Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

Despite the risk of missing mutations, oncologists predominantly use convenient, less-invasive liquid biopsies to test for biomarkers at disease progression. A more invasive tissue biopsy is generally reserved for situations where the cancer behaves unexpectedly, such as a sudden shift from bone-only to visceral disease, which might suggest a missed biological driver.

Related Insights

For extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, obtaining a sufficient tissue sample for diagnosis and molecular profiling can be extremely difficult. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing, or liquid biopsy, serves as a crucial alternative in these cases, providing a non-invasive method to secure a diagnosis and identify actionable mutations when a traditional tissue biopsy is not feasible.

While liquid biopsies are a valuable, less invasive tool, a negative result is inconclusive for ruling out actionable mutations in NSCLC. It may simply mean the tumor isn't shedding enough DNA. Therefore, a negative liquid biopsy should never be the final word; it must be followed by a tissue biopsy to ensure patients don't miss out on targeted therapies.

ctDNA testing (liquid biopsy) is more effective than tissue biopsy for identifying ESR1 mutations. It samples DNA from all metastatic sites, capturing the disease's genetic heterogeneity and reflecting the most active resistance mechanisms, unlike a single-site needle biopsy which can miss them.

Dr. Wander favors liquid biopsies for tracking disease progression because they are safer and easier for patients. While acknowledging that tissue biopsies can sometimes detect mutations missed by liquid ones (10-30% discordance), he believes rapidly advancing technology will soon minimize these discrepancies, making them the standard for monitoring.

Retesting for biomarkers with liquid biopsy in the third-line setting is crucial. It can uncover new, actionable mutations that have emerged during treatment or confirm the absence of resistance mutations, potentially allowing patients to benefit from re-challenging with a previously used targeted therapy.

Clinicians must recognize that liquid and solid biopsies show significant discordance. ESR1 mutations are more frequently detected in liquid assays, while PIK3CA mutations are more often found in solid tissue. This variability by gene directly impacts the optimal testing strategy for patients.

While re-biopsying at disease progression is the "by-the-book" standard to confirm biomarkers like HER2, clinicians acknowledge it is often skipped. The difficulty of obtaining tissue and the desire to provide patients with potential treatment options create a gap between guidelines and clinical reality.

Patients with HER2-positive GI cancers can lose expression after treatment. While re-biopsy is ideal, it's often impractical or risky. In these cases, clinicians find ctDNA analysis of HER2 copy numbers to be a reliable alternative for guiding subsequent treatment decisions.

Even with contemporaneously collected samples, biomarker concordance between solid tissue and liquid biopsies is not uniform. Data shows ESR1 mutations are consistently more likely to be discordant—often found only in liquid—than PIK3CA or AKT mutations, reinforcing the need for gene-specific testing strategies.

The standard of care for GIST is evolving to mandate molecular testing at two key points: initial diagnosis and at the time of progression on first-line therapy. Using ctDNA at progression is now deemed critical to identify acquired resistance mechanisms, which directly informs the selection of subsequent, more effective therapies and avoids ineffective treatments.