{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: ESMO Recommendations on clinical reporting of genomic test results for solid cancers.
{Author}: van de Haar J;Roepman P;Andre F;Balmaña J;Castro E;Chakravarty D;Curigliano G;Czarnecka AM;Dienstmann R;Horak P;Italiano A;Marchiò C;Monkhorst K;Pritchard CC;Reardon B;Russnes HEG;Sirohi B;Sosinsky A;Spanic T;Turnbull C;Van Allen E;Westphalen CB;Tamborero D;Mateo J;
{Journal}: Ann Oncol
{Volume}: 0
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 Jul 9
{Factor}: 51.769
{DOI}: 10.1016/j.annonc.2024.06.018
{Abstract}: <B>BACKGROUND: </B>Genomic tumour profiling has a crucial role in the management of patients with solid cancers, as it helps selecting and prioritising therapeutic interventions based on prognostic and predictive biomarkers, as well as identifying markers of hereditary cancers. Harmonised approaches to interpret the results of genomic testing are needed to support physicians in their decision making, prevent inequalities in precision medicine and maximise patient benefit from available cancer management options.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Translational Research and Precision Medicine Working Group assembled a group of international experts to propose recommendations for preparing clinical genomic reports for solid cancers. These recommendations aim to foster best practices in integrating genomic testing within clinical settings. After review of available evidence, several rounds of surveys and focused discussions were conducted to reach consensus on the recommendation statements. Only consensus recommendations were reported. Recommendation statements were graded in two tiers based on their clinical importance: level A (required to maintain common standards in reporting) and level B (optional but necessary to achieve ideal practice).<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Genomics reports should present key information in a front page(s) followed by supplementary information in one or more appendices. Reports should be structured into sections: (i) patient and sample details; (ii) assay and data analysis characteristics; (iii) sample-specific assay performance and quality control; (iv) genomic alterations and their functional annotation; (v) clinical actionability assessment and matching to potential therapy indications; and (vi) summary of the main findings. Specific recommendations to prepare each of these sections are made.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>We present a set of recommendations aimed at structuring genomics reports to enhance physician comprehension of genomic profiling results for solid cancers. Communication between ordering physicians and professionals reporting genomic data is key to minimise uncertainties and to optimise the impact of genomic tests in patient care.