Abstract:Molecularly directed targeted therapies have become a key component of caring for patients with metastatic solid tumors, both alongside and instead of conventional chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Treatment options for patients with advanced cancer have expanded dramatically over the past decade, with the development of a wide variety of targeted therapies for oncogene-addicted tumors and the demonstration of efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors for many cancer types. Cell-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is shed by tumor cells into the systemic circulation and, thanks to advancements in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, affords the opportunity to noninvasively detect cancer-specific somatic variants. The use of ctDNA-based molecular genotyping for tumor profiling and identification of patients eligible for targeted therapies has been integrated into clinical practice for a variety of tumor types. The prime example of this is in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), where identifying actionable variants via genomic profiling is essential to determining the appropriate standard of care for patients. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends that all patients with metastatic NSCLC undergo molecular genotyping, and the European Society for Medical Oncology mandates testing for oncogenic drivers for which there are approved drugs. 1 ,2 Earlier approaches supported by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer prioritized tissue-based NGS at time of diagnosis, with ctDNA-based molecular genotyping relegated to the identification of resistance variants after progression on targeted therapy. 3 However, practical considerations, including faster resulting time, lower potential for sample inadequacy, and elimination of the need for invasive and, in some situations, prohibitively hazardous tissue sampling have led to the increased utilization of ctDNA molecular genotyping at diagnosis. 2 ,4 -6 Iams et al 6 report on a large, multi-institutional cohort evaluating the utility of a concurrent ctDNA-based and tissue-based molecular genotyping approach in a patient population with various metastatic cancers. The cohort consisted of 3209 patients with stage IV cancer: 1302 (41%) with NSCLC, 923 (29%) with colorectal cancer, 660 (20%) with breast cancer, and 324 (10%) with prostate cancer. Among 1448 patients found to have at least 1 actionable variant on tissue-based or ctDNA-based molecular genotyping, 135 (9.3%) had clinically actionable variants identified only in ctDNA testing. 6 This study has important implications and helps to solidify the added value of ctDNA-based molecular genotyping in identifying targetable variants that may not be recognized in tissue-only assessment. This finding highlights the utility of ctDNA-based genotyping in cases of intratumoral heterogeneity, as well as heterogeneity between a primary lesion and metastatic sites and can inform therapy selection. This study raises important practical questions. How should these results inform clinical practice? Should we use concurrent molecular genotyping across all solid tumors, and, if so, should testing be performed upon initial diagnosis, or at the time of progression? At present, the most substantial data supporting the use of concurrent ctDNA-based molecular genotyping to uncover actionable targets lies in NSCLC. Current NSCLC guidelines support the use of concurrent testing at time of initial diagnosis to decrease turnaround time and increase detection of targetable variants. 2 In addition, both the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the European Society for Medical Oncology support the use of ctDNA testing at the time of diagnosis in specific clinical scenarios, including if patients are not fit to undergo invasive tissue sampling or when samples are inadequate for molecular analysis. Guidelines also support ctDNA molecular genotyping if initial tissue-based testing does not completely assess all recommended biomarkers due to tissue quantity or available testing methods. However, this recommendation includes the caveat that a repeat tissue-based analysis may be required if an oncogenic driver is not found. 1 ,2 Although the results presented by Iams et al 6 validate previously published findings in patients with metastatic NSCLC and support the use of concurrent ctDNA molecular genotyping in this population, open questions remain about how to translate these findings to other solid tumor types. In the subgroup of patients with breast cancer, 20.2% of actionable variants were uniquely identified by ctDNA-based molecular genotyping, with the majority consisting of ESR1 variants for which there was less than 50% tissue and ctDNA profiling based concordance. 6 On the basis of these results, for patients with breast -Abstract Truncated-

Triple-negative breast cancer, which lacks the expression of hormone receptors and HER2, has a worse prognosis. Massive parallel sequencing is capable of reliably breaking down the intra-tumor and inter-tumor heterogeneity

Clinical Significance of Circulating Tumor DNA in Neoadjuvant-Treated HER2-negative Luminal B Breast Cancer.

Abstract P2-02-06: Biomarker analysis by next generation circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) sequencing in patients with advanced breast cancer

TP53 and/or BRCA1 Mutations Based on CtDNA Analysis as Prognostic Biomarkers for Primary Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Parallel Analyses of Somatic Mutations in Plasma Circulating Tumor DNA (ctDNA) and Matched Tumor Tissues in Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Whole Genome Sequencing of Single-Circulating Tumor Cell Ameliorates Unraveling Breast Cancer Heterogeneity

Abstract 2405: Harnessing liquid biopsy and genetic barcoding in evaluating diversity within triple-negative breast cancer

Abstract 2420: Evaluating circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) as a prognostic biomarker utilizing a tissue-free epigenomic assay in early-stage triple negative breast cancer (TNBC)

Circulating tumour mutation detection in triple-negative breast cancer as an adjunct to tissue response assessment

Abstract PR007: Comprehensive ctDNA profiling reveals potential metastatic genomic signatures in treatment-naive early-stage breast cancer patients

Concurrent ctDNA and Tissue Genotyping

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to evaluate stage III and stage IV metastatic breast cancer (MBC), describe tumor heterogeneity, and outcome.

Utility of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to inform treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Circulating tumor DNA in cancer diagnosis, monitoring, and prognosis

Landscape of circulating tumour DNA in metastatic breast cancer

Abstract 7507: Capturing live single circulating tumor cells platform for comprehensive genomic profiling with paired ctDNA in breast cancer patients

Exploring Circulating Tumor DNA (CtDNA) and Its Role in Early Detection of Cancer: A Systematic Review

Clinical applications of next‐generation sequencing‐based ctDNA analyses in breast cancer: defining treatment targets and dynamic changes during disease progression

Use of ctDNA in early breast cancer: analytical validity and clinical potential

The Use of Serial Circulating Tumor DNA to Detect Resistance Alterations in Progressive Metastatic Breast Cancer

Abstract 3691: Molecular profiling using next generation sequencing with high purity enrichment of circulating tumor cells