4.7 Article

Early assessment of KRAS mutation in cfDNA correlates with risk of progression and death in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 123, Issue 1, Pages 81-91

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-0833-7

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. IOV intramural research grant 2017 SINERGIA
  2. Universita degli Studi di Padova, Padova, Italy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Liquid biopsy has the potential to monitor biological effects of treatment. KRAS represents the most commonly mutated oncogene in Caucasian non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of this study was to explore association of dynamic plasma KRAS genotyping with outcome in advanced NSCLC patients. Methods Advanced NSCLC patients were prospectively enrolled. Plasma samples were collected at baseline (T1), after 3 or 4 weeks, according to treatment schedule (T2) and at first radiological restaging (T3). Patients carrying KRAS mutation in tissue were analysed in plasma with droplet digital PCR. Semi-quantitative index of fractional abundance of mutated allele (MAFA) was used. Results KRAS-mutated cohort included 58 patients, and overall 73 treatments (N = 39 chemotherapy and N = 34 immune checkpoint inhibitors) were followed with longitudinal liquid biopsy. Sensitivity of KRAS detection in plasma at baseline was 48.3% (95% confidence interval (CI): 35.0-61.8). KRAS mutation at T2 was associated with increased probability of experiencing progressive disease as best radiological response (adjusted odds ratio: 7.3; 95% CI: 2.1-25.0, p = 0.0016). Increased MAFA (T1-T2) predicted shorter progression-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 2.1; 95% CI: 1.2-3.8, p = 0.0142) and overall survival (adjusted HR: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.2-8.4, p = 0.0168). Conclusions Longitudinal analysis of plasma KRAS mutations correlated with outcome: its early assessment during treatment has great potentialities for monitoring treatment outcome in NSCLC patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available