A new paradigm in oncology that matches therapies to molecular profiles rather than cancer location
Imagine walking into an oncologist's office and instead of being treated based solely on where your cancer originated—breast, lung, or colon—your doctor analyzes the unique genetic fingerprints of your tumor and selects a treatment specifically designed to target those molecular abnormalities.
This revolutionary approach represents the promise of precision oncology, a field that is fundamentally transforming how we combat cancer.
At the forefront of this transformation are innovative clinical trial designs known as basket trials, which represent a radical departure from traditional cancer research methods. Unlike conventional trials that focus on a single cancer type, basket trials test whether drugs that target specific molecular alterations can be effective across multiple cancer types that share those same genetic changes 3 . Leading this charge is MD Anderson Cancer Center's Precision Medicine Clinical Trials Platform, which pioneered one of the first precision medicine programs across tumor types back in 2007 1 .
Treatments target specific genetic mutations rather than cancer location
Therapies are matched to individual patient's tumor profiles
Moving beyond the one-size-fits-all approach to cancer treatment
Focus on specific molecular alterations regardless of cancer origin 5 . Picture an actual basket collecting various items that share a common characteristic—a basket trial "collects" patients with different cancer types who all share the same genetic mutation and tests a drug targeting that mutation 6 .
Investigate multiple targeted therapies for a single cancer type that has been stratified into different molecular subgroups 6 . Think of an umbrella covering multiple groups—patients with the same cancer type are categorized by their molecular profiles and assigned to different targeted treatments accordingly.
Perpetual trials that allow researchers to add new treatment arms as promising drugs emerge and remove arms that prove ineffective, all under a single master protocol 6 . This adaptive design makes drug evaluation more efficient and responsive to emerging evidence.
| Trial Type | Focus | Design Approach | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| Basket Trial | Targets specific molecular alterations across cancer types | Tests single targeted therapy on multiple cancers sharing a mutation | NTRK fusion trial across 17 cancer types 3 |
| Umbrella Trial | Multiple therapies for a single cancer type | Stratifies patients with same cancer by molecular markers into parallel sub-studies | Lung-MAP testing multiple targeted drugs in lung cancer 5 |
| Platform Trial | Flexible, ongoing evaluation of multiple interventions | Allows adding/removing treatment arms during trial using shared control groups | STAMPEDE trial for prostate cancer 6 |
By testing targeted therapies across multiple cancer types simultaneously, researchers can more quickly identify which patients benefit from specific treatments 3 .
For uncommon genetic alterations, it would be nearly impossible to recruit enough patients with the same cancer type for a traditional trial. Basket trials solve this by pooling patients across different cancer types 5 .
Master protocols standardize procedures across multiple sub-studies, reducing operational complexity and costs 6 .
MD Anderson's Initiative for Molecular Profiling and Advanced Cancer Therapy
The Initiative for Molecular Profiling and Advanced Cancer Therapy (IMPACT) launched at MD Anderson Cancer Center in 2007 as one of the first precision medicine programs across tumor types 1 . At a time when many doubted the feasibility of matching therapies to tumor genetics in solid tumors, IMPACT set out to test a revolutionary hypothesis: that selection of therapy based on patients' tumor molecular analysis would improve clinical outcomes compared to the standard approach 1 .
Patients with advanced cancer who had exhausted standard treatments underwent tumor molecular analysis. In the early years, this involved PCR assays to identify mutations in genes like BRAF, KRAS, or EGFR. As technology advanced, the program incorporated multigene assays and eventually next-generation sequencing capable of analyzing hundreds of genes 1 .
When molecular profiling revealed a "targetable" alteration, patients were directed to clinical trials with drugs designed to inhibit that specific target. When no matched trial was available, patients received non-matched targeted therapy 1 .
Researchers meticulously documented treatment responses, progression-free survival (how long patients lived without their cancer worsening), and overall survival, comparing results between matched and non-matched groups 1 .
The findings from the IMPACT study provided some of the earliest convincing evidence supporting the precision medicine approach in oncology. The initial analysis included 1,144 patients with advanced cancer, with 40.2% having at least one identifiable molecular abnormality 1 .
Response Rate with Matched Therapy
Time to Treatment Failure (Matched)
Overall Survival (Matched)
| Outcome Measure | Matched Targeted Therapy | Non-Matched Therapy | Statistical Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objective Response Rate | 27% | 5% | P < .0001 |
| Median Time to Treatment Failure | 5.2 months | 2.2 months | P < .0001 |
| Median Overall Survival | 13.4 months | 9.0 months | P = .017 |
Perhaps even more compelling, when patients served as their own controls, matched targeted therapy resulted in longer time to treatment failure compared to patients' previous line of therapy (5.2 months vs. 3.1 months), whereas non-matched therapy showed no such benefit 1 .
Advanced technologies powering the precision oncology revolution
This high-throughput technology enables comprehensive analysis of hundreds of cancer-related genes simultaneously from small tissue samples 1 . NGS has replaced older single-gene tests, providing a more complete picture of the molecular landscape of each patient's tumor.
This innovative approach detects tumor DNA circulating in the blood, allowing for non-invasive molecular profiling and monitoring of treatment response 4 . The Van Morris team at MD Anderson used liquid biopsies to analyze RNA signatures from patients with colorectal cancer, identifying differences between exceptional responders and other patients 4 .
The most advanced approaches integrate genomic, transcriptomic (RNA), proteomic (protein), and immunomic (immune system) data to build a comprehensive picture of each tumor's unique biology 3 .
The massive datasets generated by these technologies require sophisticated computational tools and artificial intelligence algorithms to identify patterns and match patients to optimal treatments 3 .
| Drug Name | Molecular Target | Approval Year | Response Rate | Key Cancer Types Responding |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pembrolizumab | Mismatch Repair Deficiency | 2017 | 39.6% | Colorectal, endometrial, multiple others 3 |
| Larotrectinib | NTRK fusions | 2018 | 75% | 17 different cancer types 3 |
| Entrectinib | NTRK fusions | 2019 | 57% | 10 different cancer types 3 |
| Dostarlimab | Mismatch Repair Deficiency | 2021 | 41.6% | Endometrial, colorectal, others 5 |
Where do we go from here?
While basket trials represent a significant advance, they still take a "one-target-fits-all" approach. The next frontier involves creating truly personalized combinations for individual patients based on their unique molecular profiles 3 . As technologies advance and costs decrease, the field is moving from drug-centered trials to patient-centered approaches where treatments are customized to each patient's specific biomarker profile 5 .
Current precision oncology primarily focuses on genetic alterations, but researchers are increasingly recognizing the importance of other factors, including the tumor microenvironment, immune system interactions, and metabolic characteristics 3 . Integrating these diverse data types through multi-omic approaches will be essential to overcoming the complex mechanisms of treatment resistance 1 .
Researchers are increasingly using real-world data from clinical practice to complement traditional clinical trials 3 . Digital applications that directly capture patient-reported outcomes, combined with artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms, are creating new opportunities to accelerate knowledge and optimize treatment selection 3 .
Despite the progress, significant challenges remain. The same drug may have different effectiveness across cancer types with the same mutation due to additional molecular factors 5 . For example, BRAF V600E mutations predict response to BRAF/MEK inhibitors in many cancers but show limited activity in colorectal cancer due to EGFR-mediated resistance 5 .
Basket trials and precision medicine platforms represent more than just incremental advances in cancer research—they embody a fundamental shift in how we understand and treat cancer. By moving beyond the organ-by-organ approach to a molecular-based strategy, these innovations have accelerated drug development, brought effective treatments to patients who would have previously had no options, and demonstrated that matching therapy to tumor biology can significantly improve outcomes.
The work pioneered at MD Anderson Cancer Center and other leading institutions has created a new paradigm in which cancer is increasingly defined by its molecular characteristics rather than its tissue of origin. As research continues to unravel the complexity of cancer biology and technologies enable increasingly sophisticated analyses, the precision oncology approach promises to deliver even more personalized, effective, and compassionate cancer care.
"The ability to conduct high-impact clinical research with first-in-kind clinical trials offers our patients the highest quality of patient care beyond standard practices."