PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 5, 2026Cancer Research0 citations

Abstract 3820: Concordance analyses of a rapid, targeted, and comprehensive genomic profiling panel for the detection of guideline-recommended biomarkers in non-small cell lung cancer

View Full Paper
AWAmanda WilliamsonHPHardik I. ParikhJWJon I. Williams

Key Points

  • Evaluate the concordance of a rapid genomic profiling panel for detecting biomarkers in non-small cell lung cancer.
  • Retrospective analysis of 200 advanced NSCLC samples tested with OSI and re-tested with OPA.
  • Concordance focused on specific DNA variants and RNA fusions associated with lung cancer.
  • Assessment of sensitivity and specificity relative to standard assays used in biomarker detection.
  • Evaluation of workflow metrics including turnaround time and ease of use.
  • OPA demonstrated 96.7% concordance for SNV/Indels and 100% for CNVs and fusions.
  • Specificity of OPA was 99.89%, with high accuracy in detecting actionable biomarkers.
  • Turnaround time with OPA was 1 day with less than 1-hour hands-on time for testing.

Abstract

Abstract Targeted therapies and immunotherapies have improved survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). For advanced and early-stage disease, clinical guidelines emphasize timely biomarker results to optimize outcomes. Laboratories face challenges in meeting expanding biomarker demands while conserving tissue and maintaining turnaround times suitable for clinical use and trial enrollment. This study evaluated concordance between the targeted Oncomine™ Precision Assay (OPA), a rapid, low-input NGS panel, and the OmniSeq® INSIGHT (OSI) comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) assay and assessed OPA’s feasibility for expedited biomarker reporting in routine practice. We retrospectively selected 200 advanced NSCLC samples with residual nucleic acid previously tested by OSI. DNA and RNA were re-run using OPA on the Genexus instrument with inter-assay controls. Concordance analyses focused on DNA variants in BRAF, EGFR, ERBB2(HER2), KRAS, and MET, and RNA fusions in ALK, MET, RET, ROS1, and NTRK1-NTRK3. Sensitivity and specificity of OPA relative to OSI were calculated. Workflow metrics including ease-of-use and hands-on time were also evaluated.In a preliminary cohort of 37 samples, OPA showed Assay-QC pass rates of 95% (DNA) and 100% (RNA). Five samples that failed OSI RNA QC passed OPA, though no additional fusions were detected; these were excluded from concordance calculations. Averaged sequencing metrics were 1.07M DNA mapped reads and 125,180 RNA fusion mapped reads. Inter-assay controls were 100% concordant for SNV/Indels (20/20) and fusions (44/44). In the clinical cohort, OPA showed 96.7% for SNV/Indels (29/30), 100% for CNVs (3/3) and fusions (2/2). Specificity was 99.89%, with one potential false positive possibly below OSI’s limit of detection (LOD). Turnaround time was 1 day with 1-hour hands-on time. OPA demonstrated high concordance with OSI for a defined set of actionable NSCLC biomarkers. While not all clinically relevant biomarkers (e.g., TMB, MSI, or genes outside the OPA panel) were assessed, results showed strong analytical agreement for overlapping targets. CGP assays like OSI remain the standard for broad biomarker testing in advanced NSCLC, but OPA’s rapid turnaround and low-input requirements offer a practical option for timely detection of select actionable biomarkers, making it a useful complement to CGP when time or tissue is limited. Citation Format: Amanda Williamson, Hardik Parikh, Jon Williams, Jie An, Erin DeBlasi, Alison Roos, Leandra Blann, Luca Quagliata, Mark Tomilo, Marcia Eisenberg, Brian Caveney, Taylor J. Jenson, Shakti Ramkissoon, Eric Severson. Concordance analyses of a rapid, targeted, and comprehensive genomic profiling panel for the detection of guideline-recommended biomarkers in non-small cell lung cancer abstract. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 3820.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Williamson et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d1fceba79560c99a0a2ac7https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.am2026-3820
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Abstract 5359: Precision oncology in practice: Comprehensive genomic profiling identifies actionable alterations and guides therapeutic selection in 756 clinical solid tumors.2026
  2. 2Abstract 3252: Simplified genomic profiling using Aspyre Lung solves real-life challenges with limited and poor-quality tissue2026
  3. 3Analytical Validation and Clinical Implementation of a 1080-Gene Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Assay with Integrated Cloud-Based Analysis for Solid Tumor Molecular Oncology2026
  4. 4Abstract 1310: Serial plasma comprehensive genomic profiling detects therapy resistance and guides management of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.2026 · 1 citations
  5. 5ERBB2 Mutation Testing in NSCLC: A Pan-European Real-World Evaluation of the Oncomine Precision Assay2025 · 1 citations