Druggable genomic landscapes of high-grade gliomas
Paola Ghanem,Maria Fatteh,David Olayinka Kamson,Archana Balan,Michael Chang,Jessica Tao,Jaishri Blakeley,Johns Hopkins Molecular Tumor Board Investigators,Jenna Canzoniero,Stuart A Grossman,Kristen Marrone,Karisa C Schreck,Valsamo Anagnostou,Christine Pratilas,Taxiarchis Botsis,Rena Xian,Chris Gocke,Tseh Ming-Lin,Eitan Halper-Stromberg,Ying Zou,Kent Hardart,Jonathan Spiker,Kory Kreimeyer,Ting He,Katie Fiallos,Dana Petry,Kala Visvanathan,Antonio Wolff,Cesar Santa-Maria,Raquel Nunez,Christian Meyer,John Laterra,Vered Stearns,Karen Smith,Deborah Armstrong,Rachel Karchin,Katerina Karaindrou,Lily Zandi,Marta Majcherska,Faith Too,Monique Makell,Jennifer Lehman,Timsy Wanchoo,Jaime Wehr,Michael Conroy,Selina Shiqing Teh
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1254955
2023-12-08
Abstract:Background: Despite the putatively targetable genomic landscape of high-grade gliomas, the long-term survival benefit of genomically-tailored targeted therapies remains discouraging. Methods: Using glioblastoma (GBM) as a representative example of high-grade gliomas, we evaluated the clonal architecture and distribution of hotspot mutations in 388 GBMs from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Mutations were matched with 54 targeted therapies, followed by a comprehensive evaluation of drug biochemical properties in reference to the drug's clinical efficacy in high-grade gliomas. We then assessed clinical outcomes of a cohort of patients with high-grade gliomas with targetable mutations reviewed at the Johns Hopkins Molecular Tumor Board (JH MTB; n = 50). Results: Among 1,156 sequence alterations evaluated, 28.6% represented hotspots. While the frequency of hotspot mutations in GBM was comparable to cancer types with actionable hotspot alterations, GBMs harbored a higher fraction of subclonal mutations that affected hotspots (7.0%), compared to breast cancer (4.9%), lung cancer (4.4%), and melanoma (1.4%). In investigating the biochemical features of targeted therapies paired with recurring alterations, we identified a trend toward higher lipid solubility and lower IC50 in GBM cell lines among drugs with clinical efficacy. The drugs' half-life, molecular weight, surface area and binding to efflux transporters were not associated with clinical efficacy. Among the JH MTB cohort of patients with IDH1 wild-type high-grade gliomas who received targeted therapies, trametinib monotherapy or in combination with dabrafenib conferred radiographic partial response in 75% of patients harboring BRAF or NF1 actionable mutations. Cabozantinib conferred radiographic partial response in two patients harboring a MET and a PDGFRA/KDR amplification. Patients with IDH1 wild-type gliomas that harbored actionable alterations who received genotype-matched targeted therapy had longer progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS; 7.37 and 14.72 respectively) than patients whose actionable alterations were not targeted (2.83 and 4.2 months respectively). Conclusion: While multiple host, tumor and drug-related features may limit the delivery and efficacy of targeted therapies for patients with high-grade gliomas, genotype-matched targeted therapies confer favorable clinical outcomes. Further studies are needed to generate more data on the impact of biochemical features of targeted therapies on their clinical efficacy for high-grade gliomas.