Precision Oncology: a Clinical and Patient Perspective

Abstract

Molecular characterization of tumors has shifted cancer treatment strategies away from nonspecific cytotoxic treatment of histology-specific tumors toward targeting of actionable mutations that can be found across multiple cancer types. The development of high-throughput technologies such as next-generation sequencing, combined with decision support applications and availability of patient databases, has provided tools that optimize disease management. Precision oncology has proven success in improving outcomes and quality of life, as well as identifying and overcoming mechanisms of drug resistance and relapse. Addressing challenges that impede its use will improve matching of therapies to patients. Here we review the current status of precision oncology medicine, emphasizing its impact on patients – what they understand about precision oncology medicine and their hopes for the future.

Lay abstract

Precision oncology offers individualized treatment of cancer on a per-patient basis, based on the unique DNA fingerprint of a patient’s cancer. New, advanced technologies for DNA sequencing have led to rapid advancement in developing novel therapies. Decision-making tools have followed pace, leading to improved matching of therapy to patient, ultimately improving outcomes (including quality of life), building trust between patient and physician, and increasing hope for the future.

Keywords::

• outcomes
• precision oncology
• quality of life
• tumor-agnostic therapy

Author contributions

Conception/design: U Lassen, L Makaroff, A Stenzinger, A Italiano, G Vassal, J Garcia-Foncillas, B Avouac. Manuscript writing: U Lassen, L Makaroff, A Stenzinger, A Italiano, G Vassal, J Garcia-Foncillas, B Avouac. Final approval of manuscript: U Lassen, L Makaroff, A Stenzinger, A Italiano, G Vassal, J Garcia-Foncillas, B Avouac.

Financial & competing interests disclosure

U Lassen has received research grants from BMS, GSK, Pfizer and Roche, and participated on advisory boards for Bayer, Novartis and Pfizer. L Makaroff has received grants from Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Ferring, Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Roche and Seagen, and participated on advisory boards/speaker’s bureau for Bayer. A Stenzinger received research grants from BMS, Bayer and Chugai, and participated in advisory boards/speaker’s bureaus for AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eli Lilly, Illumina, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics and Thermo Fisher. A Italiano has held an advisory role for Bayer Healthcare. G Vassal provided advice to Bayer, BMS, Roche/Genentech, Celgene, Debiopharm, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Pfizer, Servier and Takeda without personal remuneration. J Garcia-Foncillas received research grants from Merck and Roche and participated in advisory boards/speaker’s bureau for AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche. B Avouac participated in advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Roche and BMS, and provided advice to Pfizer, Incyte, Ipsen and Takeda. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

Medical writing assistance was provided by I Koo and funded by Bayer.

Additional information

Funding

Medical writing assistance was provided by I Koo and funded by Bayer