Bioinformatic Methods and Bridging of Assay Results for Reliable Tumor Mutational Burden Assessment in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

IntroductionTumor mutational burden (TMB) has emerged as a clinically relevant biomarker that may be associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy. Standardization of TMB measurement is essential for implementing diagnostic tools to guide treatment.ObjectiveHere we describe the in-depth evaluation of bioinformatic TMB analysis by whole exome sequencing (WES) in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples from a phase III clinical trial.MethodsIn the CheckMate 026 clinical trial, TMB was retrospectively assessed in 312 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (58% of the intent-to-treat population) who received first-line nivolumab treatment or standard-of-care chemotherapy. We examined the sensitivity of TMB assessment to bioinformatic filtering methods and assessed concordance between TMB data derived by WES and the FoundationOne((R)) CDx assay.ResultsTMB scores comprising synonymous, indel, frameshift, and nonsense mutations (all mutations) were 3.1-fold higher than data including missense mutations only, but values were highly correlated (Spearman's r=0.99). Scores from CheckMate 026 samples including missense mutations only were similar to those generated from data in The Cancer Genome Atlas, but those including all mutations were generally higher. Using databases for germline subtraction (instead of matched controls) showed a trend for race-dependent increases in TMB scores. WES and FoundationOne CDx outputs were highly correlated (Spearman's r=0.90).ConclusionsParameter variation can impact TMB calculations, highlighting the need for standardization. Encouragingly, differences between assays could be accounted for by empirical calibration, suggesting that reliable TMB assessment across assays, platforms, and centers is achievable.