Search

Clinical genomic testing of patient germline, tumor tissue, or plasma cell-free DNA can enable a personalized approach to cancer management and treatment. In prostate cancer (PCa), broad genotyping tests are now widely used to identify germline and/or somatic alterations in BRCA2 and other DNA damage repair genes. Alterations in these genes can confer cancer sensitivity to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, are linked with poor prognosis, and can have potential hereditary cancer implications for family members. However, there is huge variability in genomic tests and reporting standards, meaning that for successful implementation of testing in clinical practice, end users must carefully select the most appropriate test for a given patient and critically interpret the results. In this white paper, we outline key pre- and post-test considerations for choosing a genomic test and evaluating reported variants, specifically for patients with advanced PCa. Test choice must be based on clinical context and disease state, availability and suitability of tumor tissue, and the genes and regions that are covered by the test. We describe strategies to recognize false positives or negatives in test results, including frameworks to assess low tumor fraction, subclonal alterations, clonal hematopoiesis, and pathogenic versus nonpathogenic variants. We assume that improved understanding among health care professionals and researchers of the nuances associated with genomic testing will ultimately lead to optimal patient care and clinical decision making.

De novo metastatic prostate cancer is highly aggressive, but the paucity of routinely collected tissue has hindered genomic stratification and precision oncology. Here, we leveraged a rare study of surgical intervention in 43 de novo metastatic prostate cancers to assess somatic genotypes across 607 synchronous primary and metastatic tissue regions plus circulating tumor DNA. Intra-prostate heterogeneity was pervasive and impacted clinically relevant genes, resulting in discordant genotypes between select primary restricted regions and synchronous metastases. Additional complexity was driven by polyclonal metastatic seeding from phylogenetically related primary populations. When simulating clinical practice relying on a single tissue region, genomic heterogeneity plus variable tumor fraction across samples caused inaccurate genotyping of dominant disease; however, pooling extracted DNA from multiple biopsy cores before sequencing can rescue misassigned somatic genotypes. Our results define the relationship between synchronous treatment-sensitive primary and metastatic lesions in men with de novo metastatic prostate cancer and provide a framework for implementing genomics-guided patient management., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)