Clinical reliability of genomic data obtained from spinal metastatic tumor samples. Issue 7 (6th January 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Barzilai, Ori; Martin, Axel; Reiner, Anne S; Laufer, Ilya; Schmitt, Adam; Bilsky, Mark H
• Is Part Of: Neuro-oncology. Volume 24:Issue 7(2022)
• Page Start: 1090
• Page End: 1100
• Publication Date: 2022-01-06
• Subjects: genomic -- metastases -- next generation sequencing -- spine -- tumor; Brain Neoplasms -- Periodicals; Brain -- Tumors -- Periodicals; Brain -- Cancer -- Periodicals; Nervous system -- Cancer -- Periodicals; 616.99481
• DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noac009
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1522-8517

Abstract

Abstract: Background: The role of tumor genomic profiling is rapidly growing as it results in targeted, personalized, cancer therapy. Though routinely used in clinical practice, there are no data exploring the reliability of genomic data obtained from spine metastases samples often leading to multiple biopsies in clinical practice. This study compares the genomic tumor landscape between spinal metastases and the corresponding primary tumors as well as between spinal metastases and visceral metastases. Methods: Spine tumor samples, obtained for routine clinical care from 2013 to 2019, were analyzed using MSK-IMPACT, a next-generation sequencing assay. These samples were matched to primary or metastatic tumors from the corresponding patients. A concordance rate for genomic alterations was calculated for matching sample pairs within patients for the primary and spinal metastatic tumor samples as well as for the matching sample pairs within patients for the spinal and visceral metastases. For a more robust and clinically relevant estimate of concordance, subgroup analyses of previously established driver mutations specific to the main primary tumor histologies were performed. Results: Eighty-four patients contributed next-generation sequencing data from a spinal metastasis and at least one other site of disease: 54 from the primary tumor, 39 had genomic tumor data from another, nonspinal metastasis, 12 patients participated in both subsets. For the cohort of matched primary tumors and spinal metastases ( n = 54) comprised of mixed histologies, we found an average concordance rate of 96.97% for all genetic events, 97.17% for mutations, 100% for fusions, 89.81% for deletions, and 97.01% for amplifications across all matched samples. Notably, >25% of patients harbored at least one genetic variant between samples tested, though not specifically for known driver mutations. The average concordance rate of driver mutations was 96.99% for prostate cancer, 95.69% ( P = .0004513) for lung cancer, and 96.43% for breast cancer. An average concordance of 99.02% was calculated for all genetic events between spine metastases and non-spinal metastases ( n = 41) and, more specifically, a concordance rate of 98.91% was calculated between spine metastases and liver metastases ( n = 12) which was the largest represented group of nonspine metastases. Conclusion: Sequencing data performed on spine tumor samples demonstrate a high concordance rate for genetic alterations between the primary tumor and spinal metastasis as well as between spinal metastases and other, visceral metastases, particularly for driver mutations. Spine tumor samples may be reliably used for genomic-based decision making in cancer care, particularly for prostate, NSCLC, and breast cancer.