Interim analysis of a new study examining the impact of VeriStrat testing on treatment decisions among patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was presented in September at the 2017 Chicago Multidisciplinary Symposium in Thoracic Oncology, sponsored by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. The poster presentation was entitled, “Insight Study Interim Analysis: Impact of VeriStrat Results on Patient Management in Early and Locally Advanced NSCLC.”
The VeriStrat test is a predictive and prognostic blood-based proteomic test that helps guide treatment decisions for patients with advanced NSCLC. The test is used to assess disease aggressiveness by characterizing host response to the tumor, classifying patients as either VeriStrat-good or VeriStrat-poor.
“Historic data have shown the utility of VeriStrat in patients with advanced stage NSCLC. Results of this interim analysis of the Insight study show that VeriStrat testing also impacts treatment planning for patients with early-stage disease,” explains lead author of the study Paul Walker, MD. “Treatment strategies were significantly different for patients in this cohort with a VeriStrat-good status versus those who tested VeriStrat-poor.”
Insight is a national, multiinstitutional prospective observational trial of patients with NSCLC for whom physicians ordered VeriStrat testing. The primary endpoint of the study is observing the impact of VeriStrat on treatment planning. An interim analysis of 714 patients enrolled between May 2016 and June 2017 was conducted on the primary study endpoint. The analysis focused on the 170-patient subset with stage IA-IIIA disease at the time of study entry.
The interim analysis showed that patients who tested VeriStrat-good (VS-good) were treated significantly differently from patients who tested VeriStrat-poor (VS-poor), receiving nonsystemic treatments such as radiation therapy (11%), surgery (12%), or observation (11%). Patients who tested VS-poor did not receive these treatments. Nearly all patients with a VS-poor test result received systemic therapies (97%), compared to 66% of the VS-good patients. In contrast, per multivariate analysis, treatment decisions were not affected by other prognostic factors, such as performance status, histology, and age.
For more information, visit Biodesix.
