Discordance in Recommendation Between Next-Generation Sequencing Test Reports and Molecular Tumor Boards in India

• Published in: JCO global oncology Vol. 10; no. 10; p. e2300330
• Main Authors: Mathew, Aju, Davis, Sissmol, Boby, Jeffrey Mathew, R I, Anu, Suryavanshi, Moushumi, Dawood, Shaheenah S, Panda, Pankaj Kumar, Nag, Shona Milon, Das, Arunangshu, Rohatgi, Nitesh, Popat, Sanjay, Shah, Riyaz N H, Thampy, Cherian, Parikh, Aparna Raj, Yadav, Siddhartha, Mehta, Prashant, Singh, Randeep, Mukherji, Deborah, Shilpakar, Ramila, Mullapally, Sujith Kumar, Sirohi, Bhawna
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Wolters Kluwer Health 01-03-2024; American Society of Clinical Oncology
• Subjects: High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing; Humans; India; Medical Oncology; Neoplasms - diagnosis; Neoplasms - genetics; Neoplasms - therapy; ORIGINAL REPORTS; Precision Medicine; India
• ISSN: 2687-8941; 2687-8941
• DOI: 10.1200/GO.23.00330

Accurate understanding of the genomic and transcriptomic data provided by next-generation sequencing (NGS) is essential for the effective utilization of precision oncology. Molecular tumor boards (MTBs) aim to translate the complex data in NGS reports into effective clinical interventions. Often, MTB treatment recommendations differ from those in the NGS reports. In this study, we analyze the discordance between these recommendations and the rationales behind the discordances, in a non-high-income setting, with international input to evaluate the necessity of MTB in clinical practice.
We collated data from MTB that were virtually hosted in Chennai, India. We included patients with malignancies who had NGS reports on solid tissue or liquid biopsies, and excluded those with incomplete data. MTB forms and NGS reports of each clinical case were analyzed and evaluated for recommendation concordance. Concordance was defined as an agreement between the first recommendation in the MTB forms and the therapeutic recommendations suggested in the NGS report. Discordance was the absence of the said agreement. The rationales for discordance were identified and documented.
Seventy MTB reports were analyzed with 49 cases meeting the inclusion criteria. The recommendation discordance was 49% (24 of 49). Discordant recommendations were mainly due to low level of evidence for the drug (75% of cases).
The discordance between MTB and NGS vendor recommendations highlights the clinical utility of MTB. The educational experiences provided by this initiative are an example of how virtual academic collaborations can enhance patient care and provider education across geographic borders.