By Anthony M Magliocco MD
We are currently living in revolutionary times when it comes to cancer therapy and treatment options. There are literally hundreds of clinical trials under way evaluating dozens of new therapeutic compounds and combinations of therapy. In fact there are so many trials that its difficult to always find enough patients for them and also to design them to produce the level of evidence expected in traditional multi-armed phase III trials.
There are hundreds of open clinical trials testing dozens of compounds and combinations of therapy
Indeed, we seem to be arriving at the point where cancer therapy really is being tailored and delivered to the individual. This shift from evidence based conventional cancer therapy clinical trials, to newer, matched and “N of One” trials creates new challenges for the oncologist and diagnostic laboratory industry.
In a traditional trial, selection and enrollment would depend on results of a key biomarker such as HER2 overexpression for Trastuzumab therapy
Traditionally a biomarker would be required to select a patient for a specific therapy. For example, in breast cancer, presence of HER2 over expression or amplification was a marker to help select patients for enrollment in a trial. Because the frequency of the biomarker was relatively common in a common disease, it was possible to build a well powered phase III trial to collect convincing evidence that on a population based setting that this was an effective strategy. This led to FDA approval and the development of companion diagnostics such as the Herceptin Test.
Fast forward twenty years or so. Now we have so called “basket trials” where cancers can be tested with complex genomic tests that will evaluate hundreds of genes, for example the Moffitt STAR assay that covers 170 actionable mutations and alterations resulting in detection of relatively rare, but still actionable mutations in many tumors. However the mutations are variable and the choices for treatment complex meaning that more than one combination of therapy could be considered. Whats an oncologist to do?
Going forward, it appears that if patients cannot be managed or enrolled in large trials, there will need to be an approach to effectively manage the so called “N of One” patient. In fact, it could be considered that almost every patient is a now unique in some way and could be classified as a rare disease
With a movement away from classical evidence based clinical trials toward n of one trials, off label therapy, and basket trials new approaches to companion diagnostics are urgently needed
In this situation, it appears that physicians will need to act on “best available evidence” or actual bioinformatics or other predictive models of possible response based on understanding the underlying molecular circuitry in the cancer in question. In this situation a “best guess” is made for assignment of therapy (either in a basket trial or in an off-label situation).
This approach can be problematic and has numerous complications such as the possibility of providing futile or toxic treatment. Fortunately, there are plenty of new advances in technology that might address this problem. The most help may come from the so-called “liquid biopsy”. Which is essentially usually a simple blood test evaluated with a exotic new technology.
The main components of a liquid Biopsy include circulating normal cells (WBC, Platelets, RBCs) possibly circulating living cancer cells (CTCs) and bits of dying cancer cells (cell free DNA, miRNA etc).
A Story of Two Biomarkers CTCs and cfDNA
CTCs Circulating Tumor Cells
The CTCs are very fragile, rare and hard to detect but give a window into the living cancer in the patient as treatment progresses. These cells can be further evaluated to determine if they are proliferating or if certain signalling pathways are active. In fact they can also be harvested, sequenced, and in some cases grown and expanded in culture.
Cell Free DNA cfDNA
Cell Free DNA or cfDNA gives a more stable read out of the tumor load, and mutation composition of the DNA, or at least the DNA leaking into the blood. It might be expected that when a new treatment begins, cancer cells in the host may undergo death and leak DNA into the blood. Consequently there could be an initial “Spike” in the amount of circulating DNA – this could be a positve signal. In other instances, cfDNA might indicate if there is residual cancer left in a patient after a surgery was completed that was initially intended to remove all disease giving a type of molecular staging. If a therapy is working well we would expect that CTCs and cfDNA would decrease and perhaps become immeasurable. On development of resistance there would be detection of new clones and expansion of the concentration of CTCs and cfDNA fragments.
Liquid biopsy provides a means to monitor tumor response to therapy in a dynamic and real time manner giving unprecedented opportunities to modulate treatment and truly personalize therapy for cancer patients
I expect that the twin technologies of CTC and cfDNA analysis will become more valued by oncologists, patients and payers as these tools will provide a way to dynamically monitor tumor response to treatment and provide immediate evidence of efficacy of a therapy or also of impending relapse potentially allowing a window of opportunity to adjust treatment.