Tumor Genomic Profiling Reports from Different Vendors: A Comparisonwith Respect to Clinical Action Ability of the Provided Data
2016
Background: Next generation sequencing (NGS) of selected genes is an expanding field of solid tumor
characterization. Multiple vendors offer this service, but panel design and policies on interpretive reporting are
variable. This study compared reports from selected vendors, with emphasis on clinical Action ability reporting.
Methodology: DNA aliquots of five breast and five colorectal cancers were sent to providers offering the
following solid tumor NGS tests: Foundation oneTM, StrandAdvantageTM, CANCP, and GeneTrailsTM. The
interpretive reports were compared for the reporting of clinically actionable variants.
Results: Detection of mutants was mostly consistent (17 of 21, 81% concordant), while detection of copy number
variants was highly discordant (6 of 23, 26.1% concordant). Discordance of copy number variation appeared to be
primarily due to difference in analytical sensitivity. Actionable variants with approved targeted therapies for the same
tumor type were detected and interpreted uniformly by all tests. Reporting of variants with other action ability was
variable, largely due to difference in panel design and analytical sensitivity, and, to a lesser degree, to different
annotation policies. Actionable variant reporting by Foundation one provided better coverage of clinical trials for
targeted therapies while strand advantage uniquely covered chemotherapeutic response modulation. GeneTrails provided moderate coverage of clinical trials despite its small gene panel size. Utility of rearrangement targets in
Foundation one and StrandAdvantage panel was not evident, due to the tumor type assessed.
Conclusion: All enrolled tests reported actionable variants with FDA-approved target therapy for the specific
tumor type with consistent clinical interpretations. In contrast, reporting of variants with other Action ability was
heavily impacted by panel design, reporting policy, and annotation policy. Larger studies will be needed to quantify
the qualitative differences outlined above and evaluate the benefit to the patient in order to improve the practice of
precision medicine in the future.
Keywords:
- Correction
- Source
- Cite
- Save
- Machine Reading By IdeaReader
47
References
0
Citations
NaN
KQI