%0 Journal Article %A Yukti Choudhury %A Min-Han Tan %A Jun Li Shi %A Augustine Tee %A Kao Chin Ngeow %A Jonathan Poh %A Ruth Rosalyn Goh %A Jamie Mong %T Complementing Tissue Testing with Plasma mutation Profiling Improves Therapeutic Decision Making for Lung Cancer Patients %D 2021 %R 10.1101/2021.08.04.21261589 %J medRxiv %P 2021.08.04.21261589 %X Background Tissue biopsy is an integral part of the diagnostic approach to lung cancer. It is however invasive and associated with limitations of tissue heterogeneity. Liquid biopsies may complement tissue testing by providing additional molecular information and may be particularly helpful in patients from whom obtaining sufficient tissue for genomic profiling is challenging.Methods Patients with suspected lung cancer (n=71) were prospectively recruited. Blood and diagnostic tissue samples were collected within 48 hrs of each other. Plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) testing was done using an ultrasensitive amplicon-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel (plasma NGS testing). For cases diagnosed as non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) via histology or cytology, targeted testing for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations was performed using tissue biopsy samples, where available (tissue EGFR testing). Concordance of clinically actionable mutations between methods and sample types were assessed.Results For confirmed NSCLC cases (n = 54), tissue EGFR test results were available only for 70.3% (38/54) due to sample inadequacies, compared to blood samples for 98.1% (53/54) cases. Tissue EGFR testing identified sensitizing EGFR (L858R or exon 19 deletion) mutation in 31.6% (12/38) of cases. Plasma NGS identified clinically actionable mutations in 37.7% (20/53) of cases, including EGFR mutations in two cases with no tissue EGFR results, and mutations in KRAS, BRAF and MET. Overall sensitivity of EGFR sensitizing mutation detection by plasma NGS was 75% (9/12), and specificity was 100% (25/25) in patients tested in both tissue EGFR and plasma NGS (n=37). In this cohort of patients, tissue EGFR testing alone informed clinical decisions in 22.2% (12/54) of cases. Adding plasma NGS to tissue EGFR testing increased the detection rate of actionable mutations to 42.6% (23/54), representing a near doubling (1.9-fold increase) of clinically relevant findings. The average turnaround time (TAT) of plasma NGS was shorter than standard tissue testing (10 days vs. 29.9 days, p-value <0.05).Conclusions In the first-line setting, plasma NGS was highly concordant with tissue EGFR testing. Plasma NGS increases the detection of actionable findings with shorter time to results. This study outlines the clinical utility of a complementary plasma mutation profiling in the routine management of lung cancer patients.Competing Interest StatementYukti Choudhury, Min-Han Tan, Jonathan Poh and Kao Chin Ngeow are employees of Lucence DiagnosticsClinical TrialNCT04254497Funding StatementThis study was funded by the Singapore Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) Industrial Alignment Fund (IAF111221).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Changi General Hospital (Singapore) IRB.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. %U https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/08/05/2021.08.04.21261589.full.pdf