The Clinical Utility and Impact of Next Generation Sequencing in Gynecologic Cancers
Next generation sequencing (NGS) has facilitated the identification of molecularly targeted therapies. However, clinical utility is an emerging challenge. Our objective was to identify the clinical utility of NGS testing in gynecologic cancers. A retrospective review of clinico-pathologic data was p...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-03-01
|
| Series: | Cancers |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/14/5/1352 |
| _version_ | 1797475430207324160 |
|---|---|
| author | Vijaya Kadam Maruthi Mahyar Khazaeli Devi Jeyachandran Mohamed Mokhtar Desouki |
| author_facet | Vijaya Kadam Maruthi Mahyar Khazaeli Devi Jeyachandran Mohamed Mokhtar Desouki |
| author_sort | Vijaya Kadam Maruthi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Next generation sequencing (NGS) has facilitated the identification of molecularly targeted therapies. However, clinical utility is an emerging challenge. Our objective was to identify the clinical utility of NGS testing in gynecologic cancers. A retrospective review of clinico-pathologic data was performed on 299 gynecological cancers where NGS testing had been performed to identify (1) recognition of actionable targets for therapy, (2) whether the therapy changed based on the findings, and (3) the impact on survival. High grade serous carcinoma was the most common tumor (52.5%). The number of genetic alterations ranged from 0 to 25 with a mean of 2.8/case. The most altered genes were <i>TP53, PIK3CA, BRCA1</i> and <i>BRCA2</i>. Among 299 patients, 100 had actionable alterations (79 received a targeted treatment (Group1), 29 did not receive treatment (Group 2), and there were no actionable alterations in 199 (Group3). The death rate in groups 1, 2 and 3 was 54.4%, 42.8% and 50.2%, with an average survival of 18.6, 6.6 and 10.8 months, respectively (<i>p</i> = 0.002). In summary, NGS testing for gynecologic cancers detected 33.4% of actionable alterations with a high clinical action rate. Along with the high clinical utility of NGS, testing also seemed to improve survival for patients who received targeted treatment. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T20:44:57Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-ab4e6191d7f74fabb9a6737561928afe |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2072-6694 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T20:44:57Z |
| publishDate | 2022-03-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Cancers |
| spelling | doaj.art-ab4e6191d7f74fabb9a6737561928afe2023-11-23T22:49:42ZengMDPI AGCancers2072-66942022-03-01145135210.3390/cancers14051352The Clinical Utility and Impact of Next Generation Sequencing in Gynecologic CancersVijaya Kadam Maruthi0Mahyar Khazaeli1Devi Jeyachandran2Mohamed Mokhtar Desouki3Department of Pathology, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260, USADepartment of Pathology, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260, USADepartment of Pathology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY 14203, USADepartment of Pathology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY 14203, USANext generation sequencing (NGS) has facilitated the identification of molecularly targeted therapies. However, clinical utility is an emerging challenge. Our objective was to identify the clinical utility of NGS testing in gynecologic cancers. A retrospective review of clinico-pathologic data was performed on 299 gynecological cancers where NGS testing had been performed to identify (1) recognition of actionable targets for therapy, (2) whether the therapy changed based on the findings, and (3) the impact on survival. High grade serous carcinoma was the most common tumor (52.5%). The number of genetic alterations ranged from 0 to 25 with a mean of 2.8/case. The most altered genes were <i>TP53, PIK3CA, BRCA1</i> and <i>BRCA2</i>. Among 299 patients, 100 had actionable alterations (79 received a targeted treatment (Group1), 29 did not receive treatment (Group 2), and there were no actionable alterations in 199 (Group3). The death rate in groups 1, 2 and 3 was 54.4%, 42.8% and 50.2%, with an average survival of 18.6, 6.6 and 10.8 months, respectively (<i>p</i> = 0.002). In summary, NGS testing for gynecologic cancers detected 33.4% of actionable alterations with a high clinical action rate. Along with the high clinical utility of NGS, testing also seemed to improve survival for patients who received targeted treatment.https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/14/5/1352molecular testinggynecologic tumorsnext generation sequencing |
| spellingShingle | Vijaya Kadam Maruthi Mahyar Khazaeli Devi Jeyachandran Mohamed Mokhtar Desouki The Clinical Utility and Impact of Next Generation Sequencing in Gynecologic Cancers Cancers molecular testing gynecologic tumors next generation sequencing |
| title | The Clinical Utility and Impact of Next Generation Sequencing in Gynecologic Cancers |
| title_full | The Clinical Utility and Impact of Next Generation Sequencing in Gynecologic Cancers |
| title_fullStr | The Clinical Utility and Impact of Next Generation Sequencing in Gynecologic Cancers |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Clinical Utility and Impact of Next Generation Sequencing in Gynecologic Cancers |
| title_short | The Clinical Utility and Impact of Next Generation Sequencing in Gynecologic Cancers |
| title_sort | clinical utility and impact of next generation sequencing in gynecologic cancers |
| topic | molecular testing gynecologic tumors next generation sequencing |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/14/5/1352 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT vijayakadammaruthi theclinicalutilityandimpactofnextgenerationsequencingingynecologiccancers AT mahyarkhazaeli theclinicalutilityandimpactofnextgenerationsequencingingynecologiccancers AT devijeyachandran theclinicalutilityandimpactofnextgenerationsequencingingynecologiccancers AT mohamedmokhtardesouki theclinicalutilityandimpactofnextgenerationsequencingingynecologiccancers AT vijayakadammaruthi clinicalutilityandimpactofnextgenerationsequencingingynecologiccancers AT mahyarkhazaeli clinicalutilityandimpactofnextgenerationsequencingingynecologiccancers AT devijeyachandran clinicalutilityandimpactofnextgenerationsequencingingynecologiccancers AT mohamedmokhtardesouki clinicalutilityandimpactofnextgenerationsequencingingynecologiccancers |