4.7 Article

Tumor mutational burden assessment in non-small-cell lung cancer samples: results from the TMB2 harmonization project comparing three NGS panels

Journal

JOURNAL FOR IMMUNOTHERAPY OF CANCER
Volume 9, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2020-001904

Keywords

immunotherapy; lung neoplasms; tumor biomarkers; translational medical research; B7-H1 antigen

Funding

  1. Bristol Myers Squibb [OT123-367]
  2. Fondos FEDER
  3. Plan Estatal de I+D+I 2008-2011 [PI11/02866]
  4. Plan Estatal de I+D+I 2013-2016 [PI17/00778, PI17-01001, PI14-01176]
  5. iLUNG Program from Comunidad de Madrid [B2017/BMD-3884]
  6. Spanish Network of Biomedical Research in Cancer (CIBERONC) [CB16/12/00442]
  7. Fundacion CRIS contra el cancer (Unidad Integral CRIS de Inmuno-oncologia)
  8. Marie Sklodowska-Curie Post-doctoral Research Fellowship - European Respiratory Society under the RESPIRE3 (REspiratory Science Promoted by International Research Exchanges 3) program from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program u [713 406]
  9. Spanish Ministry of Education [FPU16/00382]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tumor mutational burden (TMB) is a proposed predictive biomarker for immunotherapy in solid tumors. Two next generation sequencing panels, TSO500 and OTML, showed strong agreement with a reference assay FO in NSCLC samples. TSO500 exhibited higher inter-laboratory reproducibility and adjusted cut-off values ensured a sensitivity >88%.
Background Tumor mutational burden (TMB) is a recently proposed predictive biomarker for immunotherapy in solid tumors, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Available assays for TMB determination differ in horizontal coverage, gene content and algorithms, leading to discrepancies in results, impacting patient selection. A harmonization study of TMB assessment with available assays in a cohort of patients with NSCLC is urgently needed. Methods We evaluated the TMB assessment obtained with two marketed next generation sequencing panels: TruSight Oncology 500 (TSO500) and Oncomine Tumor Mutation Load (OTML) versus a reference assay (Foundation One, FO) in 96 NSCLC samples. Additionally, we studied the level of agreement among the three methods with respect to PD-L1 expression in tumors, checked the level of different immune infiltrates versus TMB, and performed an inter-laboratory reproducibility study. Finally, adjusted cut-off values were determined. Results Both panels showed strong agreement with FO, with concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) of 0.933 (95% CI 0.908 to 0.959) for TSO500 and 0.881 (95% CI 0.840 to 0.922) for OTML. The corresponding CCCs were 0.951 (TSO500-FO) and 0.919 (OTML-FO) in tumors with <1% of cells expressing PD-L1 (PD-L1=55), and 0.861 (TSO500-FO) and 0.722 (OTML-FO) in tumors with PD-L1 >= 1% (N=41). Inter-laboratory reproducibility analyses showed higher reproducibility with TSO500. No significant differences were found in terms of immune infiltration versus TMB. Adjusted cut-off values corresponding to 10 muts/Mb with FO needed to be lowered to 7.847 muts/Mb (TSO500) and 8.380 muts/Mb (OTML) to ensure a sensitivity >88%. With these cut-offs, the positive predictive value was 78.57% (95% CI 67.82 to 89.32) and the negative predictive value was 87.50% (95% CI 77.25 to 97.75) for TSO500, while for OTML they were 73.33% (95% CI 62.14 to 84.52) and 86.11% (95% CI 74.81 to 97.41), respectively. Conclusions Both panels exhibited robust analytical performances for TMB assessment, with stronger concordances in patients with negative PD-L1 expression. TSO500 showed a higher inter-laboratory reproducibility. The cut-offs for each assay were lowered to optimal overlap with FO.

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