Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Sep 12;106(10):dju256.
doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju256. Print 2014 Oct.

Biomarker testing for breast, lung, and gastroesophageal cancers at NCI designated cancer centers

Affiliations

Biomarker testing for breast, lung, and gastroesophageal cancers at NCI designated cancer centers

Julian C Schink et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. .

Abstract

Background: Molecular biomarkers, a cornerstone of precision oncology, are critical in breast, gastroesophageal, and non-small cell lung cancer management (BC, GEC, NSCLC). Testing practices are intensely debated, impacting diagnostic quality and affecting pathologists, oncologists and patients. However, little is known about testing approaches used in practice. Our study described biomarker practices in BC, GEC, and NSCLC at the leading US cancer centers.

Methods: We conducted a survey of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) designated centers on BC, GEC, and NSCLC biomarker testing. We used simple frequencies to describe practices, two-sided Fisher's exact test and two-sided McNemar's test for cross-cancer comparison. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results: For BC human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), 39% of centers combine guidelines by using in situ hybridization (ISH) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) concurrently, and 21% reflex-test beyond guideline-recommended IHC2+. For GEC HER2, 44% use ISH and IHC concurrently, and 28% reflex-test beyond IHC2+. In NSCLC, the use of IHC is limited to 4% for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and 7% for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK). 43.5% test NSCLC biomarkers on oncologist order; 34.5% run all biomarkers upfront, and 22% use a sequential protocol. NSCLC external testing is statistically significantly higher than BC (P < .0001) and GEC (P < .0001). NSCLC internally developed tests are statistically significantly more common than BC (P < .0001) and GEC (P < .0001).

Conclusions: At the NCI cancer centers, biomarker testing practices vary, but exceeding guidelines is a common practice for established biomarkers and emerging practice for newer biomarkers. Use of internally developed tests declines as biomarkers mature. Implementation of multibiomarker protocols is lagging. Our study represents a step toward developing a biomarker testing practice landscape.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. MacConaill LE. Existing and emerging technologies for tumor genomic profiling. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(15):1815–1824 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Freedman AN, Sansbury LB, Figg WD, et al. Cancer pharmacogenomics and pharmacoepidemiology: setting a research agenda to accelerate translation. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(22):1698–1705 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gazdar AF, Minna JD. Precision medicine for cancer patients: lessons learned and the path forward. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(17):1262–1263 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ross JS. Cancer biomarkers, companion diagnostics and personalized oncology. Biomark Med. 2011;5(3):277–279 - PubMed
    1. Garraway LA, Verweij J, Ballman KV. Precision oncology: an overview. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(15):1803–1805 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms