| name | bio-clinical-databases-tumor-mutational-burden |
| description | Calculates tumor mutational burden from WES/WGS/panel data with Friends of Cancer Research harmonization equations, per-assay calibration (FDA 10/Mb = 7.8 TSO500 = 8.4 OncomineTML), synonymous/indel/germline filtering, hypermutator tiering, blood TMB, and integration with HLA-LOH and neoantigen quality (Luksza 2017 fitness). Use when assessing ICI eligibility under tumor-specific cutoffs (McGrail 2021), comparing tissue vs bTMB, or auditing TMB-H reporting against ESMO 2024 and FDA pembrolizumab pan-tumor 2020. |
| tool_type | python |
| primary_tool | cyvcf2 |
Version Compatibility
Reference examples tested with: cyvcf2 0.30+, VEP 111+ (or snpEff 5.2+), pandas 2.2+, numpy 1.26+, LOHHLA 1.0+ (Marty 2017), DASH 1.0+ (Montesion 2021). v4.1 (May 2024) gnomAD is current for germline subtraction. Friends of Cancer Research TMB harmonization framework (Vega 2021 Ann Oncol) and ESMO 2024 (Mosele Ann Oncol) define the operational thresholds.
Before using code patterns, verify installed versions match. If versions differ:
- Python:
pip show <package> then help(module.function) to check signatures
- CLI:
<tool> --version
If code throws ImportError, AttributeError, or TypeError, introspect the installed package and adapt the example to match the actual API rather than retrying. TMB calculation requires VCF with VEP / snpEff / Funcotator consequence annotations; the panel size used as denominator MUST match the assay's actual scored region, NOT the panel's total content.
Tumor Mutational Burden; Calculation, Harmonization, ICI Eligibility
'Calculate TMB from this somatic VCF and apply ICI eligibility cutoff' -> Count nonsynonymous coding variants passing VAF/depth/germline filters; divide by assay scored region in Mb; apply assay-calibrated TMB-H cutoff; integrate with MSI / HLA-LOH / neoantigen quality.
- Python:
cyvcf2.VCF() + VEP/snpEff consequence parsing + panel-size normalization
- CLI:
bcftools view filtering + custom counting
- HLA-LOH: LOHHLA (Marty 2017 Cell) or DASH (Montesion 2021 Cancer Discov)
- Neoantigen quality: pVAC-tools, NetMHCpan-4.1, Luksza 2017 fitness model
Regulatory and Trial Landscape
| Event | Year | Threshold | Notes |
|---|
| KEYNOTE-158 + FDA pembrolizumab pan-tumor approval | 2020 | TMB-H >= 10 mut/Mb | FoundationOne CDx companion diagnostic; 10 cohorts |
| Friends of Cancer Research TMB harmonization Phase I (Merino 2020) | 2020 | -- | 11 panels vs WES truth; 3-fold panel-specific differences |
| Friends of Cancer Research Phase II (Vega 2021) | 2021 | Calibration equations | 19 platforms; per-assay calibration to WES-aligned TMB-Mb |
| ESMO 2024 (Mosele Ann Oncol) | 2024 | TMB-H >= 10/Mb retained | NOT endorsed for breast, prostate, glioma |
| KEYNOTE-189 (NSCLC + pembrolizumab + chemo) | 2018 | -- | TMB-H did NOT enrich for benefit with chemo backbone |
| POSEIDON / KEYNOTE-021 / KEYNOTE-407 | 2019-2022 | -- | TMB inconsistent with chemo backbones |
| B-F1RST + BFAST Cohort C (bTMB) | 2022 | bTMB >= 16/Mb | BFAST Cohort C FAILED primary endpoint |
Friends of Cancer Research Harmonization: Cross-Panel Calibration
Merino 2020 J Immunother Cancer: in silico panel sampling from TCGA WES truth showed panel-specific TMB can differ 3-fold for identical samples. Vega 2021 Ann Oncol derived per-panel calibration equations to translate panel TMB to WES-aligned TMB-Mb.
Per-panel calibration to FoundationOne 10/Mb sensitivity:
| Panel | Scored region (Mb) | Equivalent threshold for FDA 10/Mb pan-tumor | Fails when |
|---|
| FoundationOne CDx | 0.8 Mb scored (NOT 1.1 Mb total) | 10 mut/Mb (FDA reference; F1CDx companion) | Using 1.1 Mb panel total inflates TMB ~37%; pipeline excludes synonymous (F1CDx includes them) |
| MSK-IMPACT v3 | 0.98 Mb | ~10 (full Vega 2021 calibration recommended) | Tumor purity < 30%; non-paired-normal mode |
| MSK-IMPACT v4 | 1.22 Mb | ~10 | -- |
| TruSight Oncology 500 | ~1.3 Mb scored (from 1.94 Mb total) | 7.8 mut/Mb | Pipeline uses 10/Mb instead of Vega 2021 calibrated 7.8 |
| Oncomine Tumor Mutation Load | 1.2 Mb | 8.4 mut/Mb | Pipeline uses 10/Mb instead of Vega 2021 calibrated 8.4 |
| Caris MI Tumor Seek | ~1.2 Mb | ; (verify Caris docs) | -- |
| Tempus xT v3 | 0.6 Mb | -- | Below 0.8 Mb minimum reliability threshold |
| Predicine ATLAS | ~0.6 Mb | -- | Below 0.8 Mb minimum; high sampling variance |
TMB =/= TMB across vendors. Manuscripts that compare TMB across panels without per-assay calibration are unreviewable. Use the Vega 2021 calibration equations or WES re-projection.
Variant-Counting Subtleties
These choices alter TMB by 5-20%:
| Variable | Convention | Notes |
|---|
| Synonymous variants | FoundationOne CDx INCLUDES synonymous (rationale: reduces sampling noise); MSK-IMPACT and most academic pipelines exclude | The FDA companion diagnostic counts synonymous; frequent misconception |
| Indels | FoundationOne includes; some assays exclude frameshift only | 5-15% TMB impact |
| Germline subtraction | Paired-normal (gold standard); else gnomAD AF <=0.5% (sometimes 1%) for tumor-only | Population-stratified gnomAD AF for ancestry-diverse cohorts |
| VAF threshold | FoundationOne >=5%; >=10% for tumor-only no UMI; down to 2% with paired-normal | Lower VAF risks contamination/artifacts |
| Hotspots | COSMIC-confirmed driver hotspots typically EXCLUDED (not random) | Inflates TMB if included |
| Tumor purity | FoundationOne >=20%; MSK-IMPACT >=30% | Below floor erodes VAF-based filtering |
| VEP version | Pin to assay's annotation version | gnomAD v4 uses VEP 105 |
Hypermutator Tiering
| Class | Threshold | Common etiology |
|---|
| TMB-H (FDA pan-cancer) | >= 10 mut/Mb | Variable; ICI eligible |
| Hypermutator (research) | >= 100 mut/Mb | MMR-D, POLE-exo |
| Ultra-hypermutator | >= 500 mut/Mb | POLE+MMR concurrent |
MSI-H typically 30-50 mut/Mb; pure POLE-exo P286R 100-300 mut/Mb; POLE-exo + MMR-D exceeds 500. MSI-H and TMB-H overlap substantially in CRC and endometrial (~80% of MSI-H are TMB-H) but only ~16% of TMB-H solid tumors are MSI-H (Salem ME et al 2018 Mol Cancer Res 16:805-812).
The Tumor-Type-Specific Cutoff Debate
McGrail 2021 Ann Oncol is the most damning paper for the universal 10/Mb cutoff. TMB-H predicts ICI response in melanoma, NSCLC, bladder; but FAILS in breast, prostate, glioma. ORR in TMB-H melanoma/NSCLC/bladder was 39.8%; TMB-H breast/prostate/glioma was 15.3%. Mechanistic explanation: TMB only predicts when baseline CD8 T-cell infiltrate is present.
Sha 2020 Cell Rep Med: TMB-H predicts ICI benefit in MSS subset but adds nothing on top of MSI-H (because MSI-H is uniformly hypermutator and uniformly responsive).
Samstein 2019 Nat Genet (MSK-IMPACT 1,662 ICI-treated): cancer-specific TMB cutoffs (top 20% within each tumor type) outperform universal 10/Mb.
ESMO 2024 retained TMB-H >= 10/Mb pan-tumor but explicitly noted exceptions: NOT endorsed for breast, prostate, glioma based on negative real-world data.
Blood TMB (bTMB): The Negative-Trial Story
Gandara 2018 Nat Med: bTMB on Foundation Medicine FoundationACT panel; POPLAR + OAK retrospective. bTMB >= 16 mut/Mb showed PFS benefit with atezolizumab in NSCLC.
B-F1RST (Kim 2022): bTMB >= 16 prospectively predictive for atezolizumab first-line NSCLC.
BFAST Cohort C (Dziadziuszko 2022): FAILED primary endpoint; atezolizumab vs chemo in bTMB-H NSCLC did not improve investigator-assessed PFS. Dominant confounder: low ctDNA shed fraction produces false-negative bTMB.
Operational state: bTMB is research-grade in tissue-naive settings; tissue TMB remains the regulatory standard.
Neoantigen Quality: Beyond Raw TMB
Luksza 2017 Nature: neoantigen fitness model. Combines "non-selfness" (TCR recognition probability via IEDB similarity) + "selfness" (MHC binding affinity differential vs WT peptide). Pancreatic-cancer validation (Balachandran 2017 Nature): long-term survivors had higher-quality neoantigens. Luksza 2022 Nature: immunoediting over 10 years.
McGranahan 2016 Science: clonal neoantigen burden (mutations present in all tumor cells) predicts ICI response better than total. Subclonal-rich tumors evade despite high TMB.
HLA-LOH (Marty 2017 Cell, LOHHLA; Montesion 2021 Cancer Discov, DASH): HLA-LOH occurs in ~40% of NSCLC and abolishes neoantigen presentation for the lost allele. ~17% pan-cancer; >30% in HNSCC / NSCLC / cervical. Co-occurs with high subclonal burden + APOBEC + immune escape.
Decision Tree by Scenario
| Scenario | Recommended path | Why |
|---|
| Pan-tumor ICI eligibility (FDA pembrolizumab) | TMB-H >= 10/Mb on FoundationOne CDx | FDA companion diagnostic |
| Non-FoundationOne panel | Apply Vega 2021 calibration to FoundationOne 10/Mb equivalent | TSO500 = 7.8; Oncomine = 8.4 |
| WES TMB | Compute directly; threshold per ESMO 2024 = 10/Mb | WES is reference standard |
| Tissue-naive bTMB | Caution: BFAST Cohort C failed | Research-grade; check ctDNA shed fraction |
| Breast / prostate / glioma | TMB-H NOT endorsed per ESMO 2024 + McGrail 2021 | Tumor-type-specific cutoffs |
| MSI-H + TMB-H concurrence | MSI-H supersedes for ICI biomarker decision | Sha 2020 |
| Hypermutator characterization (>=100/Mb) | Confirm MMR-D or POLE-exo via signatures + IHC | Co-occurrence is common |
| Neoantigen quality (research) | Luksza fitness + HLA-LOH (LOHHLA / DASH) + clonality (McGranahan) | Beyond raw TMB |
| Cross-panel comparison | Vega 2021 calibration equations OR WES re-projection | Direct comparison invalid |
Standard Workflow
Goal: Compute TMB from a VEP-annotated somatic VCF with full filtering.
Approach: Parse cyvcf2; apply VAF + depth + germline (gnomAD) filters; count nonsynonymous coding consequences; divide by scored Mb.
from cyvcf2 import VCF
import re
NONSYNONYMOUS_CONSEQUENCES = {
'missense_variant', 'stop_gained', 'stop_lost', 'start_lost', 'start_retained',
'frameshift_variant', 'inframe_insertion', 'inframe_deletion',
'splice_donor_variant', 'splice_acceptor_variant',
'protein_altering_variant', 'initiator_codon_variant'
}
PANEL_SCORED_REGION = {
'FoundationOne_CDx': 0.8,
'MSK_IMPACT_v3': 0.98,
'MSK_IMPACT_v4': 1.22,
'TSO500': 1.3,
'Oncomine_TML': 1.2,
'Caris_MI': 1.2,
'Tempus_xT_v3': 0.6,
'WES': 30.0,
'WGS': 3000.0
}
ASSAY_TMB_H_CUTOFF = {
'FoundationOne_CDx': 10.0,
'TSO500': 7.8,
'Oncomine_TML': 8.4,
'MSK_IMPACT_v3': 10.0,
: ,
:
}
():
csq_field:
[]
cons_idx = csq_header.index()
out = []
transcript csq_field.split():
fields = transcript.split()
(fields) > cons_idx:
out.append(fields[cons_idx])
out
():
target = (NONSYNONYMOUS_CONSEQUENCES)
include_synonymous:
target.add()
cons_str consequences:
cons cons_str.split():
cons target:
():
vcf = VCF(vcf_path)
cons_idx = csq_header.index() csq_header
nonsyn_count =
total_pass =
v vcf:
v.FILTER :
depth = v.INFO.get(, )
depth < min_depth:
vaf = _get_vaf(v)
vaf vaf < min_vaf:
gnomad_af = v.INFO.get(, ) v.INFO.get(, )
gnomad_af > max_gnomad_af:
total_pass +=
csq = v.INFO.get(, )
consequences = parse_consequences_from_vep(csq, csq_header)
is_nonsynonymous(consequences, include_synonymous=include_synonymous):
nonsyn_count +=
tmb = nonsyn_count / scored_region_mb
{
: (tmb, ),
: nonsyn_count,
: total_pass,
: scored_region_mb
}
():
:
ad = variant.()
ad (ad) > :
ad0 = ad[]
total = (ad0)
ad0[] / total total >
Exception:
:
af = variant.()
af (af) > :
(af[])
Exception:
():
cutoff = ASSAY_TMB_H_CUTOFF.get(assay, )
tmb_value >= :
category =
tmb_value >= :
category =
tmb_value >= cutoff:
category =
:
category =
category
TMB-MSI Concordance and Reconciliation
Goal: When MSI-H is present, TMB-H adds no information (Sha 2020).
def tmb_msi_reconcile(tmb_value, msi_status, tumor_type=None):
'''Reconcile TMB + MSI for ICI decision.'''
tmb_high = tmb_value >= 10
msi_high = msi_status == 'MSI-H'
if msi_high:
return ('ICI eligible by MSI-H (FDA 2017 pembrolizumab); TMB-H adds no information '
'(Sha 2020 Cell Rep Med).')
if tmb_high and tumor_type in ('breast', 'prostate', 'glioma'):
return ('TMB-H present but NOT endorsed for this tumor type (ESMO 2024; McGrail 2021). '
'Tumor-specific cutoffs recommended.')
if tmb_high:
return ('TMB-H pan-tumor; ICI eligible (FDA pembrolizumab 2020). '
'Confirm baseline CD8 infiltrate; check HLA-LOH (Marty 2017 LOHHLA).')
return 'TMB-low; MSS. Standard-of-care chemo.'
Per-Operation Failure Modes
1. Using panel total size as denominator (NOT scored region)
- Trigger: Compute TMB = nonsynonymous count / 1.1 Mb for FoundationOne.
- Mechanism: FoundationOne CDx total panel is 1.1 Mb; SCORED region (counted for TMB denominator) is 0.8 Mb.
- Symptom: TMB underestimated by ~37%.
- Fix: Use 0.8 Mb for FoundationOne CDx scored region per Vega 2021.
2. Cross-panel comparison without calibration
- Trigger: TSO500 reports TMB = 9.5; compared to FoundationOne 10/Mb cutoff.
- Mechanism: Vega 2021 showed equivalent threshold is 7.8/Mb on TSO500 (not 10/Mb).
- Symptom: TSO500 TMB-H called positive at incorrect threshold.
- Fix: Apply assay-specific Vega 2021 calibration; TSO500 cutoff = 7.8/Mb.
3. FoundationOne synonymous mis-handling
- Trigger: Compare academic pipeline (no synonymous) to FoundationOne reference (synonymous included).
- Mechanism: FoundationOne CDx counts synonymous; MSK-IMPACT and most academic pipelines exclude.
- Symptom: Academic pipeline TMB systematically lower than FoundationOne by ~10-20%.
- Fix: Match the counting convention to the comparison reference; document explicitly.
4. Tumor-only TMB inflated
- Trigger: Tumor-only WES with naive germline filter (gnomAD AF > 1%).
- Mechanism: Population-specific common variants leak through if gnomAD AF threshold not stratified by ancestry.
- Symptom: AFR/EAS patient TMB inflated 1.5-3x; misclassified as TMB-H.
- Fix: Stratify gnomAD AF by patient ancestry; use grpmax FAF95; threshold <= 0.5%.
5. bTMB applied without ctDNA shed check
- Trigger: Report bTMB low in a metastatic patient.
- Mechanism: Low ctDNA shed fraction produces false-negative bTMB (BFAST Cohort C failure mechanism).
- Symptom: Patient with high tissue TMB labeled bTMB-low; ICI not offered.
- Fix: Check tumor fraction (e.g., ichorCNA, MAF of known driver) before trusting bTMB-low; consider tissue TMB.
6. TMB-H applied to breast / prostate / glioma
- Trigger: ICI prescribed for TMB-H breast cancer based on pan-tumor approval.
- Mechanism: McGrail 2021 demonstrated TMB fails to enrich for ICI response in breast, prostate, glioma; ESMO 2024 explicitly excludes these.
- Symptom: ICI offered with low expectation of benefit; patient bears unnecessary toxicity.
- Fix: Apply tumor-type-specific cutoffs (Samstein 2019); document ESMO 2024 caveat in report.
7. Hotspots inflating TMB
- Trigger: Include BRAF V600E and KRAS G12C in TMB count.
- Mechanism: Driver hotspots are non-random; including biases TMB upward in driver-mutated samples.
- Symptom: TMB inflated in samples with strong drivers.
- Fix: Exclude COSMIC-confirmed hotspots (provide hotspot BED).
8. MSI-H -> add TMB-H -> additive ICI confidence
- Trigger: Report TMB-H as additional support for ICI in MSI-H patient.
- Mechanism: MSI-H is uniformly hypermutator + uniformly ICI-responsive; adding TMB-H is statistical tautology (Sha 2020).
- Symptom: Reviewer flag.
- Fix: Report MSI-H + TMB-H concurrence but explicitly note TMB-H is NOT additive given MSI-H.
9. Ignoring HLA-LOH
- Trigger: TMB-H + neoantigen prediction without LOH check.
- Mechanism: HLA-LOH abolishes neoantigen presentation for lost allele in ~17% pan-cancer (>30% HNSCC / NSCLC / cervical).
- Symptom: Apparent neoantigen burden inflated.
- Fix: Run LOHHLA (Marty 2017) or DASH (Montesion 2021); flag HLA-LOH-positive tumors.
Reconciliation: When Sources Disagree
| Pattern | Likely cause | Action |
|---|
| Vendor TMB vs WES TMB differ 2-3x | Panel-specific scored region + counting convention | Apply Vega 2021 calibration |
| FoundationOne vs MSK-IMPACT same sample differ | Synonymous handling differs | Document both; cite Vega 2021 |
| Tissue TMB vs bTMB differ | ctDNA shed fraction low; tumor heterogeneity | Trust tissue; check ctDNA fraction for bTMB confidence |
| TMB-H + MSI-H | Expected concurrence | MSI-H is the primary biomarker; TMB-H not additive |
| TMB-H + clinical PD-L1-negative | Independent biomarkers | Report both; ICI eligibility still per TMB-H pan-tumor |
| Patient with TMB-H but PR rate low | Tumor-type-specific cutoff; HLA-LOH | Apply Samstein 2019 cancer-specific cutoff; check HLA-LOH |
| POLE-exo + MMR-D | Ultra-hypermutator | ICI excellent response expected |
Quantitative Thresholds and Conventions
| Threshold | Convention | Source |
|---|
| FDA pembrolizumab pan-tumor | TMB-H >= 10 mut/Mb on FoundationOne CDx | FDA 2020 |
| TSO500 equivalent cutoff | 7.8 mut/Mb | Vega 2021 |
| Oncomine TML equivalent cutoff | 8.4 mut/Mb | Vega 2021 |
| Hypermutator | >= 100 mut/Mb | Research convention |
| Ultra-hypermutator | >= 500 mut/Mb | POLE+MMR; ICI excellent |
| MSI-H typical TMB | 30-50 mut/Mb | Salem 2018 Mol Cancer Res 16:805 |
| MSI-H + TMB-H overlap | ~80% MSI-H are TMB-H in CRC/endometrial; ~16% TMB-H are MSI-H | Salem 2018 Mol Cancer Res 16:805 |
| Tumor purity floor | FoundationOne >=20%; MSK-IMPACT >=30% | Vendor documentation |
| Min VAF | FoundationOne 5%; tumor-only no UMI 10% | Vendor documentation |
| Tumor-only germline filter | gnomAD AF <=0.5% (sometimes 1%) | Convention |
| Panel size minimum | >= 0.8 Mb workable; >= 1.0 Mb preferred; < 0.5 Mb unreliable | Vega 2021 |
| HLA-LOH frequency | ~17% pan-cancer; >30% HNSCC / NSCLC / cervical | Montesion 2021 |
Common Errors
| Symptom | Cause | Solution |
|---|
| TMB much lower than FoundationOne report | Used panel total (1.1) instead of scored (0.8) | Use 0.8 Mb for FoundationOne |
| Academic TMB systematically lower | Excluded synonymous; FoundationOne includes | Match counting convention |
| AFR / EAS tumor-only TMB inflated | gnomAD AF filter EUR-only | Use grpmax FAF95; stratify by patient ancestry |
| bTMB negative but tissue positive | Low ctDNA shed | Use tissue TMB; check fraction |
| TMB-H in breast cancer with poor response | ESMO 2024 / McGrail 2021 exclusion | Use tumor-type-specific cutoff |
| MSI-H + TMB-H reported as additive | Tautology | MSI-H is primary biomarker |
| POLE-exo + low TMB | Tumor sequencing artifact OR low tumor purity | Check VAF distribution; re-call if purity low |
| Variant counting differs across replicates | Random VAF sampling at borderline thresholds | Set explicit VAF floor + replicate-stable filter |
Anticipated Reviewer Pushback
| Pushback | Standard response |
|---|
| "Why panel-specific cutoffs?" | Vega 2021 demonstrated 3-fold panel variance; FoundationOne 10/Mb = TSO500 7.8 = Oncomine 8.4. Universal 10/Mb is wrong across non-F1 platforms. |
| "TMB-H is supposed to be tumor-agnostic" | FDA pan-tumor approval based on KEYNOTE-158; ESMO 2024 retained but excluded breast/prostate/glioma. McGrail 2021 + Samstein 2019 demonstrate tumor-type-specific cutoffs. |
| "Synonymous variants?" | FoundationOne CDx counts synonymous; academic pipelines exclude. We document the counting convention and apply Vega 2021 calibration. |
| "Why exclude hotspots?" | Driver hotspots are non-random; including biases TMB upward in driver-mutated samples vs cohort comparator. |
| "Tumor-only TMB unreliable" | Acknowledged; we apply stringent gnomAD grpmax FAF95 filtering stratified by patient ancestry; report paired-normal-validated subset separately. |
| "Why HLA-LOH integration?" | Marty 2017 + Montesion 2021 show ~17% pan-cancer (>30% HNSCC / NSCLC / cervical) lose HLA via LOH; apparent neoantigen burden over-estimated without LOH check. |
| "bTMB?" | BFAST Cohort C failed primary endpoint (Dziadziuszko 2022); bTMB is research-grade in tissue-naive only; we use tissue TMB as regulatory standard. |
| "Why ultra-hypermutator distinction?" | POLE+MMR (>=500 mut/Mb) shows superior ICI response per multiple case series; mechanistically distinct from MMR-D alone. |
References
- Marabelle A et al. 2020. Association of TMB with efficacy of pembrolizumab in advanced solid tumours from the phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 study. Lancet Oncol 21:1353.
- Merino DM et al. 2020. Establishing guidelines to harmonize tumor mutational burden (TMB). J Immunother Cancer 8:e000147. (FoC Phase I)
- Vega DM et al. 2021. Aligning TMB analytical validation efforts: TMB harmonization Phase II project. Ann Oncol 32:1626.
- Mosele MF et al. 2024. Recommendations for the use of NGS for patients with metastatic cancers. Ann Oncol 35:588. (ESMO 2024)
- McGrail DJ et al. 2021. High TMB predicts response to immunotherapy independent of clinical or pathologic features. Ann Oncol 32:661.
- Sha D et al. 2020. TMB as a predictive biomarker in solid tumors. Cell Rep Med 1:100043.
- Samstein RM et al. 2019. TMB and survival after immunotherapy across cancer types. Nat Genet 51:202.
- Chalmers ZR et al. 2017. Analysis of 100,000 human cancer genomes reveals the landscape of TMB. Genome Med 9:34.
- Yarchoan M et al. 2017. Tumor mutational burden and response rate to PD-1 inhibition. NEJM 377:2500.
- Gandara DR et al. 2018. Blood-based TMB as a predictor of response to atezolizumab in NSCLC. Nat Med 24:1441.
- Dziadziuszko R et al. 2022. Atezolizumab vs platinum-based chemotherapy in blood-based TMB-positive NSCLC: BFAST Cohort C. Nat Med 28:2541.
- Salem ME et al. 2018. Landscape of TMB in different cancers: implications for ICI response. Cancer Discov 8:1136.
- Luksza M et al. 2017. A neoantigen fitness model predicts tumour response to checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. Nature 551:517.
- Luksza M et al. 2022. Neoantigen quality predicts immunoediting in survivors of pancreatic cancer. Nature 606:389.
- McGranahan N et al. 2016. Clonal neoantigens elicit T cell immunoreactivity and sensitivity to immune checkpoint blockade. Science 351:1463.
- Marty R et al. 2017. MHC-I genotype restricts the oncogenic mutational landscape. Cell 171:1272. (LOHHLA)
- Montesion M et al. 2021. Somatic HLA class I loss is a widespread mechanism of immune evasion which refines the use of TMB as a biomarker. Cancer Discov 11:282. (DASH)
- Friends of Cancer Research TMB harmonization resources:
https://friendsofcancerresearch.org/tmb/
Related Skills
- clinical-databases/somatic-signatures - Mutational signatures including HRD (PARP) and MMR-D (ICI)
- clinical-databases/msi-detection - MSI-H is the related ICI biomarker
- clinical-databases/hla-typing - HLA typing for neoantigen prediction and LOH
- variant-calling/variant-calling - Mutect2 / Strelka2 somatic upstream
- variant-calling/clinical-interpretation - ACMG / AMP cancer framework
