Reddi, Honey V.

Context.— Clinical laboratories are increasingly implementing pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing. Although PGx is similar to genetic testing for other indications, there are unique aspects that laboratories should consider. Objective.— To aid clinical laboratories that are implementing clinical PGx testing by describing characteristics of PGx test design and validation, as well as approaches to reporting. Resources that are useful for clinical laboratories performing PGx testing will be highlighted. Design.— The College of American Pathologists formed a workgroup composed of laboratorians with expertise in clinical PGx testing. The workgroup included representatives from the Association for Molecular Pathology and the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. The workgroup reviewed pertinent literature, as well as experience from proficiency testing and from members’ laboratories. Results.— The workgroup recommends that laboratories implementing PGx consider the following concepts: testing platform, test design (ie, selection of pharmacogenes and variants/alleles), use of reference materials during test development and as controls during clinical runs, star allele and standard nomenclature systems, translations from genotype to predicted phenotype, and considerations for result reporting including making medication recommendations. The workgroup provides considerations when using report vendors, emphasizing the clinical laboratory’s role and responsibility when implementing such reporting tools from vendors. Conclusions.— Clinical laboratories should be familiar with the fundamentals of PGx, ensure that PGx testing meets the applicable regulatory requirements for all aspects of the clinical laboratory testing process, and follow recommendations for standardization of nomenclature and reporting.

431 Background: Patients (pts) with localized PC do not routinely undergo comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) unless they develop recurrent or metastatic disease. KRAS is the most frequently mutated gene in PC, however, the impact of different KRAS mutations in localized PC has not been well characterized. We interrogated our genomic database to analyze the KRAS status in PC pts who presented with localized disease at diagnosis (Dx). Methods: We identified PC pts at our institution who underwent CGP utilizing the Foundation One CDx assay and had localized disease at initial Dx; these pts were categorized into resectable/borderline resectable PC (LPC) and locally advanced PC (LAPC). All pts with LPC and LAPC underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiation prior to possible surgery (all intended therapy - AIT). Tissue from metastatic sites was used for CGP in pts who developed recurrent/metastatic disease before or after completion of AIT. The primary tumor was used for CGP in pts who completed AIT without subsequent relapse or in the absence of adequate metastatic tissue. Effect of each gene on response and survival outcomes was estimated using proportional odds and Cox regression analysis, respectively, adjusting for stage. Results: 75 pts were identified, median age at Dx was 65 years, 59% were male, 65% had a primary tumor in the pancreatic head. 38 (86%) pts with LPC completed AIT compared to 21 (68%) pts with LAPC (p<0.001). KRAS mutation was detected in 95% (71/75) of pts– 94% (67/71) in codon 12 and 6% (4/71) in codon 61. The various KRAS mutations and their association with completion of AIT is summarized in the table. The likelihood of completing AIT did not differ based on KRAS wildtype (WT) vs mutated status (p =1.00), the mutated codon (codon 12 vs. codon 61; p =1.00) or the individual KRAS point mutations (p = 0.7); however, all patients with G12A (N= 1), G12C (N=1), G12L (N=1) and G12R (N=11) mutations completed AIT. KRAS status (mutated vs. WT) and the individual KRAS mutations were not associated with overall survival (OS) after adjusting for stage (p= 0.13 and p = 0.26 respectively). Median OS for patients with LPC and LAPC, was 39 months (mos) and 29 mos respectively. Conclusions: KRAS status and individual KRAS mutations did not have an impact on completing AIT or mOS; however, these findings need to be interpreted with caution due to the inherent biases involved in such analyses. The clinical significance and functional relevance of KRAS G12A, G12C, G12L and G12R mutations, though relatively rare, needs further characterization as well as mechanistic elucidation. [Table: see text]

4050 Background: Somatic mutations in KRAS, HRAS, NRAS (extended RAS) and BRAF have prognostic and predictive impact in pts with mCRC. We analyzed the prognostic impact of specific somatic mutations in extended RAS and BRAF. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of pts with mCRC at our institution who underwent comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) utilizing the Foundation One assay. DNA was extracted from clinical specimens and CGP was performed on hybrid-capture, adaptor ligation-based libraries for up to 315 genes plus 47 introns from 19 genes frequently rearranged in cancer. BRAF mutations were classified as class I, II and III according to accepted nomenclature. Fisher’s exact test and Kaplan Meier estimates were used for statistical analyses. This project was approved by the Medical College of Wisconsin Institutional Review Board. Results: 273 pts were identified - median age at diagnosis was 57, 48% were male. Somatic mutations in extended RAS were found in 138 (50%) pts, majority being mutations in KRAS (46%). Among pts with KRAS mutations, codon 12, 13, 61 and 146 mutations accounted for 73%, 11%, 4% and 6% respectively while KRAS G12C mutations accounted for 9%. BRAF mutations were detected in 22 (8%) pts - BRAF V600E and non–V600E mutations accounting for 4.4% and 3.6% respectively. Among pts with BRAF mutations, 17 (77%) were kinase domain mutations, 16 of which could be further classified as class I (12/16), II (1/16) and III (3/16). Median overall survival (mOS) for the entire cohort was 26.4 months (mo). KRAS mutated pts had a mOS of 25.8 mo; pts with KRAS G12C mutation had a mOS of 23 mo compared to 27.1 mo for pts with other KRAS mutations (p < 0.001).Pts with BRAF mutation had a mOS of 26.2 mo; pts with BRAF V600E mutation had a mOS of 14.1 mo compared to 30.6 mo for pts with BRAF non-V600E mutations (p = 0.1). Conclusions: The poor prognosis of pts with KRAS G12C and BRAF V600E mutations compared to pts with other KRAS and BRAF mutations merit further biologic characterization with functional assays. Individualized therapeutic strategies must be conceptualized for mCRC pts with specific RAS/BRAF mutations, considering their widely disparate prognosis and putative downstream signaling mechanisms. Dynamic molecular simulation to understand conformational changes in proteins associated with specific mutations will be pivotal to optimizing precision therapeutic strategies.

Context: Molecular markers hold the promise of improved diagnostic yield in thyroid fine-needle biopsy. The Afirma gene expression classifier (GEC), available commercially, reports a negative predictive value of 94% in the diagnosis of benign nodules after indeterminate cytology. However, there are currently no independent studies of the performance of this assay. Objective: The aim was to assess the performance of the Afirma GEC in an academic medical center. Design: Samples for the GEC were collected according to the manufacturer's recommended protocol from patients undergoing thyroid fine-needle aspiration. We requested GEC analysis on nodules reported cytologically as follicular neoplasm or atypia or follicular lesion of undetermined significance from patients willing to defer surgery. Patients: All patients undergoing thyroid fine-needle aspiration during the study period, whose cytology was reported as follicular neoplasm or atypia of undetermined significance/follicular lesion of undetermined significance, were offered access to the test and recruited to this study. Intervention: Patients whose GEC was “benign” were offered ultrasound follow-up in lieu of surgery. Those with a “suspicious” GEC were advised to undergo diagnostic lobectomy. Setting: The study was conducted at a large academic medical center. Main Outcome Measure: We measured the rate of benign and suspicious calls from the Afirma GEC and histological diagnosis after surgery. Results: A total of 72 nucleic acid samples were sent for GEC analysis. In 12 (17%) of these samples, there was insufficient mRNA, leaving 60 Afirma results for analysis. Of these, 16 (27%) were benign, whereas 44 (73%) were suspicious. The rate of confirmed malignancy in GEC-suspicious nodules was only 17%. Conclusion: The Afirma GEC demonstrates a lower than expected rate of benign reports in follicular or Hürthle cell neoplasm and a lower than anticipated malignancy rate within GEC-suspicious nodules. These data suggest that the positive predictive value of the GEC is lower than previously reported and call into question the performance of the test when applied in the context of specialized academic cytopathology.

Context: The BRAF V600E mutation (BRAF-MUT) confers an aggressive phenotype in papillary thyroid carcinoma, but unidentified additional genomic abnormalities may be required for full phenotypic expression. Objective: RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) was performed to identify genes differentially expressed between BRAF-MUT and BRAF wild-type (BRAF-WT) tumors and to correlate changes to patient clinical status. Design: BRAF-MUT and BRAF-WT tumors were identified in patients with T1N0 and T2–3N1 tumors evaluated in a referral medical center. Gene expression levels were determined (RNA-Seq) and fusion transcripts were detected. Multiplexed capture/detection and digital counting of mRNA transcripts (nCounter, NanoString Technologies) validated RNA-Seq data for immune system-related genes. Patients: BRAF-MUT patients included nine women, three men; nine were TNM stage I and three were stage III. Three (25%) had tumor infiltrating lymphocytes. BRAF-WT included five women, three men; all were stage I, and five (62.5%) had tumor infiltrating lymphocytes. Results: RNA-Seq identified 560 of 13 085 genes differentially expressed between BRAF-MUT and BRAF-WT tumors. Approximately 10% of these genes were related to MetaCore immune function pathways; 51 were underexpressed in BRAF-MUT tumors, whereas 4 (HLAG, CXCL14, TIMP1, IL1RAP) were overexpressed. The four most differentially overexpressed immune genes in BRAF-WT tumors (IL1B; CCL19; CCL21; CXCR4) correlated with lymphocyte infiltration. nCounter confirmed the RNA-Seq expression level data. Eleven different high-confidence fusion transcripts were detected (four interchromosomal; seven intrachromosomal) in 13 of 20 tumors. All in-frame fusions were validated by RT-PCR. Conclusion: BRAF-MUT papillary thyroid cancers have reduced expression of immune/inflammatory response genes compared with BRAF-WT tumors and correlate with lymphocyte infiltration. In contrast, HLA-G and CXCL14 are overexpressed in BRAF-MUT tumors. Sixty-five percent of tumors had between one and three fusion transcripts. Functional studies will be required to determine the potential role of these newly identified genomic abnormalities in contributing to the aggressiveness of BRAF-MUT and BRAF-WT tumors.

The development of subspecialty tumor groups for uncommon malignancies represents an effective approach to building experience, increasing patient volumes and referrals, and fostering development of increased therapeutic options and clinical trials for patients afflicted with otherwise historically neglected cancers.

BACKGROUND There is great interest in circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) as disease biomarkers. Translating promising miRNAs into validated clinical tests requires the characterization of many preanalytical and analytical parameters. METHODS miRNAs were extracted from serum and plasma samples of healthy volunteers, and miRNAs known to be present in serum and plasma (miR-15b, miR-16, miR-24, and miR-122) were amplified by reverse-transcription quantitative PCR. Stability and the effects of hemolysis were determined. Assay variation and its components, including the effect of adding control miRNA, were assessed by nested ANOVA. RESULTS miRNA concentrations were higher in plasma than in serum. Processing of plasma to remove subcellular/cellular components reduced miRNA concentrations to those of serum. The miRNAs analyzed were stable refrigerated or frozen for up to 72 h and were stable at room temperature for 24 h. Hemolysis increased the apparent concentration of 3 of the miRNAs. The total variability of replicate miRNA concentrations was &lt;2.0-fold, with most of the variability attributable to the extraction process and interassay imprecision. Normalizing results to those of spiked exogenous control miRNAs did not improve this variability. CONCLUSIONS Detailed validation of the preanalytical steps affecting miRNA detection and quantification is critical when considering the use of individual miRNAs as clinical biomarkers. Unless these causes of imprecision are considered and mitigated, only miRNAs that are extremely up- or downregulated will be suitable as clinical biomarkers.

Abstract Background: Molecular testing of thyroid malignancies, in combination with cytologic and histologic examination, is becoming increasingly attractive as a tool for refining traditional morphologic diagnosis. The molecular changes associated with follicular thyroid carcinoma (FTC) are point mutations in RAS oncogenes or the presence of PAX8/PPARG (paired box 8/peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma) rearrangement. Methods: We developed and validated a clinical assay for the detection of PAX8/PPARG rearrangements that uses a 4-color reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) assay and high-resolution fragment analysis. Results: The RT-PCR assay is applicable for detecting the various described fusion transcripts of PAX8/PPARG in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded thyroid tissue and in fine-needle aspirate biopsy washes from thyroid nodules. The analytical sensitivity of the assay is 1 abnormal cell in a background of 100–10 000 translocation-negative cells. A comparison of the RT-PCR assay with dual-fusion fluorescence in situ hybridization showed an overall concordance of 95%. With this assay, we obtained a prevalence for the PAX8/PPARG rearrangement in FTC of 62% (13 of 21 cases), compared with a 5% prevalence (3 of 55) for other follicular cell–derived neoplasms. Conclusions: The introduction of this assay into clinical practice could provide useful information for the diagnosis and possibly for the prognosis and treatment of thyroid cancer in the future.