Association of KRAS G13D tumor mutations with outcome in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with first-line chemotherapy with or without cetuximab

ATM mutations and E-cadherin expression define sensitivity to EGFR-targeted therapy in colorectal cancer

EGFR-targeted therapy is a key treatment approach in patients with RAS wildtype metastatic colorectal cancers (CRC). Still, also RAS wildtype CRC may be resistant to EGFR-targeted therapy, with few predictive markers available for improved stratification of patients. Here, we investigated response of 7 CRC cell lines (Caco-2, DLD1, HCT116, HT29, LS174T, RKO, SW480) to Cetuximab and correlated this to NGS-based mutation profiles, EGFR promoter methylation and EGFR expression status as well as to E-cadherin expression. Moreover, tissue specimens of primary and/or recurrent tumors as well as liver and/or lung metastases of 25 CRC patients having received Cetuximab and/or Panitumumab were examined for the same molecular markers. In vitro and in situ analyses showed that EGFR promoter methylation and EGFR expression as well as the MSI and or CIMP-type status did not guide treatment responses. In fact, EGFR-targeted treatment responses were also observed in RAS exon 2 p.G13 mutated CRC cell lines or CRC cases and were further linked to PIK3CA exon 9 mutations. In contrast, non-response to EGFR-targeted treatment was associated with ATM mutations and low E-cadherin expression. Moreover, down-regulation of E-cadherin by siRNA in otherwise Cetuximab responding E-cadherin positive cells abrogated their response. Hence, we here identify ATM and E-cadherin expression as potential novel supportive predictive markers for EGFR-targeted therapy.

Do patient access schemes for high-cost cancer drugs deliver value to society?-lessons from the NHS Cancer Drugs Fund

BACKGROUND

The NHS Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) was established in 2010 to reduce delays and improve access to cancer drugs, including those that had been previously appraised but not approved by NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence). After 1.3 billion GBP expenditure, a UK parliamentary review in 2016 rationalized the CDF back into NICE.

METHODS

This paper analyses the potential value delivered by the CDF according to six value criteria. This includes validated clinical benefits scales, cost-effectiveness criteria as defined by NICE and an assessment of real-world data. The analysis focuses on 29 cancer drugs approved for 47 indications that could be prescribed through the CDF in January 2015.

RESULTS

Of the 47 CDF approved indications, only 18 (38%) reported a statistically significant OS benefit, with an overall median survival of 3.1 months (1.4-15.7 months). When assessed according to clinical benefit scales, only 23 (48%) and 9 (18%) of the 47 drug indications met ASCO and ESMO criteria, respectively. NICE had previously rejected 26 (55%) of the CDF approved indications because they did not meet cost-effectiveness thresholds. Four drugs-bevacizumab, cetuximab, everolimus and lapatinib-represented the bulk of CDF applications and were approved for a total of 18 separate indications. Thirteen of these indications were subsequently delisted by the CDF in January 2015 due to insufficient evidence for clinical benefit-data which were unchanged since their initial approval.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude the CDF has not delivered meaningful value to patients or society. There is no empirical evidence to support a 'drug only' ring fenced cancer fund relative to concomitant investments in other cancer domains such as surgery and radiotherapy, or other noncancer medicines. Reimbursement decisions for all drugs and interventions within cancer care should be made through appropriate health technology appraisal processes.

Present and future of metastatic colorectal cancer treatment: A review of new candidate targets

In the last two decades, great efforts have been made in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) due to the approval of new target agents for cytotoxic drugs. Unfortunately, a large percentage of patients present with metastasis at the time of diagnosis or relapse after a few months. The complex molecular heterogeneity of this disease is not completely understood; to date, there is a lack of predictive biomarkers that can be used to select subsets of patients who may respond to target drugs. Only the RAS-mutation status is used to predict resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents in patients with mCRC. In this review, we describe approved targeted therapies for the management of metastatic mCRC and discuss new candidate targets on the horizon.

Recent Advances in Targeting the EGFR Signaling Pathway for the Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Outcomes for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients have been improved by treatment with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) antibodies, particularly when combined with predictive biomarkers to select patients lacking RAS mutations. New technologies such as liquid biopsy and next-generation sequencing have revealed that potential mechanisms of resistance to anti-EGFR therapies act through acquired mutations of KRAS and the EGFR ectodomain. Mutations in cross-talking molecular effectors that participate in downstream EGFR signaling are also negative predictors for anti-EGFR therapy. In the current review, we describe recent advances in anti-EGFR therapy and discuss new treatment strategies to target downstream RAS-MAPK signaling in mCRC.

In vivo and ex vivo cetuximab sensitivity assay using three-dimensional primary culture system to stratify KRAS mutant colorectal cancer

In clinic, cetuximab, an anti-EGFR antibody, improves treatment outcomes in colorectal cancer (CRC). KRAS-mutant CRC is generally resistant to cetuximab, although difference of the sensitivity among KRAS-mutants has not been studied in detail. We previously developed the cancer tissue-originated spheroid (CTOS) method, a primary culture method for cancer cells. We applied CTOS method to investigate whether ex vivo cetuximab sensitivity assays reflect the difference in sensitivity in the xenografts. Firstly, in vivo cetuximab treatment was performed with xenografts derived from 10 CTOS lines (3 KRAS-wildtype and 7 KRAS mutants). All two CTOS lines which exhibited tumor regression were KRAS-wildtype, meanwhile all KRAS-mutant CTOS lines grew more than the initial size: were resistant to cetuximab according to the clinical evaluation criteria, although the sensitivity was quite diverse. We divided KRAS-mutants into two groups; partially responsive group in which cetuximab had a substantial growth inhibitory effect, and resistant group which exhibited no effect. The ex vivo signaling assay with EGF stimulation revealed that the partially responsive group, but not the resistant group, exhibited suppressed ERK phosphorylation ex vivo. Furthermore, two lines from the partially responsive group, but none of the lines in the resistant group, exhibited a combinatory effect of cetuximab and trametinib, a MEK inhibitor, ex vivo and in vivo. Taken together, the results indicate that ex vivo signaling assay reflects the difference in sensitivity in vivo and stratifies KRAS mutant CTOS lines by sensitivity. Therefore, coupling the in vivo and ex vivo assays with CTOS can be a useful platform for understanding the mechanism of diversity in drug sensitivity.

Clinical Pharmacogenetic Testing and Application: Laboratory Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines

Pharmacogenetic testing for clinical applications is steadily increasing. Correct and adequate use of pharmacogenetic tests is important to reduce unnecessary medical costs and adverse patient outcomes. This document contains recommended pharmacogenetic testing guidelines for clinical application, interpretation, and result reporting through a literature review and evidence-based expert opinions for the clinical pharmacogenetic testing covered by public medical insurance in Korea. This document aims to improve the utility of pharmacogenetic testing in routine clinical settings.

Specific mutations in KRAS codon 12 are associated with worse overall survival in patients with advanced and recurrent colorectal cancer

Background:

Activating mutations in KRAS have been suggested as potential predictive and prognostic biomarkers. However, the prognostic impact of specific point mutations remains less clear. This study assessed the prognostic impact of specific KRAS mutations on survival for patients with colorectal cancer.

Methods:

Retrospective review of patients KRAS typed for advanced and recurrent colorectal cancer between 2010 and 2015 in a UK Cancer Network.

Results:

We evaluated the impact of KRAS genotype in 392 patients. Mutated KRAS was detected in 42.9% of tumours. KRAS mutations were more common in moderate vs well-differentiated tumours. On multivariate analysis, primary tumour T stage (HR 2.77 (1.54–4.98), P=0.001), N stage (HR 1.51 (1.01–2.26), P=0.04), curative intent surgery (HR 0.51 (0.34–0.76), P=0.001), tumour grade (HR 0.44 (0.30–0.65), P=0.001) and KRAS mutation (1.54 (1.23–2.12), P=0.005) were all predictive of overall survival. Patients with KRAS codon 12 mutations had worse overall survival (HR 1.76 (95% CI 1.27–2.43), P=0.001). Among the five most common codon 12 mutations, only p.G12C (HR 2.21 (1.15–4.25), P=0.01) and p.G12V (HR 1.69 (1.08–2.62), P=0.02) were predictive of overall survival.

Conclusions:

For patients with colorectal cancer, p.G12C and p.G12V mutations in codon 12 were independently associated with worse overall survival after diagnosis.

Clinical performance evaluation of a sensitive, rapid low-throughput test for KRAS mutation analysis using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue samples

Background

Testing for KRAS mutations in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) on formalin-fixed, paraffin embedded (FFPE) tumor tissue has become standard of care. Different molecular methods exist to determine hotspot KRAS mutations in exon 2, 3 and 4, but testing is often limited by the sensitivity and the speed of analysis. The aim of this retrospective study was to establish the clinical performance of the Idylla™ KRAS Mutation Test on FFPE tumor samples of patients with mCRC.

Methods

KRAS mutation analysis was performed using the therascreen KRAS on the RotorGene Q platform (CE-IVD; Qiagen) and results were subsequently compared to the Idylla™ KRAS Mutation Test. Discordant result testing was performed with massive parallel sequencing or alternative routine approaches.

Results

Data from 182 samples were used to show that the overall agreement between the two methods for mutation characterization was 96.7% [95%CI: 93.0%-98.5%]. Six out of 182 samples (3.3%) showed true discordant results.

Conclusion

The Idylla™ KRAS Mutation Test allows for a fast and reliable analysis of FFPE samples with a turnaround-time of two hours without the need of molecular infrastructure or expertise in order to guide the personalized treatment of colorectal cancer patients.

Pyrosequencing analysis of KRAS codon 61 mutations in Thai patients with advanced colorectal cancer

Background

KRAS, coding for a small G-protein downstream of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) plays an important role in the EGFR signaling network. Mutation in KRAS is associated with resistance to anti-EGFR in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). According to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines, screening for mutations in KRAS codons 12 and 13 in tumor samples is mandatory for all CRC patients who are candidates for anti-EGFR targeted therapy. However, some patients with undetectable mutations in codons 12/13 do not benefit from anti-EGFR treatment, and this might be because of mutations in codon 61, which is not currently recommended for screening.

Objectives

To develop an in-house pyrosequencing method to screen for KRAS codon 61 mutations, and examine the prevalence of mutations in Thai patients with advanced CRC with no detectable mutation in codons 12/13.

Materials and Methods

DNA extracted from FFPE specimens was screened for KRAS codon 61 mutations using pyrosequencing. Our method was suitable for routine clinical samples (formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue), and was able to detect 5 common mutations in codon 61 of the KRAS gene, including c.182AT (p.Q61L), c.182AG (p.Q61R), c.182AC (p.Q61P), c.183AC (p.Q61H), and c.183AT (p.Q61H).

Results

Of the 74 samples with undetectable codon 12/13 mutation examined, two (2.7%) were found to harbor mutation in codon 61.

Conclusion

Despite the low prevalence of KRAS codon 61 mutation in our population with advanced CRC, adding the mutation test into the routine molecular service deserves consideration because the cost of treatment is very expensive.

Spectrum of Gene Mutations in Colorectal Cancer: Implications for Treatment

Gene mutations acquired during colorectal carcinogenesis remain drivers of cancer progression in the metastatic setting. KRAS and NRAS mutations define a population refractory to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies, either as single agents or in combination with standard chemotherapy. High-sensitivity extended RAS testing is currently a requirement to select anti-EGFR therapy irrespective of treatment line, thus limiting unnecessary exposure and expense in patients unlikely to respond. Multiple genetic alterations driving resistance to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies have been described, with significant overlap in primary and acquired resistance mechanisms, in line with a clonal selection process. Some of them have been validated as targets for therapeutic intervention in clinical trials, such as ERBB2 amplifications. With advances in drug development and better understanding of the dynamics of target inhibition, additional gene alterations are now promising positive predictive markers for matched targeted therapies in CRC, including BRAF V600E and RNF43 mutations. Furthermore, the microsatellite instable hypermutated colorectal cancer population is particularly sensitive to immune checkpoint inhibitors. In this article, we review the expanding landscape of druggable gene alterations in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Efficacy and safety of aflibercept in metastatic colorectal cancer pretreated with bevacizumab: A report of five cases

Aflibercept is a recombinant fusion protein that acts by inhibiting tumoural angiogenesis. Efficacy data obtained in the VELOUR randomised study has contributed to the approval of aflibercept as a second-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment following an oxaliplatin-based regimen. The present study reports a case series of five patients with mCRC, who were treated in two centres since 2011 in the Compassionate Use Program for aflibercept. All patients had a KRAS mutation and previously received palliative fluoropyrimidine-oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab. A doublet with irinotecan combined with aflibercept was administered until progression of disease. The majority of patients received a greater number of aflibercept cycles than the median reported in the VELOUR study (12 vs. 7 cycles), with manageable and reversible toxicity. The most frequent adverse events observed were diarrhoea, neutropenia, fatigue, proteinuria and hypertension. Most cases obtained a progression-free survival greater than the median reported in the VELOUR study (11 vs. 6.9 months) and, in a subgroup of patients previously treated with bevacizumab, and a median survival time of ~47 months was reached from the initial treatment of the disease. The present study contrasts the efficacy and safety results obtained from the pivotal VELOUR trial, and confirms that aflibercept, used in routine clinical practice outside of the clinical trial environment, is active and well-tolerated following bevacizumab treatment.

Randomized phase II study of cetuximab versus irinotecan and cetuximab in patients with chemo-refractory KRAS codon G13D metastatic colorectal cancer (G13D-study)

Purpose

This study investigated the efficacy and safety of cetuximab-based treatment in patients with chemotherapy-resistant refractory mCRC with KRAS G13D mutation.

Patients and methods

An assessment of the efficacy and safety of cetuximab-based treatment was performed in an observation-enriched randomized controlled study comparing the cetuximab alone group (Cet group) and the combination of cetuximab and irinotecan group (CetI group) for KRAS G13D-mutated mCRC in Japan. In this study, the patients received a biweekly (500 mg/m² on day 1) or weekly (250 mg/m²) intravenous infusion of cetuximab in Cet group, or a biweekly (500 mg/m² on day 1) or weekly (250 mg/m²) intravenous infusion of cetuximab followed by irinotecan (150 mg/m²) in CetI group. Propensity score adjustment was used to achieve balance in the observational arm.

Results

Data from a total of 29 patients (10 in Cet group, 19 in CetI group) were analyzed. Crude median progression-free survival time was 2.9 months in the Cet group and 2.5 months in the CetI group. Crude disease control rates were 55.6% in the Cet group and 47.4% in the CetI group. After a median follow-up of 43 months, the crude median overall survival was 8.0 months in the Cet group and 7.6 months in the CetI group. Cetuximab-based treatment did not markedly increase any characteristic toxicity and was generally well tolerated. Propensity score analyses adjusted for performance status and number of metastases showed comparable results with the crude results.

Conclusion

Cetuximab-based treatment seemed to benefit patients with chemotherapy-resistant, refractory KRAS G13D-mutated mCRC. Our results might support the administration of cetuximab-based treatment for KRAS-mutant mCRC and would be able to provide treatment flexibility in this setting.

The biological complexity of colorectal cancer: insights into biomarkers for early detection and personalized care

Colorectal cancer has been ranked the third and second most prevalent of all cancers in men and women, respectively, and it represents the fourth most common cause of cancer deaths. In 2012, there were 1.4 million estimated cases of colorectal cancer worldwide, and 700,000 estimated deaths, which implies significant impact on public health, especially in economically-developed countries. In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of tumors, although this has been accompanied by decreased mortality, due to more appropriate and available information, earlier diagnosis, and improvements in treatment. Colorectal cancers are characterized by great genotypic and phenotypic heterogeneity, including tumor microenvironment and interactions between healthy and cancer cells. All of these traits confer a unique peculiarity to each tumor, which can thus be considered as an individual disease. Well conducted molecular and clinical characterization of each colorectal cancer is essential with a view to the implementation of precision oncology, and thus personalized care. This last aims at standardization of therapeutic plans chosen according to the genetic background of each specific neoplasm, to increase overall survival and reduce treatment side effects. Thus, prognostic and predictive molecular biomarkers assume a critical role in the characterization of colorectal cancer and in the determination of the most appropriate therapy.

RAS and BRAF in metastatic colorectal cancer management

The treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has been further refined with the development of monoclonal antibodies, cetuximab and panitumumab, towards the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Anti-EGFR therapy has afforded improved survival in those with wild-type RAS mCRC but provides no benefit and even harm in those with RAS-mutant tumors. BRAF mutations have also been shown to predict lack of clinically meaningful benefit to anti-EGFR therapy in mCRC. Mechanisms of resistance to EGFR blockade in wild-type RAS or BRAF metastatic colorectal tumors appear to converge on the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway. Clinical trials involving combined BRAF, EGFR, and/or MAPK kinase (MEK) inhibition have shown promising activity in BRAF-mutant mCRC. Here, we review pivotal clinical trials that have redefined our treatment approach in mCRC with respect to anti-EGFR therapy based on RAS and BRAF mutation status. Future studies will likely focus on improving efficacy of anti-EGFR-based therapy in mCRC through sustained MAPK pathway inhibition.

Is hepatectomy justified for patients with RAS mutant colorectal liver metastases? An analysis of 524 patients undergoing curative liver resection

BACKGROUND

RAS mutations are associated with limited overall survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases. Our aim was to determine criteria for considering hepatectomy for patients with RAS mutant colorectal liver metastases.

METHODS

Of 1,163 patients who underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases during 2005-2014, all patients operated on with curative intent who had known RAS mutation status were included. Factors associated with overall survival were determined using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 524 patients met the inclusion criteria; 212 (40%) had mutated RAS. Mutations were located on codon 12 in 128 patients (60%) and codon 13 in 29 (14%). At median follow-up of 38 months, median overall survival was 72.6 months for wild-type RAS and 50.9 months for mutated RAS (P < .001). Median overall survival for patients with codon 12 and 13 mutations was 51.9 and 50.9 months, respectively (P = .839), significantly worse than for patients with wild-type RAS (P = .005, and P = .038 for codon 12 and 13, respectively). For patients with RAS mutation, factors associated independently with worse overall survival were node-positive primary tumor, tumor >3 cm, and >7 cycles of preoperative chemotherapy. Major and 2-stage hepatectomy were not associated independently with overall survival. Median overall survival was 57, 41, and 21.5 months for patients with 1, 2, and 3 risk factors, respectively. There were no 4-year survivors in the highest-risk group.

CONCLUSION

Patients with multiple risk factors had poor overall survival after curative resection of RAS mutant colorectal liver metastases. For such patients, hepatectomy may be ill advised, and alternative therapies or further systemic therapy should be considered.

Prognostic and predictive biomarkers in metastatic colorectal cancer anti-EGFR therapy

AIM: To reviewing genetic and epigenetic make-up of metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) addicted to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signalling.

METHODS: The present study summarizes the potential value of prognostic and predictive biomarkers in selecting mCRC patients treated with anti-EGFR therapy. A meta-analysis was performed using a systematic search of PubMed, Medline and Web of Science to identify eligible papers until March 21^st, 2016 using these following terms: ‘‘colorectal cancer’’, “predictive biomarkers’’, “anti-EGFR therapy”, “KRAS”, “NRAS’’, “PIK3CA”, “TP53”, “PTEN”, ‘‘EGFR”, “MET”, “HER2”, “epiregulin”, “amphiregulin”, “prognostic biomarkers”, “BRAF”, “miRNA” and “antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) activity”. Two investigators independently evaluated and extracted data from each identified studies based on selected criteria of inclusion and exclusion.

RESULTS: The introduction of agents targeting EGFR such as cetuximab and panitumumab increased overall survival of mCRCs. Nevertheless, it has firstly became evident that response rates to cetuximab regimens in unselected patient populations were typically lower than 30%. Clinical data confirmed the predictive value of RAS mutations for resistance to cetuximab and panitumumab leading to the license of these monoclonal antibodies exclusively for the management of patients with RAS-wild type colorectal cancers. So far the identification of predictive biomarkers have generated interesting, though preliminary and, at times, conflicting data on the importance of tumour mRNA levels of EGFR ligands, of activating mutations in other genes such as NRAS and PIK3CA. The prognostic value of selected microRNAs level and ADCC activity is under investigation, while the prognostic impact of BRAF status remains controversial.

CONCLUSION: This review focuses on the personalized treatment of mCRC and discusses the potential of new prognostic and predictive biomarkers in selecting patients treated with anti-EGFR therapy.

Prognostic and Predictive Value of RAS Gene Mutations in Colorectal Cancer: Moving Beyond KRAS Exon 2

The advent of anti-EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) therapy resulted in significant progress in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer patients. However, many patients do not respond to this therapy or develop acquired resistance within a few months after the start of treatment. Since 2008, anti-EGFR therapy is restricted to KRAS wild-type patients as it has been shown that KRAS exon 2-mutated patients do not respond to this therapy. Still, up to 60 % of KRAS exon 2 wild-type patients show primary resistance to this treatment. Recently, several studies investigating the predictive and prognostic role of RAS mutations other than in KRAS exon 2 demonstrated that patients with these mutations are not responding to therapy. However, the role of these mutations has long been questioned as The National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines in Oncology and the European Medicines Agency indications had already been changed in order to restrict anti-EGFR therapy to all RAS wild-type colorectal cancer patients, while the Food and Drug Administration guidelines remained unchanged. Recently, the Food and Drug Administration guidelines have also been changed, which implies the importance of RAS mutations beyond KRAS exon 2 in colorectal cancer. In this review, we discuss the most important studies regarding the predictive and prognostic role of RAS mutations other than in KRAS exon 2 in order to demonstrate the importance of these RAS mutations in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with anti-EGFR therapy.

Mechanisms of resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in metastatic colorectal cancer

The prognosis of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remain poor despite the impressive improvement of treatments observed over the last 20 years that led to an increase in median overall survival from 6 mo, with the only best supportive care, to approximately 30 mo with the introduction of active chemotherapy drugs and targeted agents. The monoclonal antibodies (moAbs) cetuximab and panitumumab, directed against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), undoubtedly represent a major step forward in the treatment of mCRC, given the relevant efficacy in terms of progression-free survival, overall survival, response rate, and quality of life observed in several phase III clinical trials among different lines of treatment. However, the anti-EGFR moAbs were shown only to be effective in a subset of patients. For instance, KRAS and NRAS mutations have been identified as biomarkers of resistance to these drugs, improving the selection of patients who might derive a benefit from these treatments. Nevertheless, several other alterations might affect the response to these drugs, and unfortunately, even the responders eventually become resistant by developing secondary (or acquired) resistance in approximately 13-18 mo. Several studies highlighted that the landscape of responsible alterations of both primary and acquired resistance to anti-EGFR drugs biochemically converge into MEK-ERK and PIK3CA-AKT pathways. In this review, we describe the currently known mechanisms of primary and acquired resistance to anti-EGFR moAbs together with the various strategies evaluated to prevent, overcame or revert them.

New findings on primary and acquired resistance to anti-EGFR therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: do all roads lead to RAS?

Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy with the monoclonal antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab is the main targeted treatment to combine with standard chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Many clinical studies have shown the benefit of the addition of these agents for patients without mutations in the EGFR pathway. Many biomarkers, including KRAS and NRAS mutations, BRAF mutations, PIK3CA mutations, PTEN loss, AREG and EREG expression, and HER-2 amplification have already been identified to select responders to anti-EGFR agents. Among these alterations KRAS and NRAS mutations are currently recognized as the best predictive factors for primary resistance. Liquid biopsy, which helps to isolate circulating tumor DNA, is an innovative method to study both primary and acquired resistance to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. However, high-sensitivity techniques should be used to enable the identification of a wide set of gene mutations related to resistance.

Response to Cetuximab With or Without Irinotecan in Patients With Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Harboring the KRAS G13D Mutation: Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group ICECREAM Study

Purpose

RAS mutations predict lack of response to epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but preclinical studies and retrospective clinical data suggest that patients with tumors harboring the exon 2 KRAS G13D mutation may benefit from cetuximab. We aimed to assess cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in patients with molecularly selected (G13D mutation) chemotherapy-refractory mCRC in a randomized phase II trial of this rare molecular subtype.

Patients and Methods

Patients with chemotherapy-refractory KRAS G13D mutation–positive mCRC who had progressed within 6 months of irinotecan therapy were randomly assigned to cetuximab 400 mg/m2 loading dose and then 250 mg/m2 once per week with or without irinotecan 180 mg/m2 once every 2 weeks. The primary end point was 6-month progression-free survival; secondary end points were response rate, overall survival, quality of life, and toxicity.

Results

Fifty-one of 53 patients recruited over 2 years were eligible. The 6-month progression-free survival rate was 10% (95% CI, 2% to 26%) for cetuximab versus 23% (95% CI, 9% to 40%) for cetuximab plus irinotecan with a hazard ratio of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.42 to 1.32). Response and stable disease rates were 0% and 58% for monotherapy versus 9% and 70% for combination treatment, respectively. Overall survival and quality of life were similar; toxicities were higher with combination therapy.

Conclusion

In patients with G13D-mutated chemotherapy-refractory mCRC, there was no statistically significant improvement in disease control at 6 months with either cetuximab monotherapy or cetuximab plus irinotecan. No responses were seen with single-agent cetuximab. The responses observed with the combination of cetuximab and irinotecan may reflect true drug synergy or persistent irinotecan sensitivity. The ICECREAM (Irinotecan Cetuximab Evaluation and Cetuximab Response Evaluation Among Patients with a G13D Mutation) study demonstrates the need to prospectively evaluate hypotheses that were previously supported by retrospective analyses and exemplifies the value of international collaboration in trials of rare molecular subtypes.

Outcome according to KRAS-, NRAS- and BRAF-mutation as well as KRAS mutation variants: pooled analysis of five randomized trials in metastatic colorectal cancer by the AIO colorectal cancer study group

In this pooled analysis of metastatic colorectal cancer patients, mutations in KRAS, and BRAF were associated with inferior progression-free and overall survival compared with patients with non-mutated tumors. KRAS exon 2 mutation variants were associated with heterogeneous outcome compared with unmutated tumors with KRAS G12C and G13D being associated with rather poor survival.

Background

To explore the impact of KRAS, NRAS and BRAF mutations as well as KRAS mutation variants in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving first-line therapy.

Patients and methods

A total of 1239 patients from five randomized trials (FIRE-1, FIRE-3, AIOKRK0207, AIOKRK0604, RO91) were included into the analysis. Outcome was evaluated by the Kaplan–Meier method, log-rank tests and Cox models.

Results

In 664 tumors, no mutation was detected, 462 tumors were diagnosed with KRAS-, 39 patients with NRAS- and 74 patients with BRAF-mutation. Mutations in KRAS were associated with inferior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) [multivariate hazard ratio (HR) for PFS: 1.20 (1.02–1.42), P = 0.03; multivariate HR for OS: 1.41 (1.17–1.70), P < 0.001]. BRAF mutation was also associated with inferior PFS [multivariate HR: 2.19 (1.59–3.02), P < 0.001] and OS [multivariate HR: 2.99 (2.10–4.25), P < 0.001]. Among specific KRAS mutation variants, the KRAS G12C-variant (n = 28) correlated with inferior OS compared with unmutated tumors [multivariate HR 2.26 (1.25–4.1), P = 0.001]. A similar trend for OS was seen in the KRAS G13D-variant [n = 71, multivariate HR 1.46 (0.96–2.22), P = 0.10]. More frequent KRAS exon 2 variants like G12D [n = 152, multivariate HR 1.17 (0.86–1.6), P = 0.81] and G12V [n = 92, multivariate HR 1.27 (0.87–1.86), P = 0.57] did not have significant impact on OS.

Conclusion

Mutations in KRAS and BRAF were associated with inferior PFS and OS of mCRC patients compared with patients with non-mutated tumors. KRAS exon 2 mutation variants were associated with heterogeneous outcome compared with unmutated tumors with KRAS G12C and G13D (trend) being associated with rather poor survival.

Preclinical and clinical studies on afatinib in monotherapy and in combination regimens: Potential impact in colorectal cancer

Targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) or tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) has been an interesting therapeutic strategy because aberrant activation of this receptor plays an important role in the tumorgenesis of many cancer types, including colorectal cancer (CRC). After the initial promising results of EGFR-targeted therapies, therapeutic resistance is a major clinical problem. In order to overcome resistance to these EGFR-targeted therapies, new treatment options are necessary. In contrast to first generation EGFR inhibitors, afatinib (BIBW2992) is a second-generation irreversible ErbB family blocker that inhibits EGFR as well as HER2 and HER4. Consequently, treatment with afatinib may result in a distinct and more pronounced therapeutic benefit. Preclinical studies have reported promising results for afatinib in monotherapy as well as in combination with other drugs in CRC model systems. Furthermore, clinical studies examining afatinib as single agent and in combination therapy demonstrated manageable safety profile. Nevertheless, only limited antitumor activity has been observed in CRC patients. Although several combination treatments with afatinib have already been investigated, no optimal combination has been identified for CRC patients yet. As molecular tumor characteristics have gained increased importance in the choice of treatment, additional studies with biomarker-driven patient recruitment are required to further explore afatinib efficacy in CRC.

Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Standard of Care and Future Perspectives

Palliative chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer has undergone substantial changes in recent years. The implementation of modern biologicals in the treatment has substantially improved overall survival up to 30 months. With the increasing number of therapeutic options, the question of optimal treatment sequence arises, which is addressed in current studies like FIRE 4 or STRATEGIC-1. Furthermore, clinical and molecular biomarkers to predict efficacy and tolerability are urgently needed. Today, the detection of activating RAS mutations is the only validated biomarker which precludes patients from anti-EGFR treatment. The detection of BRAF mutation V600E is associated with a very poor prognosis corresponding to a survival of 9-12 months. Prospective trials evaluating an optimal approach to this subgroup are still missing. First results from strategies targeting the aberrant signal transduction are promising and require further validation. Despite the advances so far, life expectancy unfortunately continues to be limited in the majority of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. New strategies are needed to improve the prognosis. To this end, the identification of Her2/neu as a potential target and first experiences with checkpoint inhibition in patients with mismatch repair-deficient tumors are promising and also require further validation.

Codon 13 KRAS mutation predicts patterns of recurrence in patients undergoing hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Investigations regarding the impact of tumor biology after surgical management of colorectal liver metastasis have focused largely on overall survival. We investigated the impact of codon-specific KRAS mutations on the rates and patterns of recurrence in patients after surgery for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM).

METHODS

All patients who underwent curative-intent surgery for CRLM between 2002 and 2015 at Johns Hopkins who had available data on KRAS mutation status were identified. Clinico-pathologic data, recurrence patterns, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were assessed using univariable and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 512 patients underwent resection only (83.2%) or resection plus radiofrequency ablation (16.8%). Although 5-year overall survival was 64.6%, 284 (55.5%) patients recurred with a median RFS time of 18.1 months. The liver was the initial recurrence site for 181 patients, whereas extrahepatic recurrence was observed in 162 patients. Among patients with an extrahepatic recurrence, 102 (63%) had a lung recurrence. Although overall KRAS mutation was not associated with overall RFS (P = 0.186), it was independently associated with a worse extrahepatic (P = 0.004) and lung RFS (P = 0.007). Among patients with known KRAS codon-specific mutations, patients with codon 13 KRAS mutation had a worse 5-year extrahepatic RFS (P = 0.01), whereas codon 12 mutations were not associated with extrahepatic (P = 0.11) or lung-specific recurrence rate (P = 0.24). On multivariable analysis, only codon 13 mutation independently predicted worse overall extrahepatic RFS (P = 0.004) and lung-specific RFS (P = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing resection of CRLM, overall KRAS mutation was not associated with RFS. KRAS codon 13 mutations, but not codon 12 mutations, were associated with a higher risk for overall extrahepatic recurrence and lung-specific recurrence. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2698-2707. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

ICECREAM: randomised phase II study of cetuximab alone or in combination with irinotecan in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with either KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and PI3KCA wild type, or G13D mutated tumours

Background

Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer whose disease has progressed on oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-containing regimens may benefit from EGFR-inhibiting monoclonal antibodies if they do not contain mutations in the KRAS gene (are “wild type”). It is unknown whether these antibodies, such as cetuximab, are more efficacious in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer as monotherapy, or in combination with irinotecan. Lack of mutation in KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA predicts response to EFGR-inhibitors. The ICECREAM trial examines the question of monotherapy versus combination with chemotherapy in two groups of patients: those with a “quadruple wild type” tumour genotype (no mutations in KRAS, NRAS, PI3KCA or BRAF genes) and those with the specific KRAS mutation in codon G13D, for whom possibly EGFR-inhibitor efficacy may be equivalent.

Methods and design

ICECREAM is a randomised, phase II, open-label, controlled trial comparing the efficacy of cetuximab alone or with irinotecan in patients with “quadruple wild type” or G13D-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer, whose disease has progressed on, or who are intolerant of oxaliplatin- and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint is the 6-month progression-free survival benefit of the treatment regimen. Secondary endpoints are response rate, overall survival, and quality of life. The tertiary endpoint is prediction of outcome with further biological markers. International collaboration has facilitated recruitment in this prospective trial of treatment in these infrequently found molecular subsets of colorectal cancer.

Discussion

This unique trial will yield prospective information on the efficacy of cetuximab and whether this is further enhanced with chemotherapy in two distinct populations of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the “quadruple wild type”, which may ‘superselect’ for tumours sensitive to EGFR-inhibition, and the rare KRAS G13D mutated tumours, which are also postulated to be sensitive to the drug. The focus on establishing both positive and negative predictive factors for the response to targeted therapy is an attempt to improve outcomes, reduce toxicity and contain treatment costs. Tissue and blood will yield a resource for molecular studies. Recruitment, particularly of patients with the rare G13D mutation, will demonstrate the ability for international collaboration to run prospective trials in small colorectal cancer molecular subgroups.

Trial registration

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12612000901808, registered 16 August 2012.

Biochemical Classification of Disease-associated Mutants of RAS-like Protein Expressed in Many Tissues (RIT1)

RAS-like protein expressed in many tissues 1 (RIT1) is a disease-associated RAS subfamily small guanosine triphosphatase (GTPase). Recent studies revealed that germ-line and somatic RIT1 mutations can cause Noonan syndrome (NS), and drive proliferation of lung adenocarcinomas, respectively, akin to RAS mutations in these diseases. However, the locations of these RIT1 mutations differ significantly from those found in RAS, and do not affect the three mutational "hot spots" of RAS. Moreover, few studies have characterized the GTPase cycle of RIT1 and its disease-associated mutants. Here we developed a real-time NMR-based GTPase assay for RIT1 and investigated the effect of disease-associated mutations on GTPase cycle. RIT1 exhibits an intrinsic GTP hydrolysis rate similar to that of H-RAS, but its intrinsic nucleotide exchange rate is ∼4-fold faster, likely as a result of divergent residues near the nucleotide binding site. All of the disease-associated mutations investigated increased the GTP-loaded, activated state of RIT1 in vitro, but they could be classified into two groups with different intrinsic GTPase properties. The S35T, A57G, and Y89H mutants exhibited more rapid nucleotide exchange, whereas F82V and T83P impaired GTP hydrolysis. A RAS-binding domain pulldown assay indicated that RIT1 A57G and Y89H were highly activated in HEK293T cells, whereas T83P and F82V exhibited more modest activation. All five mutations are associated with NS, whereas two (A57G and F82V) have also been identified in urinary tract cancers and myeloid malignancies. Characterization of the effects on the GTPase cycle of RIT1 disease-associated mutations should enable better understanding of their role in disease processes.

KRAS mutation testing in colorectal cancer: the model for molecular pathology testing in the future

Somatic mutations in the KRAS gene often occur in colorectal cancer (CRC) and are predictive for poor response to EGFR blockade therapy. Over the past decade, routine detection of KRAS mutations has been employed in many diagnostic centers using a range of methodological approaches including Sanger sequencing, pyrosequencing, high-resolution melt analysis and more recently, next-generation sequencing approaches. This article highlights the clinical relevance of KRAS-mutated CRCs, examines advantages and disadvantages of various detection methods and highlights the considerations that are critical for an accurate, rapid and efficient workflow to detect KRAS and other RAS mutations in CRC presently and in the future.

Molecular testing to optimize therapeutic decision making in advanced colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In recent years, therapeutic advances have prolonged the survival of patients with advanced disease. Along with the addition of new treatments, an increasing body of literature explores the potential benefit of using molecular testing to define tumor, circulating, or host biomarkers of benefit to specific treatment strategies. At present, testing for specific mutations in exons 2, 3, and 4 of KRAS and NRAS has become accepted practice to select patients for treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted agents. Additionally, testing for the BRAF V600E mutation is used to refine decisions based on patient prognosis. The presence of the uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 (UGT1A1) *28 polymorphism is associated with toxicity from irinotecan, although it has not been universally applied. Nonetheless, molecular markers to predict response and toxicity of cytotoxic therapy are evolving. While the development of selection biomarkers for anti-angiogenic treatments has not proved fruitful to date, improved development strategies and novel targeted agents are anticipated to revolutionize the approach to treatment of advanced CRC in the near future. This review summarizes currently available data to select treatment strategies in patients with advanced CRC.

The potential utility of re-mining results of somatic mutation testing: KRAS status in lung adenocarcinoma

KRAS mutant non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) vary in clinical outcome depending on which specific KRAS mutation is present. Shorter progression free survival has been associated with KRAS variants G12C and G12V. Cell lines with these variants depend to a greater extent on the RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK signaling pathway and become more susceptible to MEK inhibition. Because different KRAS mutations may lead to altered drug sensitivity, we aimed to determine specific KRAS mutation status in a NSCLC patient cohort at our institution. A total of 502 NSCLC samples were screened for somatic mutations using the 50 gene AmpliSeq™ Cancer Hotspot Panel v2 (CHPv2). However only samples positive for variants in the KRAS gene were included in this study. Variants identified in the KRAS genes were curated using publicly available databases. The overall mutation rate in the KRAS gene was 32.7% (164/502). The most common KRAS mutations were G12C (41%), G12V (19%), and G12D (14%) along with less frequent variants. After re-mining our sequencing data, we found that more than a half of our KRAS mutant NSCLC patients could potentially benefit from the addition of a MEK inhibitor such as selumetinib to standard chemotherapeutic agents. Due to mutated KRAS, these patients will likely fail traditional anti-EGFR therapies but be eligible for newer combination therapies.

RAS isoforms and mutations in cancer at a glance

RAS proteins (KRAS4A, KRAS4B, NRAS and HRAS) function as GDP-GTP-regulated binary on-off switches, which regulate cytoplasmic signaling networks that control diverse normal cellular processes. Gain-of-function missense mutations in RAS genes are found in ∼25% of human cancers, prompting interest in identifying anti-RAS therapeutic strategies for cancer treatment. However, despite more than three decades of intense effort, no anti-RAS therapies have reached clinical application. Contributing to this failure has been an underestimation of the complexities of RAS. First, there is now appreciation that the four human RAS proteins are not functionally identical. Second, with >130 different missense mutations found in cancer, there is an emerging view that there are mutation-specific consequences on RAS structure, biochemistry and biology, and mutation-selective therapeutic strategies are needed. In this Cell Science at a Glance article and accompanying poster, we provide a snapshot of the differences between RAS isoforms and mutations, as well as the current status of anti-RAS drug-discovery efforts.

Pooled Analysis of the Prognostic and Predictive Value of KRAS Mutation Status and Mutation Subtype in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

OBJECTIVES

This pooled analysis of four trials of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) versus placebo was conducted to clarify the prognostic and predictive roles of Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) mutations (MUTs) and to explore the importance of MUT subtype.

METHODS

Data were pooled from four trials of EGFR TKIs versus placebo (National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group [NCIC CTG] trial BR.21, TOPICAL, NCIC CTG trial BR.26, and NCIC CTG trial BR.19). Analyses of the combined data were performed to determine relationships of MUT status/subtype to response and survival end points.

RESULTS

KRAS status was known for 1362 of 2624 patients (785 receiving EGFR TKIs and 577 receiving placebo); 275 (20%) had KRAS MUTs (248 at codon 12; 15 at codon 13; 12 at other codons). In the placebo arms there was no difference in overall survival (OS) for patients with KRAS MUTs or wild-type tumors (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.04, confidence interval [CI]: 0.81-1.33 for univariable analysis and HR = 1.09, CI: 0.85-1.41 for multivariable analysis). Patients with guanine-to-thymidine transversion MUTs had longer OS than did those with guanine-to-adenine transition MUTs or guanine-to-cytosine transversion MUTs (median OS 6.3, 1.8, and 3.9 months, respectively, p = 0.01). Patients with KRAS MUT tumors derived no benefit from EGFR TKIs (OS HR = 1.13, CI: 0.85-1.51; progression-free survival HR = 1.02, CI: 0.76-1.36). The interaction between KRAS status and EGFR TKI effect was significant for progression-free survival (p = 0.04) but not for OS (p = 0.17). For patients with G12V MUTs, EGFR TKI treatment was harmful (OS HR = 1.96, CI: 1.03-3.70, p = 0.04), whereas guanine-to-adenine transition MUTs were associated with an OS benefit from EGFR TKIs (HR = 0.49, CI: 0.24-1.00, p = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, KRAS MUT is neither prognostic nor predictive of benefit from EGFR TKIs. However, it appears that KRAS MUT subtypes are not homogeneous in terms of their prognostic and predictive effects. These observations require prospective validation.

Colorectal cancer tumour markers and biomarkers: Recent therapeutic advances

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer among females and third among males worldwide. It also contributes significantly to cancer-related deaths, despite the continuous progress in diagnostic and therapeutic methods. Biomarkers currently play an important role in the detection and treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. Risk stratification for screening might be augmented by finding new biomarkers which alone or as a complement of existing tests might recognize either the predisposition or early stage of the disease. Biomarkers have also the potential to change diagnostic and treatment algorithms by selecting the proper chemotherapeutic drugs across a broad spectrum of patients. There are attempts to personalise chemotherapy based on presence or absence of specific biomarkers. In this review, we update review published last year and describe our understanding of tumour markers and biomarkers role in CRC screening, diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Goal of future research is to identify those biomarkers that could allow a non-invasive and cost-effective diagnosis, as well as to recognise the best prognostic panel and define the predictive biomarkers for available treatments.

[Molecular pathology of colorectal cancer]

In recent years, several predictive and prognostic biomarkers have been established in colorectal cancer (CRC). The RAS-mutation status is widely applied in the daily routine diagnostic as predictive biomarker for treatment with EGFR-inhibitors. A BRAF- mutation has no predictive value in this context. The detection of high-grade microsatellite instability (MSI-H) is a predictive biomarker for response to 5-Fluoruracil-monotherapy. Prognostic biomarkers in CRC are the MSI-status and the mutational status of BRAF. According to the current WHO classification poorly and undifferentiated CRC and MSI-associated special morphological subtypes are molecular graded depending on their MSI-status. The detection of a BRAF-mutation in the context of microsatellite stability (MSS) is associated with a very poor prognosis and thus represents the most aggressive molecular subtype of CRC. In patients with positive Bethesda criteria a stepwise immunohistochemical and molecular diagnostic scheme is proposed.

Meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy between KRAS G13D and other KRAS mutant metastatic colorectal cancer tumours

BACKGROUND

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) tumours harbouring a RAS mutation are associated with a lack of treatment benefit from anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). However, observational evidence has led to speculation that mCRC patients with KRAS G13D mutant (MT) tumours may derive a benefit from treatment with anti-EGFR mAbs.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate whether the efficacy of anti-EGFR mAbs for mCRC differs between tumours harbouring a KRAS G13D mutation (KRAS G13D) and KRAS mutations other than G13D (other KRAS MT).

RESULTS

Eight RCTs (n = 5967) met the inclusion criteria for assessment of both overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). For other KRAS MT the hazard ratio for OS benefit with addition of anti-EGFR mAb therapy was 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]; 0.96, 1.17), compared to 1.08 (95% CI; 0.73, 1.60) for KRAS G13D [test for interaction p=0.99]. In contrast, the hazard ratio for KRAS wild-type (WT) tumours was 0.85 (95% CI; 0.76, 0.95). Regarding PFS benefit with anti-EGFR mAbs, the hazard ratio was 1.07 (95% CI; 0.92, 1.26) for other KRAS MT, 0.96 (95% CI; 0.73, 1.27) for KRAS G13D, and 0.68 (95% CI; 0.54, 0.85) for KRAS WT. Again, the test for interaction (p=0.46) demonstrated no significant difference in PFS benefit for anti-EGFR mAb therapy between KRAS G13D and other KRAS MT.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrates no significant difference between KRAS G13D and other KRAS MT tumours in terms of treatment benefit from anti-EGFR mAbs for mCRC.

Can KRAS and BRAF mutations limit the benefit of liver resection in metastatic colorectal cancer patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials investigated the potential role of both KRAS and BRAF mutations, as prognostic biomarkers, in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who underwent surgical treatment of CRC-related liver metastases (CLM), showing conflicting results. This meta-analysis aims to review all the studies reporting survival outcomes (recurrence free survival (RFS), and/or overall survival (OS)) of patients undergoing resection of CLM, stratified according to KRAS and/or BRAF mutation status.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from all published studies reporting survival outcomes (RFS and/or OS) of CRC patients who received resection of CLM, stratified by KRAS and/or BRAF mutation status were collected, according to the PRISMA guidelines. Pooled HRs were calculated for both the OS and/or RFS.

RESULTS

Seven eligible trials (1403 patients) were included. Pooled analysis showed that KRAS mutations predicted a significantly worse both RFS (HR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.23-2.21) and OS (HR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.51-2.30) in patients who underwent surgical resection of CLM. BRAF mutations were also associated with a significantly worse OS (HR: 3.90; 95% CI: 1.96-7.73) in this subgroup of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests both KRAS and BRAF mutations as poor, prognostic biomarkers, associated with worse survival outcomes, in patients undergoing hepatic resection of CLM.

WITHDRAWN: Molecular classification of colorectal cancer: Current perspectives and controversies

This article has been withdrawn at the request of the editor. The authors have plagiarized part of a paper that had already appeared in ASCO EDUCATIONAL BOOK (2014), 91-99 (http://meetinglibrary.asco.org/content/114000091-144). One of the conditions of submission of a paper for publication is that authors declare explicitly that their work is original and has not appeared in a publication elsewhere. Re-use of any data should be appropriately cited. As such this article represents an abuse of the scientific publishing system. The scientific community takes a very strong view on this matter and apologies are offered to readers of the journal that this was not detected during the submission process. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy. This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy).

Personalized Therapy of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)

Lung cancer remains the most common cause of cancer related deaths in both men and women in the United States and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for over 85 % of all lung cancers. Survival of these patients has not significantly altered in over 30 years. This chapter initially discusses the clinical presentation of lung cancer patients. Most patients diagnosed with lung cancer due to symptoms have advanced stage cancer. Once diagnosed, lung cancer patients need imaging studies to assess the stage of the disease before decisions regarding therapy are finalized. The most important prognostic factors are stage of the disease and performance status and these factors also determine therapy. The chapter subsequently discusses management of each stage of the disease and the impact of several pathologic, clinical factors in personalizing therapy for each individual patient. Transition from chemotherapy for every patient to a more personalized approach based on histology and molecular markers has occurred in the management of advanced stage NSCLC. It is expected that such a personalized approach will extend to all stages of NSCLC and will likely improve the outcomes of all NSCLC patients.

Association Between Specific Mutations in KRAS Codon 12 and Colorectal Liver Metastasis

IMPORTANCE

Currently, one of the most commonly available biomarkers in the treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is the Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS); however, the prognostic implications of specific mutations of the KRAS gene are still not well defined.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the prognostic impact of specific KRAS mutations on patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective single-center study was conducted from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2013. Data about specific KRAS mutations for 331 patients who underwent hepatic resection for CRLM at Johns Hopkins Hospital between 2003 and 2013 were analyzed. Clinicopathological characteristics, perioperative details, and outcomes were stratified by specific KRAS mutation at codons 12 and 13.

INTERVENTION

Resection of CRLM.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

A mutated KRAS (mtKRAS) was identified in 91 patients (27.5%). At a median follow-up of 27.4 months, recurrence was observed in 48 patients (52.7%) with mtKRAS and 130 patients (54.2%) with wild-type KRAS (wtKRAS) (P = .82). Median and 5-year survival among patients with mtKRAS was 32.4 months and 32.7%, respectively, vs 58.5 months and 46.9%, respectively, for patients with wtKRAS (P = .02). Patients with KRAS codon 12 mutations had worse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.54; 95% CI, 1.05-2.27; P = .03) vs those with wtKRAS, whereas a KRAS codon 13 mutation was not associated with prognosis (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.83-2.62; P = .19). Among the 6 most common mutations in codons 12 and 13, only G12V (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.00-3.17; P = .05) and G12S (HR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.22-9.10; P = .02) were associated with worse OS compared with patients with wtKRAS (both P < .05). Among patients who recurred, G12V (HR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.32-6.61; P = .01), G12C (HR, 6.74; 95% CI, 2.05-22.2; P = .002), and G12S mutations (HR, 4.91; 95% CI, 1.52-15.8; P = .01) were associated with worse OS (both P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

G12V and G12S mutations of codon 12 were independent prognostic factors of worse OS. Among patients who recurred after resection of CRLM, G12V, G12C, and G12S mutations were associated with worse OS. Information on specific KRAS mutations may help individualize therapeutic and surveillance strategies for patients with resected CRLM.

Microvessel density and endothelial cell proliferation levels in colorectal liver metastases from patients given neo-adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy and bevacizumab

The treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastasis has improved significantly and first line therapy is often combined chemotherapy and bevacizumab, although it is unknown who responds to this regimen. Colorectal liver metastases grow in different histological growth patterns showing differences in angiogenesis. To identify possible response markers, histological markers of angiogenesis were assessed. Patients who underwent resection of colorectal liver metastasis at Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark from 2007 to 2011 were included (n = 254) including untreated and patients treated with chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus bevacizumab. The resected liver metastases were characterised with respect to growth pattern, endothelial and tumour cell proliferation as well as microvessel density and tumour regression. Tumour regression grade of liver metastases differed significantly between untreated/chemotherapy treated patients in comparison to chemotherapy plus bevacizumab treated patients (both p < 0.0001). Microvessel density was decreased in liver metastases from patients treated with bevacizumab in comparison to those from untreated/chemotherapy-treated patients (p = 0.006/p = 0.002). Tumour cell proliferation assessed by Ki67 expression correlated to a shorter recurrence free survival in the total patient cohort. In conclusion, liver metastases from patients treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and bevacizumab had significantly lower microvessel densities and tumour regression grades when compared to liver metastases from untreated or chemotherapy treated patients. This may indicate that bevacizumab treatment results in altered vascular biology and tumour viability, with possible tumour reducing effect.

PRMT1-mediated methylation of the EGF receptor regulates signaling and cetuximab response

Posttranslational modifications to the intracellular domain of the EGFR are known to regulate EGFR functions; however, modifications to the extracellular domain and their effects remain relatively unexplored. Here, we determined that methylation at R198 and R200 of the EGFR extracellular domain by protein arginine methyltransferase 1 (PRMT1) enhances binding to EGF and subsequent receptor dimerization and signaling activation. In a mouse orthotopic colorectal cancer xenograft model, expression of a methylation-defective EGFR reduced tumor growth. Moreover, increased EGFR methylation sustained signaling activation and cell proliferation in the presence of the therapeutic EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab. In colorectal cancer patients, EGFR methylation level also correlated with a higher recurrence rate after cetuximab treatment and reduced overall survival. Together, these data indicate that R198/R200 methylation of the EGFR plays an important role in regulating EGFR functionality and resistance to cetuximab treatment.

RAS Mutations as Predictive Biomarkers in Clinical Management of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

The use of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody therapies in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is guided by the presence of activating point mutations in codons 12, 13, 59, 61, 117, and 146 of the KRAS and NRAS genes in the primary tumor. Although these mutations have been incorporated into the prescribing information for both cetuximab and panitumumab, highlighted in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines, and routinely tested, a number of controversial issues and unanswered questions related to these mutations and their clinical significance remain. In the present review, we explored the contradictory data related to the prognostic value of KRAS mutations, the reported frequent discordance of KRAS mutations, and the reported nonequivalence of some of these mutations. We also considered the issues related to incorporating additional mutations into the already accredited and approved assays and the challenges created by changing an assay's analytical and clinical limits of detection. We also discuss the lack of biologic data supporting the pathogenicity of newly described clinically actionable mutations and explore the uncertainty regarding the clinical significance of low-frequency mutations, highlighting the importance of correcting allele frequencies for tumor purity. We also considered the importance of distinguishing the significance of low-frequency RAS mutations in tumors previously not treated or treated with anti-EGFR therapies and explore new technologies capable of detecting emerging polyclonal RAS mutations that appear to confer drug resistance.

Effect of KRAS exon 2 mutations on antitumor activity of afatinib and gefitinib

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of different KRAS mutations on the inhibitory potential of afatinib and gefitinib in SW48 colorectal cancer cells. The influence of afatinib/gefitinib on cell viability and cell cycle was evaluated in isogenic SW48 KRAS wild-type/mutant cells. Protein levels of phosphorylated/total EGFR, HER-2, HER-3, ERK, and AKT were compared between treated/untreated samples using western blotting. The activity of both afatinib and gefitinib was the lowest in KRAS G12C/G12S/G12D and the highest in G13D/G12A mutant subtypes. A 50% decrease in cell viability was achieved at concentrations of 3.0-7.7 μmol/l for afatinib and 5.4-19.5 μmol/l for gefitinib. The effect of both drugs on apoptosis appeared to be stronger than their influence on proliferation and was generally less pronounced in mutant cells than in wild-type cells. The average number of apoptotic cells after treatment with afatinib was 2.6 times as high as the corresponding value following treatment with gefitinib (P<0.01). Levels of pEGFR, pHER-2, pERK, and pAKT were reduced more extensively by afatinib than by gefitinib (P<0.001). Some KRAS mutations (G12C/G12S/G12D) appear to weaken the activity of afatinib and gefitinib whereas others seem to increase sensitivity to treatment (G13D/G12A) compared with the parental clone (KRAS wild-type). In SW48 colorectal cancer cells, afatinib seems to be more potent than gefitinib because of its superior efficacy in inhibiting both EGFR and HER-2, suppressing signaling along both MEK/ERK and PI3K/AKT pathways to a greater extent.

Combination of cetuximab and PP242 synergistically suppress the progression of wild-type KRAS colorectal carcinoma

Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) has been shown to be overactive in human colorectal cancer, but the first-generation mTOR inhibitor, rapamycin, has failed to show clinical efficacy against colorectal cancer. On the other hand, although the second-generation mTOR inhibitor, PP242, has exerted substantial efficacy, it was revealed that independent inhibition by PP242 was transient, which could lead to positive-feedback loop to EGFR. Using wild-type KRAS colorectal cancer cells as models, we investigate the treatment efficacy of a widely used anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody, cetuximab, and PP242, alone or in combination in vitro and in vivo. Results of cell viability assays confirmed the synergistic inhibitory effect of PP242 and cetuximab on the survival of Caco-2 and HT-29 cells. Moreover, the ability of cancer-cell invasion and proliferation was also significantly inhibited by the combination therapy when compared with cetuximab or PP242 alone. Interestingly, the percentage of CD44-positive cancer cells was substantially decreased by the combination therapy in comparison with PP242 alone through fluorescence-activated cell sorting. The growth of cancer stem-like cell spheres in vitro was also maximally inhibited by combination therapy, in terms of either diameter or number. More importantly, the efficacy of combination therapy was more prominent than either drug alone in established tumor xenografts. These findings supported the potential use of combination therapy of PP242 and cetuximab against wild-type KRAS colorectal carcinomas.

Colon cancer and the epidermal growth factor receptor: Current treatment paradigms, the importance of diet, and the role of chemoprevention

Colorectal cancer represents the third most common and the second deadliest type of cancer for both men and women in the United States claiming over 50000 lives in 2014. The 5-year survival rate for patients diagnosed with metastatic colon and rectal cancer is < 15%. Early detection and more effective treatments are urgently needed to reduce morbidity and mortality of patients afflicted with this disease. Here we will review the risk factors and current treatment paradigms for colorectal cancer, with an emphasis on the role of chemoprevention as they relate to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) blockade. We will discuss how various EGFR ligands are upregulated in the presence of Western diets high in saturated and N-6 polyunsaturated fats. We will also outline the various mechanisms of EGFR inhibition that are induced by naturally occurring chemopreventative agents such as ginseng, green tea, and curcumin. Finally, we will discuss the current role of targeted chemotherapy in colon cancer and outline the limitations of our current treatment options, describing mechanisms of resistance and escape.

Preferential HER2 expression in liver metastases and EGFR expression in peritoneal metastases in patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Despite recent clinical trials, the sensitivity and resistance of metastatic gastric cancer to anti-HER2 and anti-EGFR therapy are still unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To clarify the HER2 and EGFR expression status in the metastatic sites, we immunohistochemically compared HER2 and EGFR expression between primary and metastatic tumors from 52 gastric cancer patients with liver metastases and 85 patients with peritoneal metastases.

RESULTS

The HER2 positivity rate of primary and metastatic tumors in patients with liver metastases, especially with intestinal-type histology (70.6 and 80.0 %, respectively), was significantly higher than in primary and metastatic tumors (22.4 and 16.4 %, respectively) in patients with peritoneal metastases. HER2 positivity of the primary tumor and liver metastases showed good concordance (87.5 %) in patients with liver metastases. In contrast, the EGFR positivity rate of metastatic tumors (70.1 %) in patients with peritoneal metastases was significantly higher than that of metastatic tumors (37.5 %) in patients with liver metastases. HER2 and EGFR expression tended to be mutually exclusive, and HER2/EGFR double-positive cases were rare in patients with liver or peritoneal metastases. In four such patients with HER2/EGFR double-positive primary tumors, the HER2- and EGFR-positive areas were separate, and corresponding liver metastasis was only positive for HER2 and peritoneal metastasis only positive for EGFR.

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that HER2 and EGFR are preferentially expressed in the liver and peritoneal metastases, respectively, which would be potential targets for anti-HER2 and anti-EGFR molecular therapy in metastatic gastric cancer patients.

Safety and efficacy of the addition of simvastatin to cetuximab in previously treated KRAS mutant metastatic colorectal cancer patients

Introduction Cetuximab is registered for use in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with RAS wild-type tumours only. Simvastatin blocks the mevalonate pathway and thereby interferes with the post-translational modification (prenylation) of KRAS. We hypothesize that the activitated KRAS pathway in KRAS mutant tumors can be inhibited by simvastatin rendering these tumors sensitive to the EGFR inhibitor cetuximab. Methods A Simon two-stage, single-arm, phase II study was performed to test the efficacy and safety of the addition of simvastatin to cetuximab in patients with a KRAS mutation in their CRC tumour who were previously treated with fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin and irinotecan based regimens. The primary endpoint was to test the percentage of patients alive and free from progression 12.5 weeks after the first administration of cetuximab. Our hypothesis was that at least 40 % was free from progression, comparable to, though slightly lower than in KRAS wild-type patients. Results Four of 18 included patients (22.2 %) were free from progression at the primary endpoint time. The time to progression in these 4 patients ranged from 20.3 to 47 weeks. Conclusion Based on the current study we conclude that the theoretical concept of KRAS modulation with simvastatin was not applicable in the clinic, as we were not able to restore sensitivity to cetuximab in CRC patients harbouring a somatic KRAS mutation.

A Phase II Study of Sorafenib Combined With Cetuximab in EGFR-Expressing, KRAS-Mutated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Mutations in the KRAS gene predict for resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapies, including cetuximab. Upregulation of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A has been implicated in resistance to anti-EGFR treatment. Abrogation of the VEGF and RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathways has the potential to restore cetuximab sensitivity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult patients with histologically documented, measurable, EGFR-expressing, KRAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that had progressed after 5-fluorouracil-based regimens were treated with sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily and intravenous cetuximab weekly in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was the response rate (complete response, partial response, and stable disease at 4 cycles). The secondary endpoints included plasma biomarker analysis of angiogenic cytokines and correlative imaging studies with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and zirconium 89-panitumumab.

RESULTS

Of the 30 patients enrolled, 26 were evaluable for response. Of the 26 patients evaluated, 4 had stable disease at 4 cycles and 1 had stable disease at 8 cycles. The median progression-free survival was 1.84 months. The common toxicities were rash, diarrhea, and liver enzyme elevations. Of the angiogenic cytokines evaluated, only the placental growth factor increased significantly with treatment (P < .0001). No pharmacodynamic parameters were associated with the treatment response.

CONCLUSION

We report the results of a trial that combined cetuximab and sorafenib for the treatment of KRAS-mutated mCRC, with correlative imaging studies and pharmacodynamic angiogenic cytokine profiling as downstream markers of EGFR and VEGF receptor (VEGFR) signaling. No objective responses were observed. Additional development of biomarkers for patient selection is needed to evaluate combined EGFR and VEGFR blockade as a therapeutic option in KRAS-mutated CRC.