Tumor-agnostic genomic and clinical analysis of BRAF fusions identify actionable targets.

in Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research by Monica F Chen, Soo-Ryum Yang, Jessica J Tao, Antoine Desilets, Eli L Diamond, Clare Wilhelm, Ezra Rosen, Yixiao Gong, Kerry Mullaney, Jean Torrisi, Robert J Young, Romel Somwar, Helena A Yu, Mark G Kris, Gregory J Riely, Maria E Arcila, Marc Ladanyi, Mark T A Donoghue, Neal Rosen, Rona Yaeger, Alexander Drilon, Yonina R Murciano-Goroff, Michael Offin

TLDR

  • The study looked at how a type of genetic change called a BRAF fusion affects cancer patients. The study found that BRAF fusions are more common in certain types of cancer and have a variety of different partners. The study also found that some patients with BRAF fusions responded well to a type of treatment called MAPK-directed therapies. However, the study also found that some patients with BRAF fusions developed new genetic changes after starting treatment, which could affect their response to treatment. The study suggests that more research is needed to understand how to better treat patients with BRAF fusions.

Abstract

Even though BRAF fusions are increasingly detected in standard multigene next-generation sequencing panels, few reports have explored their structure and impact on clinical course. We collected data from patients with BRAF fusion-positive cancers identified through a genotyping protocol of 97,024 samples. Fusions were characterized and reviewed for oncogenic potential (in-frame status, non-BRAF partner gene, intact BRAF kinase domain). We found 241 BRAF fusion-positive tumors from 212 patients with 82 unique 5' fusion partners spanning 52 histologies. 39 fusion partners were not previously reported, and 61 were identified once. BRAF fusion incidence was enriched in pilocytic astrocytomas, gangliomas, low-grade neuroepithelial tumors, and acinar cell carcinoma of the pancreas. 24 patients spanning multiple histologies were treated with MAPK-directed therapies of which 20 were evaluable for RECIST. Best response was partial response (N=2), stable disease (N=11), and progressive disease (N=7). The median time on therapy was 1 month with MEK plus BRAF inhibitors ([N=11], range 0-18 months) and 8 months for MEK inhibitors ([N=14], range 1-26 months). 9 patients remained on treatment for longer than 6 months [pilocytic astrocytomas (N=6), Erdheim-Chester disease (N=1), extraventricular neurocytoma (N=1), melanoma (N=1)]. Fifteen patients had acquired BRAF fusions. BRAF fusions are found across histologies and represent an emerging actionable target. BRAF fusions have a diverse set of fusion partners. Durable responses to MAPK therapies were seen, particularly in pilocytic astrocytomas. Acquired BRAF fusions were identified after targeted therapy underscoring the importance of post-progression biopsies to optimize treatment at relapse in these patients.

Overview

  • The study aimed to investigate the structure and impact of BRAF fusions on clinical course in cancer patients. The authors collected data from 97,024 samples and found 241 BRAF fusion-positive tumors from 212 patients with 82 unique 5' fusion partners spanning 52 histologies. The study focused on characterizing the oncogenic potential of BRAF fusions and identifying their impact on clinical course. The primary objective of the study was to understand the diversity of BRAF fusions and their response to MAPK-directed therapies.

Comparative Analysis & Findings

  • The study compared the outcomes observed under different experimental conditions or interventions, specifically the response to MAPK-directed therapies in patients with BRAF fusions. The authors found that BRAF fusions were enriched in certain histologies, including pilocytic astrocytomas, gangliomas, low-grade neuroepithelial tumors, and acinar cell carcinoma of the pancreas. The study also identified a diverse set of fusion partners for BRAF fusions. The authors found that durable responses to MAPK therapies were seen, particularly in pilocytic astrocytomas. Additionally, the study identified acquired BRAF fusions in 15 patients after targeted therapy, underscoring the importance of post-progression biopsies to optimize treatment at relapse in these patients.

Implications and Future Directions

  • The study's findings have significant implications for the field of research and clinical practice. The study highlights the diversity of BRAF fusions and their response to MAPK-directed therapies, which could inform the development of personalized treatment strategies for patients with BRAF fusions. The study also underscores the importance of post-progression biopsies to optimize treatment at relapse in patients with acquired BRAF fusions. Future research could focus on identifying additional actionable targets for BRAF fusions and developing more effective MAPK-directed therapies for these patients.