Real-world EGFR testing practices for non-small-cell lung cancer by thoracic pathology laboratories across Europe
Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie, Anglie Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
PubMed
37713929
PubMed Central
PMC10594022
DOI
10.1016/j.esmoop.2023.101628
PII: S2059-7029(23)00863-3
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- EGFR, Europe, molecular pathology, non-small-cell lung cancer, survey,
- MeSH
- erbB receptory genetika MeSH
- laboratoře MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mutace MeSH
- nádory plic * diagnóza genetika patologie MeSH
- nemalobuněčný karcinom plic * diagnóza genetika patologie MeSH
- pandemie MeSH
- retrospektivní studie MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Evropa MeSH
- Názvy látek
- EGFR protein, human MeSH Prohlížeč
- erbB receptory MeSH
BACKGROUND: Testing for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations is an essential recommendation in guidelines for metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, and is considered mandatory in European countries. However, in practice, challenges are often faced when carrying out routine biomarker testing, including access to testing, inadequate tissue samples and long turnaround times (TATs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: To evaluate the real-world EGFR testing practices of European pathology laboratories, an online survey was set up and validated by the Pulmonary Pathology Working Group of the European Society of Pathology and distributed to 64 expert testing laboratories. The retrospective survey focussed on laboratory organisation and daily EGFR testing practice of pathologists and molecular biologists between 2018 and 2021. RESULTS: TATs varied greatly both between and within countries. These discrepancies may be partly due to reflex testing practices, as 20.8% of laboratories carried out EGFR testing only at the request of the clinician. Many laboratories across Europe still favour single-test sequencing as a primary method of EGFR mutation identification; 32.7% indicated that they only used targeted techniques and 45.1% used single-gene testing followed by next-generation sequencing (NGS), depending on the case. Reported testing rates were consistent over time with no significant decrease in the number of EGFR tests carried out in 2020, despite the increased pressure faced by testing facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. ISO 15189 accreditation was reported by 42.0% of molecular biology laboratories for single-test sequencing, and by 42.3% for NGS. 92.5% of laboratories indicated they regularly participate in an external quality assessment scheme. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the strong heterogeneity of EGFR testing that still occurs within thoracic pathology and molecular biology laboratories across Europe. Even among expert testing facilities there is variability in testing capabilities, TAT, reflex testing practice and laboratory accreditation, stressing the need to harmonise reimbursement technologies and decision-making algorithms in Europe.
Biomedical Research Centre Navarra Health Service Pamplona Navarra Spain
Cell Biology and Biotherapy Unit INT Fondazione Pascale Via M Semmola Naples Italy
Department of Biopathology Centre Léon Bérard Lyon France
Department of Biopathology CHRU ICL CHRU Nancy Vandoeuvre lès Nancy France
Department of Biopathology Jean Perrin Centre Clermont Ferrand France
Department of Cardiac Thoracic Vascular Sciences and Public Health University of Padova Padova Italy
Department of Genetics University Hospital Bichat Claude Bernard Paris University Paris France
Department of Oncology and Hemato Oncology University of Milan Milan Italy
Department of Oncology University of Turin San Luigi Hospital Orbassano Turin Italy
Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine Thomayer University Hospital Prague Czech Republic
Department of Pathology CHRU Tours Hôpital Trousseau Chambray lès Tours France
Department of Pathology CHU de Caen Côte de Nacre Caen France
Department of Pathology Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra Pamplona Navarra Spain
Department of Pathology Erasme Hospital HUB ULB Brussels Belgium
Department of Pathology Erasme Hospital HUB ULB Brussels Belgium; CurePath Jumet Belgium
Department of Pathology Gregorio Marañón General University Hospital Madrid Spain
Department of Pathology Groupe Hospitalier Paris Saint Joseph Paris France
Department of Pathology Groupement Hospitalier Est Bron France
Department of Pathology Institut Mutualiste Montsouris Paris France
Department of Pathology IUC T Oncopole Toulouse France
Department of Pathology St Olav's Hospital Trondheim University Hospital Trondheim Norway
Department of Pathology Turku University Hospital Turku Finland
Department of Pathology Université d'Angers Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers Angers France
Department of Pathology University Clinic Golnik Golnik Slovenia
Department of Pathology University Hospital Antwerp and University of Antwerp Antwerp Belgium
Department of Pathology University Hospital of Bordeaux Hôpital Haut Lévêque Pessac France
Department of Pathology University Hospital of Saint Etienne Saint Etienne France
Department of Pathology University Hospital of Strasbourg 67098 Strasbourg France
Department of Pathology University of Oradea Oradea Romania
Department of Public Health University of Naples Federico 2 Naples Italy
Department of Tumor Biology University Hospital of Bordeaux Hospital Haut Lévêque Pessac France
Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology Medical University of Graz Graz Austria
Division of Medical Oncology 2 Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV IRCCS Padova Italy
Division of Pathology University Hospital Città Della Salute Turin Italy
HUSLAB Department of Pathology Helsinki University Hospital Helsinki Finland
Institute for Pathology Medical Faculty Belgrade Serbia
Institute of Pathology Cantonal Hospital Baselland Liestal Switzerland
Medical Unit of Molecular Genetic Grenoble University Hospital Grenoble France
Multidisciplinary Clinical Center Kommunarka of the Moscow Health Department Moscow Russia
Oncogenomics Unit European Institute of Oncology Milan Italy
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Siegel R.L., Miller K.D., Fuchs H.E., Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(1):7–33. PubMed
Hanna N.H., Robinson A.G., Temin S., et al. Therapy for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer with driver alterations: ASCO and OH (CCO) joint guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(9):1040–1091. PubMed
Daly M.E., Singh N., Ismaila N., et al. Management of stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: ASCO guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(12):1356–1384. PubMed
Remon J., Soria J.C., Peters S. Early and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: an update of the ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines focusing on diagnosis, staging, systemic and local therapy. Ann Oncol. 2021;32(12):1637–1642. PubMed
Chaft J.E., Shyr Y., Sepesi B., Forde P.M. Preoperative and postoperative systemic therapy for operable non–small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:546–555. PubMed PMC
Passaro A., Leighl N., Blackhall F., et al. ESMO expert consensus statements on the management of EGFR mutant non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol. 2022;33(5):466–487. PubMed
Hendriks L.E., Kerr K., Menis J., et al. Oncogene-addicted metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2023;34(4):339–357. PubMed
Wu Y.-L., Tsuboi M., He J., et al. Osimertinib in resected EGFR -mutated non–small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(18):1711–1723. PubMed
Planchard D., Popat S., Kerr K., et al. Updated version published 15 September 2020 by the ESMO Guidelines Committee Metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up†. Ann Oncol. 2018;(4):192–237. PubMed
Kerr K.M., Bibeau F., Thunnissen E., et al. The evolving landscape of biomarker testing for non-small cell lung cancer in Europe. Lung Cancer. 2021;154:161–175. PubMed
Remon J., Soria J.-C., Peters S. eUpdate – Early and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: an update of the ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines focusing on diagnosis, staging and systemic and local therapy. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(4):iv1–iv21. PubMed
Hofman P., Ilié M., Chamorey E., et al. Clinical and molecular practice of European thoracic pathology laboratories during the COVID-19 pandemic. The past and the near future. ESMO Open. 2021;6(1) PubMed PMC
Thunnissen E., Weynand B., Udovicic-Gagula D., et al. Lung cancer biomarker testing: perspective from Europe. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2020;9:887–897. PubMed PMC
Lindeman N.I., Cagle P.T., Aisner D.L., et al. Updated molecular testing guideline for the selection of lung cancer patients for treatment with targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors: guideline from the college of American pathologists, the international association for the study of lung cancer, and the association for molecular pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2018;142(3):321–346. PubMed
Sheffield B.S., Eaton K., Emond B., et al. Cost savings of expedited care with upfront next-generation sequencing testing versus single-gene testing among patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer based on current canadian practices. Curr Oncol. 2023;30:2348–2365. PubMed PMC
Mosele F., Remon J., Mateo J., et al. Recommendations for the use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for patients with metastatic cancers: a report from the ESMO Precision Medicine Working Group. Ann Oncol. 2020;31(11):1491–1505. PubMed
Penault-Llorca F., Kerr K.M., Garrido P., et al. Expert opinion on NSCLC small specimen biomarker testing — Part 2: analysis, reporting, and quality assessment. Virchows Archiv. 2022;481(3):351. PubMed PMC
Koopman B., Cajiao Garcia B.N., Kuijpers C.C.H.J., et al. A nationwide study on the impact of routine testing for EGFR mutations in advanced NSCLC reveals distinct survival patterns based on EGFR mutation subclasses. Cancers (Basel) 2021;13(14):3641. PubMed PMC
Chen G., Mosier S., Gocke C.D., Lin M.T., Eshleman J.R. Cytosine deamination is a major cause of baseline noise in next-generation sequencing. Mol Diagn Ther. 2014;18(5):587–593. PubMed PMC
Do H., Dobrovic A. Sequence artifacts in DNA from formalin-fixed tissues: causes and strategies for minimization. Clin Chem. 2015;61(1):64–71. PubMed
Ionescu D.N., Stockley T.L., Banerji S., et al. Consensus recommendations to optimize testing for new targetable alterations in non-small cell lung cancer. Curr Oncol. 2022;29(7):4981–4997. PubMed PMC
Deans Z.C., Costa J.L., Cree I., et al. Integration of next-generation sequencing in clinical diagnostic molecular pathology laboratories for analysis of solid tumours; an expert opinion on behalf of IQN Path ASBL. Virchows Archiv. 2017;470(1):5. PubMed PMC
Tack V., Schuuring E., Keppens C., et al. Accreditation, setting and experience as indicators to assure quality in oncology biomarker testing laboratories. Br J Cancer. 2018;119(5):605. PubMed PMC
Horgan D., Curigliano G., Rieß O., et al. Identifying the steps required to effectively implement next-generation sequencing in oncology at a national level in Europe. J Pers Med. 2022;12(1):72. PubMed PMC
Horgan D., Čufer T., Gatto F., et al. Accelerating the development and validation of liquid biopsy for early cancer screening and treatment tailoring. Healthcare. 2022;10:1714. PubMed PMC
Pujol N., Heeke S., Bontoux C., et al. Molecular profiling in non-squamous non-small cell lung carcinoma: towards a switch to next-generation sequencing reflex testing. J Pers Med. 2022;12:1684. PubMed PMC
Ilié M., Hofman V., Bontoux C., et al. Setting up an ultra-fast next-generation sequencing approach as reflex testing at diagnosis of non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer; experience of a single center (LPCE, Nice, France) Cancers. 2022;14:2258. PubMed PMC