), with a clinical benefit rate of 26% (95% CI 14%-49%), and disease control rate (DCR) limited to 48.28%. Most patients (26 of 31, 83.87%) received platinum-doublet chemotherapy, with no statistically significant difference between first-line treatment regimens. Median OS (mOS) was 18.8 months (95% CI 12.3-39.9), with a 12-month OS rate of 66% (95% CI 50%-85%). All patients received comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP). For 11 patients, NGS was unsuccessful due to low sample quantity and/or quality. For the remaining, TP53 (n = 16, 48%) and KRAS (n = 10, 30%) represented the most altered (alt) genes. No microsatellite instability was observed (0 of 28), while 6 of 28 (21.43%) tumors carried high TMB (≥10 mutation per megabase). Eight of 33 tumors (24.2%) displayed at least one actionable alteration with potential clinical benefit according to ESCAT. Only 2 of them received targeted therapy matched to genomic alterations, with a combined mPFS of 2.63 months (95% CI 1.84-not evaluable) as third-line regimens. Six patients received anti-PD1/PD-L1 therapy, showing a meaningful mPFS of 13 months (95% CI 2.04-not evaluable).
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
CUP exhibits poor prognosis with limited benefits from standard treatment regimens. A significant proportion of CUPs carry actionable alterations, underscoring the importance of genomic profiling to gather additional treatment opportunities. In addition, immunotherapy might represent a valuable treatment option for a subset of CUP. Finally, accurate definition of sequencing methods and platforms is crucial to overcome NGS failures.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38520742
pii: 7634231
doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyae038
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.

Auteurs

Luca Boscolo Bielo (L)

Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Carmen Belli (C)

Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Edoardo Crimini (E)

Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Matteo Repetto (M)

Early Drug Development Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.

Liliana Ascione (L)

Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Gloria Pellizzari (G)

Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Celeste Santoro (C)

Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Valeria Fuorivia (V)

Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Massimo Barberis (M)

Division of Pathology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Nicola Fusco (N)

Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Division of Pathology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Elena Guerini Rocco (EG)

Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Division of Pathology, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Giuseppe Curigliano (G)

Division of New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies, European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Classifications MeSH