PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tucatinib and trastuzumab in patients with previously treated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive (HER2+) metastatic biliary tract cancer (mBTC). METHODS: SGNTUC-019 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04579380 ) is an open-label phase II basket study evaluating the efficacy and safety of tucatinib and trastuzumab in patients with HER2-altered solid tumors. In the biliary tract cancer cohort, patients had previously treated HER2 overexpressing or amplified (HER2+) tumors (identified with local testing) with no prior HER2-directed therapy. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (cORR) per investigator assessment. Patients were treated on a 21-day cycle with tucatinib (300 mg orally twice daily) and trastuzumab (8 mg/kg intravenously followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks). RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled. As of data cutoff (January 30, 2023), the median duration of follow-up was 10.8 months. The cORR was 46.7% (90% CI, 30.8 to 63.0), with a disease control rate of 76.7% (90% CI, 60.6 to 88.5). The median duration of response and progression-free survival were 6.0 months (90% CI, 5.5 to 6.9) and 5.5 months (90% CI, 3.9 to 8.1), respectively. At data cutoff, 15 patients (50.0%) had died, and the estimated 12-month overall survival rate was 53.6% (90% CI, 36.8 to 67.8). The two most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were pyrexia (43.3%) and diarrhea (40.0%). Grade ≥3 TEAEs were reported in 18 patients (60.0%), with the most common being cholangitis, decreased appetite, and nausea (all 10.0%), which were generally not treatment related. TEAEs led to treatment regimen discontinuation in one patient, and there were no deaths due to TEAEs. CONCLUSION: Tucatinib combined with trastuzumab had clinically significant antitumor activity and was well tolerated in patients with previously treated HER2+ mBTC.

PURPOSE: Low concordance between plasma-based and tissue-based tests for determining the RAS mutational status have been reported in some but not all patients with limited-extent metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In this study, we investigated the relationship between metastatic site and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) detection using ctDNA genotyping, an alternative to tissue genotyping for precision oncology.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We investigated the relationship between metastatic site and ctDNA detection using Guardant360, a next-generation sequencing ctDNA assay, in mCRC patients with single-organ metastasis in the SCRUM-Japan GOZILA study (UMIN000029315).RESULTS: Of 1,187 patients with mCRC enrolled in GOZILA, 138 were eligible (49 with liver-only, 15 with lymph node-only, 27 with peritoneum-only, and 47 with lung-only metastases). The concordance of RAS/ BRAF status between Guaradant360 and tissue in vitro diagnostic tests was 95.9% in patients with liver-only, 80.0% in lymph node-only, 56.0% in peritoneum-only, and 65.9% in lung-only metastases. ctDNA fraction, as measured by the median maximum variant allelic fraction (max VAF), and median number of detected variants were 23.1% and five in liver-only, 6.0% and five in lymph node-only, 0.4% and three in peritoneum-only, and 0.4% and three in lung-only metastases, respectively (all P < .001, Kruskal-Wallis test). Few patients with liver-only (2.0%) and lymph node-only metastasis (13.3%) had a max VAF < 0.2%, which is required to ensure a detection limit of 95%, but max VAF was more frequently < 0.2% in patients with lung-only (27.7%) or peritoneum-only metastasis (29.6%).CONCLUSION: Patients with lung-only and peritoneum-only metastatic disease have significantly lower levels of ctDNA, suggesting decreased clinical sensitivity for subclonal variants. This observation suggests that such patients may benefit from concurrent tissue and plasma testing to provide optimal genotyping for subsequent therapy selection.

Purpose: FGFR2 amplification is associated with poor prognosis in advanced gastric cancer and its subclonal heterogeneity has been revealed. Here, we examined whether circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) was useful for detecting FGFR2 amplification and co-occurring resistance mechanisms in advanced gastric cancer. Experimental Design: We assessed genomic characteristics of FGFR2-amplified advanced gastric cancer in a nationwide ctDNA screening study. We also analyzed FGFR2 amplification status in paired tissue and plasma samples with advanced gastric cancer. In addition, we examined patients with FGFR2-amplified advanced gastric cancer identified by ctDNA sequencing who received FGFR inhibitors. Results: FGFR2 amplification was more frequently detected by ctDNA sequencing in 28 (7.7%) of 365 patients with advanced gastric cancer than by tissue analysis alone (2.6%–4.4%). FGFR2 amplification profiling of paired tissue and plasma revealed that FGFR2 amplification was detectable only by ctDNA sequencing in 6 of 44 patients, which was associated with a worse prognosis. Two patients in whom FGFR2 amplification was detected by ctDNA sequencing after tumor progression following previous standard chemotherapies but not by pretreatment tissue analysis had tumor responses to FGFR inhibitors. A third patient with FGFR2 and MET co-amplification in ctDNA showed a limitation of benefit from FGFR inhibition, accompanied by a marked increase in the MET copy number. Conclusions: ctDNA sequencing identifies FGFR2 amplification missed by tissue testing in patients with advanced gastric cancer, and these patients may respond to FGFR inhibition. The utility of ctDNA sequencing warrants further evaluation to develop effective therapeutic strategies for patients with FGFR2-amplified advanced gastric cancer.

Although comprehensive genomic profiling has become standard in oncology for advanced solid tumors, the full potential of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA)-based profiling in capturing tumor heterogeneity and guiding therapy selection remains underexploited, marked by a scarcity of evidence on its clinical impact and the assessment of intratumoral heterogeneity. The GOZILA study, a nationwide, prospective observational ctDNA profiling study, previously demonstrated higher clinical trial enrollment rates using liquid biopsy compared with tissue screening. This updated analysis of 4,037 patients further delineates the clinical utility of ctDNA profiling in advanced solid tumors, showcasing a significant enhancement in patient outcomes with a 24% match rate for targeted therapy. Patients treated with matched targeted therapy based on ctDNA profiling demonstrated significantly improved overall survival compared with those receiving unmatched therapy (hazard ratio, 0.54). Notably, biomarker clonality and adjusted plasma copy number were identified as predictors of therapeutic efficacy, reinforcing the value of ctDNA in reflecting tumor heterogeneity for precise treatment decisions. These new insights into the relationship between ctDNA characteristics and treatment outcomes advance our understanding beyond the initial enrollment benefits. Our findings advocate for the broader adoption of ctDNA-guided treatment, signifying an advancement in precision oncology and improving survival outcomes in advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Several trials have evaluated the efficacy of rechallenge treatment with anti–epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody (mAb) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). A recent trial indicated that RAS status in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) may potentially predict patients with RAS wild-type mCRC resistant to anti-EGFR mAb who would benefit from rechallenge treatment, and the findings should be further investigated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We enrolled patients whose plasma samples were collected in prospective phase II trials, the JACCRO CC-08 (n = 36) and CC-09 (n = 25), which evaluated rechallenge chemotherapy with anti-EGFR mAb for KRAS wild-type mCRC. RAS in ctDNA was analyzed at the time points of baseline, 8 weeks, and progression using OncoBEAM RAS CRC kit. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were enrolled in this study, with a response rate of 0% and a disease control rate (DCR) of 62.5%. RAS mutations were found at baseline in six patients. The DCR was 33% in patients with RAS mutations in ctDNA, whereas it was 80% in patients without RAS mutation at baseline. Patients with RAS mutation at baseline had significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) than those without RAS mutation (median PFS, 2.3 v 4.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 6.2; P = .013; median OS, 3.8 v 16.0 months; HR, 12.4; P = .0028). Six of 10 patients without RAS mutation at baseline acquired RAS mutations at progression. Postprogression survival after rechallenge treatment was numerically shorter in patients with RAS mutation at progression. CONCLUSION: RAS status in ctDNA was significantly associated with clinical outcomes in patients with mCRC receiving rechallenge treatment with anti-EGFR mAb. These findings could support the clinical utility of OncoBEAM RAS CRC kits for anti-EGFR mAb rechallenge in RAS wild-type mCRC.