Profile
International Journal of Surgery & Surgical Procedures Volume 1 (2016), Article ID 1:IJSSP-107, 8 pages
https://doi.org/10.15344/2456-4443/2016/107
Review Article
Multi-platform Tumour Profiling Delivers the Highest Clinical Utility and Improves Patient Outcomes in Today's Routine Clinical Practice

Giovanni Ussia1*, Robert Leonard2, Jaak Janssens3

1Dipartimento di Medicina e Chirurgia, OspedaleSant’Orsola, Universita di Bologna, Via Massarenti9 , 40138 Bologna, Italia
2Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
3Department of Oncology, Limburg Oncology Center, Belgium
Prof. Giovanni Ussia, Dipartimento di Medicina e Chirurgia, OspedaleSant’Orsola, Universita di Bologna, Via Massarenti9 , 40138 Bologna, Italia; E-mail: ussia.office@yahoo.co.uk
10 June 2016; 29 August 2016; 31 August 2016
Ussia G, Leonard R, Janssens J (2016) Multi-platform Tumour Profiling Delivers the Highest Clinical Utility and Improves Patient Outcomes in Today's Routine Clinical Practice. Int J Surg Surgical Proced 1: 107. doi: https://doi.org/10.15344/2456-4443/2016/107

References

  1. Jackson DB (2009) Clinical and economic impact of the non-responder phenomenon – implications for systems based discovery. Drug Discov Today 14: 380-385. View
  2. Planchat E, Abrial C, Thivat E, Mouret-Reynier MA, Kwiatkowski F, et al. (2011) Late lines of treatment benefit survival in metastatic breast cancer in current practice? Breast 20: 574-578. View
  3. Bailey CH, Jameson G, Sima C, Fleck S, White E, et al. (2012) Progressionfree Survival Decreases with Each Subsequent Therapy in Patients Presenting for Phase I Clinical Trials. J Cancer 3: 7-13. View
  4. Palumbo R, Sottotetti F, Riccardi A, Teragni C, Pozzi E, et al. (2013) Which patients with metastatic breast cancer benefit from subsequent lines of treatment? An update for clinicians. Ther Adv Med Oncol 5: 334-350. View
  5. Reinmuth N, Payer N, Muley T, Hoffmann H, Herth FJ, et al. (2013) Treatment and outcome of patients with metastatic NSCLC: a retrospective institution analysis of 493 patients. Respir Res 14: 139. View
  6. Von Hoff DD, Turner J (1991) Response rates, duration of response, and dose response effects in phase I studies of antineoplastics. Invest New Drugs 9: 115-122. View
  7. Olmos D, A'hern RP, Marsoni S, Morales R, Gomez-Roca C, et al. (2012) Patient selection for oncology phase I trials: a multi-institutional study of prognostic factors. J Clin Oncol 30: 996-1004. View
  8. Schwaederle M, Parker BA, Schwab RB, Fanta PT, Boles SG, et al. (2014) Molecular tumor board: the University of California-San Diego Moores Cancer Center experience. Oncologist 19: 631-636. View
  9. Egas-Bejar D, Anderson PM, Agarwal R, Corrales-Medina F, Devarajan E, et al. (2014) Theranostic Profiling for Actionable Aberrations in Advanced High Risk Osteosarcoma with Aggressive Biology Reveals High Molecular Diversity: The Human Fingerprint Hypothesis. Oncoscience 1: 167-179. View
  10. Le Tourneau C, Delord JP, Gonclaves A, Gavoille C, Dubot C, et al. (2015) Molecularly targeted therapy based on tumour molecular profiling versus conventional therapy for advanced cancer (SHIVA): a multicentre, openlabel, proof-of-concept, randomised, controlled phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 16: 1324-1334. View
  11. Weigelt B, Warne PH, Downward J (2011) PIK3CA mutation, but not PTEN loss of function, determines the sensitivity of breast cancer cells to mTOR inhibitory drugs. Oncogene 30: 3222-3233. View
  12. Hortobagyi GN, Chen D, Piccart M, Rugo HS, Burris HA 3rd, et al. (2016) Correlative Analysis of Genetic Alterations and Everolimus Benefit in Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: Results From BOLERO-2. J Clin Oncol 34: 419-426. View
  13. André F, Hurvitz S, Fasolo A, Tseng LM, Jerusalem G, et al. (2016) Molecular Alterations and Everolimus Efficacy in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Overexpressing Metastatic Breast Cancers: Combined Exploratory Biomarker Analysis From BOLERO-1 and BOLERO-3. J Clin Oncol 34: 2115-2124. View
  14. Tsimberidou AM, Iskander NG, Hong DS, Wheler JJ, Falchook GS, et al. (2012) Personalized medicine in a phase I clinical trials program: the MD Anderson Cancer Center initiative. Clin Cancer Res 18: 6373-6383. View
  15. Bedard PL, Ozo AM, Tsao MS, Leighl NB, Shepherd FA, et al. (2013) Princess Margaret Cancer Centre integrated molecular profiling in advanced cancers trial (IMPACT) using genotyping and targeted nextgeneration sequencing. J Clin Oncol 31, (suppl; abstr 11002). View
  16. Ferreira AR, Gomes ASDA, Costa FP, Saragiotto DF, Katz A, et al. (2014) Next generation sequencing – A key in search of locks? Ann Oncol 25 (suppl 4): iv560. View
  17. Sohal DP, Rini BI, Khorana AA, Dreicer R, Abraham J, et al. (2015) Prospective Clinical Study of Precision Oncology in Solid Tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 108. View
  18. Powell SF, Dib EG, Bleeker JS, Keppen MD, Mazurczak M, et al (2016) Optimizing Genotype Matched Clinical Trail (GMCT) accrual in a community oncology program (GOP). J ClinOncol 34 (suppl; abstr e18036). View
  19. Gupta D, Zook S, Kuhah H, Nazari A, Kramer K, Crilley PA, et al. (2016) Key drivers of physician decision-making in utilizing next generation sequencing results to guide cancer therapy. J ClinOncol 34 (supplabstr e18101) . View
  20. Von Hoff DD, Stephenson JJ Jr, Rosen P, Loesch DM, Borad MJ, et al. (2010) Pilot study using molecular profiling of patients' tumours to find potential targets and select treatments for their refractory cancers. J Clin Oncol 20: 4877-4883. View
  21. Jameson GS, Petricoin EF, Sachdev J, Liotta LA, Loesch DM, et al. (2014) A pilot study utilizing multi-omic molecular profiling to find potential targets and select individualized treatments for patients with previously treated metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 147: 579-588. View
  22. Dean A, Byrne A, Marinova M, Hayden I (2016) Clinical outcomes of patients with rare and heavily pretreated solid tumours treated according to the results of tumour molecular profiling. BioMed Res Int 2016: 4627214. View
  23. Popovtzer A, Sarfaty M, Limon D, Marshack G, Perlow E, et al. (2015) Metastatic Salivary Gland Tumours: A Single-center Study Demonstrating the Feasibility and Potential Clinical Benefit of Molecular-profiling-guided Therapy. BioMed Res Int 2015: 614845. View
  24. Ramanathan RK, Barrett M, Weiss GJ, Posner R, Rajeshkumar NV, et al. (2012) Abstract nr LB-221: Phase II study of Therapy Selected by Tumour Profiling in Patients with Previously Treated Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer. A Study of the SU2C Consortium. Cancer Res 72: Supplement. View
  25. Epelbaum R, Shacham-Shmueli E, Klein B, Agbarya A, Brenner B, et al. (2015) Molecular Profiling-Selected Therapy for Treatment of Advanced Pancreaticobiliary Cancer: A Retrospective Multicenter Study. BioMed Res Int 2015: 681653. View
  26. Purim O, Shacham-Shmueli E, BenyAet al. (2015) Molecular profilingselected treatment in metastatic gastric and esophageal cancer: Real-life clinical experience. BioMed Res Int.
  27. Seeber A, Gastl G, Ensinger C et al. (2016) Treatment of Patients with Refractory metastatic Cancer according to Molecular Profiling on Tumour Tissue: An Interim-Analysis of the ONCO-T-PROFILE Project. Oncotarget (In Press).
  28. Chahine G, Nasr F, Saleh K et al. (2016) Clinical outcomes of patients with previously treated advanced or metastatic cancer before or after tumour profiling: results of a monocentric pilot study in Lebanon. Presented at ICACT 2016.
  29. Herzog TJ, Spetzler D, Xiao N, Burnett K, Maney T, et al. (2016) Impact of molecular profiling on overall survival of patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Oncotarget 7: 19840-19849. View
  30. Spetzler D, Xiao N, Burnett K, Burch K, Abbott B, et al. (2015) Multi-platform molecular profiling of 1,180 patients increase median overall survival and influences treatment decision in 53% of cases. European Journal of Cancer 51(Supplement S3): S44. View
  31. Marshall J, Schwartzberg LS, Bepler G, Spetzler D, El-Deiry WS, et al. (2013) Novel panomic validation of time to next treatment (TNT) as an effective surrogate outcome measure in 4,729 patients. J Clin Oncol 34(suppl; abstr 11521). View