Evaluation of ctDNA alterations in lethal mCRPC.
Abstract
245 Background: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can be used as a prognostic biomarker in mCRPC patients, with changes in ctDNA providing insight into patient survival. In this study, we evaluate the ctDNA landscape of patients with mCRPC prior to their death. Methods: A retrospective clinical data review, 2015-2024, was conducted at Tulane Cancer Center to identify mCRPC patients who underwent ctDNA testing prior to death. All ctDNA data were obtained through a multi-gene cancer panel via the Guardant 360 assay (70-83 genes). Lethal mCRPC was defined as patients who underwent ctDNA testing ≤3 months prior to death. A matched control group (CTRL) was defined as mCRPC patients with ctDNA collection ≥2 years prior to death or most recent follow-up. Statistical analyses were performed using Pearson Chi-Square Test or Fisher Exact Test whenever appropriate. Furthermore, survival analysis was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: There were 70 patients in lethal mCRPC group and 157 patients in CTRL group. Compared to the CTRL group, in lethal mCRPC, somatic mutations and/or amplifications in BRAF(OR=2.1549, 95% C.I. [1.1136,4.1523], p=0.0298), CCND2 (OR=3.7925, 95% C.I.[1.1937,13.3380], p=0.03326), MYC (OR=2.6332, 95%C.I. [1.4158, 4.9120], p=0.0029), PDGFRA (OR=2.5235, 95% C.I. [1.1438, 5.5793], p=0.0291), and PIK3CA (OR=2.0328, 95% C.I. [1.1098, 3.7166], p=0.02846) were significantly more frequent. Additionally, lethal mCRPC patients were more likely to have missense (OR=4.3194, 95% C.I. [1.443456,19.3338], p=0.01687) and nonsense (OR=1.9364, 95% C.I. [1.06091,3.5250], p=0.04112) mutations at the end-of-life. Patients with a higher allelic fraction (≥0.6%) of TP53 alterations had a shorter median survival (p-value= 0.034). Conclusions: ctDNA mutations and/or amplifications in BRAF, CCND2, MYC, PDGFRA, and PIK3CA were more frequently detected in lethal mCRPC compared to matched CTRLs. Additionally, mCRPC patients with a lethal phenotype were more likely to have missense and nonsense mutations compared to the CTRL group. CtDNA assessment of copy number alterations was limited to amplifications only; additionally, with this assay, distinguishing between gene level and large scale chromosomal amplification is not assessable. Though this study is limited to a single-institution with retrospective analyses of clinical testing, understanding the somatic landscape of lethal mCRPC is critical for development of new biomarkers, strategies and ultimately druggable targets.
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (13)
Minqi Huang
GaN Optoelectronic Integration International Cooperation Joint Laboratory of Jiangsu Province, Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications , Nanjing 210003,
Nicholas Habibian
Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA
Tivoli Nguyen
Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA
Akerele Opeoluwa
Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA
Olivia Pocha
Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA
Priya Bhandari
Tulane University, New Orleans, LA
Courtney Johnson
Alexandra Lieberman
Tulane University, New Orleans, LA
Jennifer Schwartz
1Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medicine, Indianapolis, United States
Jodi Lyn Layton
Tulane University, New Orleans, LA
Brian E. Lewis
Tulane University, New Orleans, LA
Alton Oliver Sartor
LCMC Health, New Orleans, LA
Elisa Marie Ledet
Tulane University, New Orleans, LA