PO.ET07.02 · 实验与分子治疗

整合基因组分析揭示化疗反应的药物基因组学决定因素

Integrative genomic analysis reveals pharmacogenomic determinants of chemotherapy response

海报缩略图:整合基因组分析揭示化疗反应的药物基因组学决定因素
编号 3141 展板 9 时间 4/20 02:00–05:00 区域 Section 18 主讲 Gowhar Shafi, PhD
分会场 Pharmacogenomics and Translational Biomarkers for Precision Cancer Therapy
查看 PDF 下载 PDF 🔒 查看 / 下载完整 PDF 需登录并开通下载套餐 · 查看套餐 / 开通 AACR 官方页面

作者与单位 Authors & Affiliations

Djuraev Farrukh1, yashodhara Bhattacharya2, Mohan Uttarwar2, Sandhya Iyer2, Hrishita Kothavade2, Mina Darooei3, Madhura Basavalingegowda2, Hetakshi Kurani3, Bharat Bhosale4, Aarthi Ramesh2, Gowhar Shafi3

1Tashkent Medical Park LLC, Tashkent, Uzbekistan,23OneCell Diagnostics India Private Limited, Pune, India,4BD Precision Oncology Clinic, Mumabi, India

摘要 Abstract

中文摘要
背景:药物基因组学(PGx)标志物对于理解患者对化疗药物的反应至关重要。它们影响患者对氟嘧啶类和伊立替康等常用化疗药物的代谢,从而影响疗效和发生严重毒性的风险。尽管PGx检测的意义已得到充分确立,但其基因组分析与临床解读仍面临诸多挑战,包括许多变异的临床证据有限、对药物基因组学相关区域的捕获不完整、肿瘤异质性和采样偏倚以及变异解读等问题。乌兹别克人群中的许多队列研究也凸显了这些挑战,其中一项针对99例乌兹别克癌症患者(乳腺癌、胃癌、结直肠癌)的研究,在相当一部分个体中鉴定出具有临床意义的DPYD IVS14+1G>A剪接位点变异(又称DPYD *2A等位基因),表明该人群中存在DPD相关的5-FU风险,值得在治疗前予以考虑。本研究阐述了在临床情境下,全面基因组分析(CGP)及药物基因组学标志物解读对于有效化疗表现的重要意义。 方法:对124例采用我们的CGP检测进行基因组分析的患者进行了药物基因组学变异的回顾性研究。该队列涵盖的癌症类型包括乳腺癌、结肠癌、肺癌、黑色素瘤、胰腺癌、胃癌、卵巢癌、直肠癌及肝胆道癌。采用二代测序(NGS)及OncoIndx®检测panel对这些患者进行CGP。 结果:在124例接受分析患者的CGP结果中,检测到三个关键的药物基因组学标志物。92%(n=114)的患者检测到DPYD野生型基因型,解读为在接受5-FU/氟嘧啶类化疗时不良事件风险降低。另有2.4%(n=3)的患者检测到DPYD c.1129-5923C(HapB3)变异,解读为影响DPYD功能,在接受标准剂量5-FU/氟嘧啶类化疗时可能影响治疗结局并导致毒性增加。此外,4%(n=5)检测到TYMS野生型基因型,0.8%(n=1)为杂合型,4.8%(n=6)的患者检测到6bp缺失,解读为可引起毒性/不良药物反应增加。另外,9.7%(n=12)的患者检测到UGT1A1野生型,该基因型决定对伊立替康类化疗的反应。 结论:本研究强调,从分析得到的基因型中分析并有效解读患者的PGx表型,是降低严重不良事件风险、指导更安全有效化疗给药的关键举措。
查看英文原文 English abstract
Background: Pharmacogenomic (PGx)markers are critical in understanding patient responses to chemotherapeutic agents. They influence how patients metabolize popular chemotherapeutic agents like fluoropyrimidines and irinotecan, thereby impacting efficacy and risk of severe toxicity. Although PGx testing significance is well established, their genomic profiling and clinical interpretation involves challenges including limited clinical evidence for many variants, incomplete capture of pharmacogenomic-relevant regions, tumor heterogeneity and sampling bias, and variant interpretation. Many cohort studies among the Uzbek population have also highlighted the challenges including the one among 99 Uzbek cancer patients (breast, gastric, colorectal) identified the clinically significant DPYD IVS14+1G>A splice-site variant, also known as the DPYD *2A allele in a significant fraction of individuals indicating that DPD-related 5-FU risk is present in the population and merits pretreatment consideration. Our current study presents the significance of a comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) and interpretation of pharmacogenomic markers for effective chemotherapeutic performance in clinical scenario. Methods: A total of 124 patients who were genomically profiled using our CGP assay was retrospectively investigated for pharmacogenomic variants. The cohort included cancer types including breast, colon, lung, melanoma, pancreatic, stomach, ovarian, rectal, and hepatobiliary tract. CGP was performed on these patients using next-generation sequencing (NGS) with the OncoIndx® panel. Results: From the CGP results of the 124 profiled patients, three critical pharmacogenomic markers were detected. The DPYD wildtype genotype was detected in 92% (n=114) of patients which was interpreted to be associated with reduced risk of adverse events when treated with 5-FU/ fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. Another 2.4% (n=3) of patients were detected with DPYD c.1129-5923C (HapB3) variant which was interpreted to impact DPYD function and can affect treatment outcomes leading to increased toxicity when treated with standard dosage of 5- FU / fluoropyrimidine-based- based chemotherapy. Further, 4% (n=5) were detected with wildtype genotype of TYMS, and 0.8% (n=1) heterozygous, and 4.8% (n=6) patients detected with 6bp deletion interpreted to cause increased toxicity/ADR. In addition, 9.7% (n=12) of patients were detected with UGT1A1 wildtype which determines response o irinotecan-based chemotherapy. Conclusion: This study, highlights the significance of profiling and effective interpretation of a patient's PGx phenotype from the profiled genotype as a critical measure to lower risk of debilitating adverse events and guide towards safer, more effective dosing of chemotherapy.
利益披露 Disclosure
D. Farrukh, None.. M. Darooei, None.. H. Kurani, None.. B. Bhosale, None.. G. Shafi, None.

← 返回 AACR 2026 检索