Left-sided primary tumors are associated with favorable prognosis in patients with KRAS codon 12/13 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab plus chemotherapy: an analysis of the AIO KRK-0104 trial

Surgical and oncological outcomes in transverse colon carcinoma: does tumor sublocation make a difference?

BACKGROUND

Transverse colon carcinomas are often treated as a single entity in medical literature, despite differences in embryology, anatomy, physiology, genetics, and surgical treatment. We hypothesized that tumor sublocation affects demographics, oncological, surgical and quality of life outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent surgery for transverse colon carcinomas between 2000 and 2018 was conducted. Tumor localization was determined by operative, pathological and imaging reports, and procedures were defined by the extent of vascular resection.

RESULTS

The study included 273 patients aged 69 years (SD 12.3), of whom 44% were female. The BMI was 28.8 kg/m2 (SD 6.2), and 61% were ASA class 3. Carcinomas were in the proximal (22%), the mid (42%), and the distal transverse colon (36%). Mid-transverse carcinomas exhibited the highest prevalence among female patients (53% vs. 35% proximal vs. 39% distal, p < 0.03). Proximal transverse carcinomas presented with a higher proportion of pathological stage II than mid and distal transverse carcinomas (68.3% vs. proximal vs. 44.3% mid-vs. 49% distal, p = 0.006). On multivariate analysis, anemia was more likely in mid than proximal (p = 0.009) and distal (p = 0.002) transverse colon cancers. Obstruction occurred more often in proximal than mid (p = 0.003), and hematochezia in distal than in mid (p < 0.001) and proximal (p = 0.014) transverse colon carcinomas. The 30-day mortality and morbidity and 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were similar between the tumor sublocations.

CONCLUSION

Sublocations of the transverse colon carcinomas affect the symptoms of patients. Tumor sublocation does not impact the intraoperative, postoperative, or oncological outcomes and quality of life.

Negative Hyperselection of Resistance Mutations for Panitumumab Maintenance in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (PanaMa Phase II Trial, AIO KRK 0212)

PURPOSE

We evaluated additional mutations in RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) as prognostic and predictive biomarkers for the efficacy of added panitumumab to a 5-fluorouracil plus folinic acid (FU/FA) maintenance as pre-specified analysis of the randomized PanaMa trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Mutations (MUT) were identified using targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS; Illumina Cancer Hotspot Panel v2) and IHC. RAS/BRAF V600E/PIK3CA/AKT1/ALK1/ERBB2/PTEN MUT and HER2/neu overexpressions were negatively hyperselected and correlated with median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) since start of maintenance treatment, and objective response rates (ORR). Univariate/multivariate Cox regression estimated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

202 of 248 patients (81.5%) of the full analysis set (FAS) had available NGS data: hyperselection WT, 162 (80.2%); MUT, 40 (19.8%). From start of maintenance therapy, hyperselection WT tumors were associated with longer median PFS as compared with hyperselection MUT mCRC (7.5 vs. 5.4 months; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.52-1.07; P = 0.11), OS (28.7 vs. 22.2 months; HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36-0.77; P = 0.001), and higher ORR (35.8% vs. 25.0%, P = 0.26). The addition of panitumumab to maintenance was associated with significant benefit in hyperselection WT tumors for PFS (9.2 vs. 6.0 months; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47-0.93; P = 0.02) and numerically also for OS (36.9 vs. 24.9 months; HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.61-1.36; P = 0.50), but not in hyperselection MUT tumors. Hyperselection status interacted with maintenance treatment arms in terms of PFS (P = 0.06) and OS (P = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Extended molecular profiling beyond RAS may have the potential to improve the patient selection for anti-EGFR containing maintenance regimens.

Optimizing the first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer represents an important oncological challenge both for its incidence, which makes it an important health problem, and for its biological complexity, which has made clinical results very difficult in terms of outcome for this category of patients. To date these diseases should not be treated as a single entity but it is necessary to distinguish colorectal cancers based on characteristics that nowadays are essential to have greater therapeutic benefits. These include the sideness of the disease, the state of microsatellites, the presence of prognostic and predictive mutations of response to treatments currently available in clinical practice, which are associated with new therapeutic targets. The greatest challenge in the future will be to circumvent the resistance mechanisms that make this disease very difficult to treat with good long-term results by studying effective combination treatments with a good toxicity profile. Once such combinations or targeted treatments are consolidated, it will be desirable to shift the best therapies to the first line treatment to make them immediately accessible to the patient. It will also be essential to refine the selection of patients who can benefit from these treatments.

Differential Efficacy of Targeted Monoclonal Antibodies in Left-Sided Colon and Rectal Metastatic Cancers

BACKGROUND

The recommended first-line chemotherapy for RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is bevacizumab (BEV)-containing therapy for right-sided colon cancer (R) and antiepidermal growth factor receptor antibody (anti-EGFR)-containing therapy for left-sided colon cancer (L) or rectal cancer (RE). However, anatomical or biological heterogeneity reportedly exists between L and RE. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacies of anti-EGFR and BEV therapies for L and RE, respectively.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 265 patients with KRAS (RAS)/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with fluoropyrimidine-based doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR or BEV as the first-line treatment at a single institution. They were divided into 3 groups: R, L, and RE. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and conversion surgery rate were analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients had R (anti-EGFR/BEV: 6/39), 137 patients had L (45/92), and 83 patients had RE (25/58). In patients with R, both median (m) PFS and OS were superior with BEV therapy (mPFS, anti-EGFR vs. BEV: 8.7 vs. 13.0 months, hazard ratio [HR]: 3.90, P = .01; mOS, 17.1 vs. 33.9 months, HR: 1.54, P = .38). In patients with L, better mPFS and comparable mOS with anti-EGFR therapy were observed (mPFS, 20.0 vs. 13.4 months, HR: 0.68, P = .08; mOS, 44.8 vs. 36.0 months, HR: 0.87, P = .53), whereas, in patients with RE, comparable mPFS and worse mOS with anti-EGFR therapy were observed (mPFS, 17.2 vs. 17.8 months, HR: 1.08, P = .81; mOS, 29.1 vs. 42.2 months, HR: 1.53, P = .17).

CONCLUSIONS

Efficacies of anti-EGFR and BEV therapies may differ between patients with L and RE.

Second primary colorectal cancer in adults: a SEER analysis of incidence and outcomes

BACKGROUND

At present, there was no large epidemiological study exploring the actual incidence and survival of second primary colorectal cancer (spCRC). The different characteristics and survival of patients with spCRC and initial primary colorectal cancer (ipCRC) still need to be elucidated. In addition, the factors leading to different survival status of spCRC and ipCRC were still unclear. Our study plan to explore the annual incidence trend of spCRC as well as the factors influencing the occurrence and survival outcome of spCRC.

METHODS

This cohort study analyzed the data of 4680 spCRC patients and 330,937 initial primary colorectal cancer (ipCRC) patients. Whether patients had spCRC and whether spCRC patients survived or died were regarded as outcomes. The annual incidence of spCRC from 2004 to 2016 was analyzed by Jointpoint regression analysis. The truncation points were found, and the annual percentage change (APC) of each segment was calculated to explore the trend of spCRC change in the United States. Univariate and multivariable cox regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with the occurrence and prognosis of spCRC patients.

RESULTS

The total incidence of spCRC was decreased during 2000-2016 on the whole. The overall incidence of spCRC was lowered in both males and females despite 2013-2014, in the left colon, right colon, rectum and others. The incidence of spCRC was decreased in both 18-49 years' people and ≥ 50 years' people during 2000-2016, and the incidence of spCRC in the ≥ 50 years' people group was higher than those of 18-49 years. Insured (OR = 0.867 (0.778-0.966), initial primary site of other digestive (OR = 0.46, 95%CI: 0.42-0.50), rectum (OR = 0.74, 95%CI: 0.66-0.82), or right colon (OR = 0.73, 95%CI: 0.68-0.79), N 1 stage (OR = 0.87, 95%CI: 0.76-0.99), M 1 stage (OR = 0.49, 95%CI: 0.30-0.80), AJCC II stage (OR = 0.70, 95%CI: 0.60-0.82), AJCC III stage (OR = 0.69, 95%CI: 0.56-0.84), and radiation (OR = 0.69, 95%CI: 0.57-0.83) were associated with the risk of spCRC. At the end of follow-up, 2,246 spCRC patients were survived and 2,434 spCRC patients were dead. Patients with spCRC had poor survival probability than patients with ipCRC. Older age (HR = 1.02, 95%CI: 1.02-1.03), male (HR = 1.13, 95%CI: 1.04-1.23), Black (HR = 1.20, 95%CI: 1.06-1.35), uninsured (HR = 1.36, 95%CI: 1.16-1.59), Signet ring cell carcinoma (HR = 1.64, 95%CI: 1.19-2.25), T4 stage (HR = 1.63, 95%CI: 1.32-2.01), N2 stage (HR = 1.36, 95%CI: 1.08-1.72), M1 stage (HR = 4.51, 95%CI: 2.00-10.18), AJCC III (HR = 1.47, 95%CI: 1.08-1.98), and radiation (HR = 1.82, 95%CI: 1.43-2.33) were associated with increased risk of mortality in spCRC patients.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of spCRC was decreased except in people with initial primary tumor grade IV and those aged 15-39 years. The overall survival of spCRC patients was lower than ipCRC patients. Cancer patients with older age, high tumor grade, TNM stage, and AJCC stage should be caution to the occurrence of spCRC and timely interventions should be provided for spCRC patients to improve their outcomes.

Association of primary tumor laterality with surgical outcomes for colorectal liver metastases: results from the Colorectal Liver Operative Metastasis International Collaborative (COLOMIC)

BACKGROUND

Primary laterality of colorectal cancer is thought to be associated with differences in outcomes. Liver metastasis is the most common site of solitary colorectal cancer spread. However, how primary colorectal cancer laterality affects outcomes in colorectal liver metastasis remains unclear.

METHODS

The Colorectal Liver Operative Metastasis International Collaborative (COLOMIC) of operative hepatectomy cases for colorectal liver metastasis was compiled from five participating institutions. This included consecutive cases from 2000 to 2018 at all sites. A total of 884 patients were included in this study. Univariate, multivariate, and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Patients with left-sided versus right-sided cancers had significantly better overall survival: 49.4 vs. 41.8 months (p < 0.05). Patients with KRAS mutations had significantly worse median overall survival compared to KRAS wild-type (43.6 vs 56.1 months; p < 0.001). In left-sided cancers, KRAS mutations were associated with significantly worse median overall survival compared to KRAS wild-type cancers (43.6 vs 56.6 months; p < 0.01). This association was absent in patients with right-sided primary tumors. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed different variable sets (non-overlapping) were associated with overall survival, when comparing left-sided and right-sided cancers.

CONCLUSION

Understanding how primary tumor laterality and related biological aspects affect long-term outcomes can potentially inform treatment decisions for patients with colorectal liver metastases.

Efficacy of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab vs FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in 1st-line treatment of older patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: an analysis of the randomised trial FIRE-3

Background

The evidence on the efficacy of anticancer therapy is limited in older patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This retrospective analysis of phase III FIRE-3 trial assesses the efficacy of FOLFIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab according to the patients’ age and sidedness of primary tumour.

Methods

The study endpoints overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between younger (<65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients, followed by stratification according to primary tumour sidedness. ORR was compared using Fisher´s exact test, OS and PFS were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Univariate Cox regression analyses assessed hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for OS and PFS.

Results

Overall, older patients with RAS WT tumours had a significantly shorter OS when compared to younger patients (25.9 months vs 29.3 months, HR 1.29; P = 0.02). Also the proportion of right-sided tumours was significantly greater in older patients (27.1% vs 17.9%; P = 0.029). Secondary resection rates were numerically higher in younger patients (25.4% vs. 17.6%, P = 0.068) than in older patients. This was primarily seen in the Cetuximab arm, where older patients underwent less likely resection (13.1% vs. 26%; P = 0.02). Older patients with left-sided tumours showed only a trend towards greater efficacy of cetuximab (HR 0.86; P = 0.38). In patients with right-sided primary tumours, older patients did not appear to benefit from cetuximab in contrast to younger patients (≥65 years: 16.6 months vs 23.6 months, HR 1.1; P = 0.87; <65 years: 21.9 months vs 16.4 months HR 1.5; P = 0.31).

Conclusions

In FIRE-3, OS was generally shorter in older patients in comparison to younger patients. This could be explained by the overrepresentation of right-sided tumours and a lower secondary resection rate in older patients. The efficacy of targeted therapy was dependent on tumour sidedness in older patients with RAS WT mCRC.

Clinical trial

FIRE-3 (NCT00433927).

Improvement in colorectal cancer outcomes over time is limited to patients with left-sided disease

PURPOSE

Incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC) declined over the last decades. However, survival depends on the primary tumor location. It is unknown if all progress in outcomes vary depending on left-sided (LCRC) versus right-sided (RCC) colorectal cancer. We compare incidence and mortality rates over time according to the primary tumor location.

METHODS

Data from the Austrian National Cancer Registry spanning from 1983 to 2018 were used to calculate annual incidence and mortality rates and survival stratified by primary tumor localization and stage. Joinpoint regression with linear regression models were used on different subgroups to identify significant changes of incidence- and mortality slopes.

RESULTS

A total of 168,260 (incidence dataset) and 87,355 cases (mortality dataset) were identified. Survival of disseminated RCC was worse compared to LCRC (HR 1.14; CI 1.106-1.169). Total and LCRC incidence and mortality rates declined steadily over time, whereas the rates of RCC did not. Incidence of disseminated RCC declined significantly less (slope - 0.07; CI - 0.086; - 0.055) than in LCRC (slope - 0.159; CI - 0.183; - 0.136); mortality rate of RCC was unchanged over time. Incidence and mortality of localized RCC remained unchanged over time, whereas both rates declined independently of stage in LCRC.

CONCLUSION

Colorectal cancer outcomes during the last 35 years have preferentially improved in LCRC but not in RCC, indicating that the progress made is limited to LCRC. It is necessary to define RCC as a distinct form of CRC and to focus on specific strategies for its early detection and treatment.

APC and TP53 Mutations Predict Cetuximab Sensitivity across Consensus Molecular Subtypes

Simple Summary

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of cancer deaths. Cetuximab is an FDA-approved, underutilized therapeutic targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in metastatic CRC. To date, despite selection of patients with wild-type RAS, it is still difficult to identify patients who may benefit from EGFR inhibitor (e.g., cetuximab) therapy. Our aim is to molecularly classify CRC patients to better identify subpopulations sensitive to EGFR targeted therapy. APC and TP53 are two major tumor suppressor genes in CRC whose mutations contribute to tumor initiation and progression and may identify cetuximab-sensitive tumors. Recently, it has been suggested that the consensus molecular subtype (CMS) classification may be used to help identify cetuximab-sensitive patients. Here, we report an analysis of multiple CRC tumor/PDX/cell line datasets using combined APC and TP53 mutations to refine the CMS classification to better predict responses to cetuximab to improve patient outcomes.

Abstract

Recently, it was suggested that consensus molecular subtyping (CMS) may aide in predicting response to EGFR inhibitor (cetuximab) therapies. We recently identified that APC and TP53 as two tumor suppressor genes, when mutated, may enhance cetuximab sensitivity and may represent easily measured biomarkers in tumors or blood. Our study aimed to use APC and TP53 mutations (AP) to refine the CMS classification to better predict responses to cetuximab. In total, 433 CRC tumors were classified into CMS1-4 subtypes. The cetuximab sensitivity (CTX-S) signature scores of AP vs. non-AP tumors were determined across each of the CMS classes. Tumors harboring combined AP mutations were predominantly enriched in the CMS2 class, and to a lesser degree, in the CMS4 class. On the other hand, AP mutated CRCs had significantly higher CTX-S scores compared to non-AP CRCs across all CMS classes. Similar results were also obtained in independent TCGA tumor collections (n = 531) and in PDMR PDX/PDO/PDC models (n = 477). In addition, the in vitro cetuximab growth inhibition was preferentially associated with the CMS2 cell lines harboring A/P genotypes. In conclusion, the AP mutation signature represents a convenient biomarker that refines the CMS classification to identify CRC subpopulations predicted to be sensitive to EGFR targeted therapies.

Mutant KRAS as a prognostic biomarker after hepatectomy for rectal cancer metastases: Does the primary disease site matter?

BACKGROUND

The prognostic implication of mutant KRAS (mKRAS) among patients with primary disease in the rectum remains unknown.

METHODS

From 2000 to 2018, patients undergoing hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases at 10 collaborating international institutions with documented KRAS status were surveyed.

RESULTS

A total of 834 (65.8%) patients with primary colon cancer and 434 (34.2%) patients with primary rectal cancer were included. In patients with primary colon cancer, mKRAS served as a reliable prognostic biomarker of poor overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.58, 95% CI 1.28-1.95) in the multivariable analysis. Although a trend towards significance was noted, mKRAS was not found to be an independent predictor of OS in patients with primary rectal tumors (HR 1.34, 95% CI 0.98-1.80). For colon cancer, the specific codon impacted in mKRAS appears to reflect underlying disease biology and oncologic outcomes, with codon 13 being associated with particularly poor OS in patients with left-sided tumors (codon 12, HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.22-1.99; codon 13, HR 2.10 95% CI 1.43-3.08;). Stratifying the rectal patient population by codon mutation did not confer prognostic significance following hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

While the left-sided colonic disease is frequently grouped with rectal disease, our analysis suggests that there exist fundamental biologic differences that drive disparate outcomes. Although there was a trend toward significance of KRAS mutations for patients with primary rectal cancers, it failed to achieve statistical significance.

The efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy in treating metastatic colorectal cancer differs between the middle/low rectum and the left-sided colon

BACKGROUND

Clinically, metastatic rectal cancer has been considered a subset of left-sided colon cancer. However, heterogeneity has been proposed to exist between high and middle/low rectal cancers. We aimed to examine the efficacy of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) treatment for middle/low rectal and left-sided colon cancers.

METHODS

This study enrolled 609 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who were treated with anti-EGFR therapy. They were divided into groups based on primary tumour locations: the right-sided colon, the left-sided colon or the middle/low rectum. The efficacy of first-line and non-first-line anti-EGFR treatment was analysed. Genomic differences in colorectal cancer data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) were investigated and visualised with OncoPrint and a clustered heatmap.

RESULTS

On first-line anti-EGFR treatment, patients with middle/low rectal tumours had significantly lower progression-free survival, overall survival, and overall response rates (6.8 months, 27.8 months and 43%, respectively) than those with left-sided colon cancer (10.1 months, 38.3 months and 66%, respectively). Similar outcomes were also identified on non-first-line anti-EGFR treatment. In TCGA analysis, rectal tumours displayed genetic heterogeneity and shared features with both left- and right-sided colon cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-EGFR treatment has lower efficacy in metastatic middle/low rectal cancer than in left-sided colon cancer.

Consensus molecular subtypes in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with sequential versus combined fluoropyrimidine, bevacizumab and irinotecan (XELAVIRI trial)

BACKGROUND

The XELAVIRI trial compared sequential (fluoropyrimidine and bevacizumab; irinotecan (Iri) at progression) versus initial combination therapy (fluoropyrimidine, bevacizumab, Iri) of treatment-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In the confirmatory analysis, the primary end-point (non-inferiority of sequential therapy regarding time to failure of strategy, TFS) was not met. Nevertheless, significant differences regarding treatment efficacy were observed according to RAS status. Here, we evaluate the consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) as additional biomarkers for sequential versus combination therapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Gene expression was measured using NanoString after mRNA extraction from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour specimens. CMS were predicted using multinomial regression and correlated with updated data for TFS, overall (OS) and progression-free survival.

RESULTS

CMS were predicted in 337 of 421 (80.0%) patients (CMS1: 18.4%; CMS2: 51.6%; CMS3: 2.7%; CMS4: 27.3%). CMS2 together with RAS/BRAF wild-type status was identified as potential predictive marker of benefit from initial combination therapy for OS (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33-0.96, p = 0.036) and progression-free survival (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.29-0.79, p = 0.004) and also trending in TFS (HR 0.63, 90% CI 0.41-0.95, p = 0.066). In patients with RAS-mutated mCRC, CMS1 was associated with longer OS after initial combination therapy (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20-0.95, p = 0.038). Interaction testing (two-sided) of CMS and RAS/BRAF status in favour of the combination treatment strategy was significant for OS (p = 0.012) CONCLUSIONS: In patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC, CMS2 may serve as an additional biomarker of benefit from the initial combination therapy, including Iri.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration ID (clinicaltrials.gov) NCT01249638.

PLA2G4A promotes right-sided colorectal cancer progression by inducing CD39+γδ Treg polarization

The γδ T cell is a promising candidate cell in tumor immunotherapy. However, γδ T cells polarize to CD39⁺γδ Tregs upon colorectal cancer (CRC) induction, and the underlying mechanism remains unclear. Here, we show that the frequency of CD39⁺γδ Tregs, which positively correlated with poor prognosis, was significantly higher in right-sided CRC (RSCRC) than in the left-sided CRC (LSCRC). Interestingly, CD39⁺γδ Tregs from RSCRC showed stronger immunosuppressive phenotype and function than LSCRC. Furthermore, the quantitative mass spectrometry data show that CD39⁺γδ Treg polarization was related to the abnormal activation of the Phospholipase a2-IVa/Arachidonic acid (PLA2G4A/AA) metabolic pathway in RSCRC. Using an in vitro coculture system and an orthotopic murine model of CRC, we show that the overexpression of Pla2g4a in CT26 cells induced CD39⁺γδ Tregs, inhibiting the antitumor immune response. Finally, we found that the overall survival of the PLA2G4A^hi group was significantly shortened compared with PLA2G4A^lo RSCRC, while the survival of LSCRC showed the opposite. Collectively, RSCRC with abnormal PLA2G4A expression educates γδ T cells into CD39⁺γδ Tregs to promote tumor progression and metastasis. Our work highlights the interaction between cancer cells and immune cells by distinguishing the primary tumor site and deepens the understanding of the tumor microenvironment and immunosuppression.

The Prognostic Impact of Primary Tumor Site Differs According to the KRAS Mutational Status: A Study By the International Genetic Consortium for Colorectal Liver Metastasis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prognostic impact of tumor laterality in colon cancer liver metastases (CLM) after stratifying by Kirsten rat sarcoma 2 viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) mutational status.

BACKGROUND

Although some studies have demonstrated that patients with CLM from a right sided (RS) primary cancer fare worse, others have found equivocal outcomes of patients with CLM with RS versus left-sided (LS) primary tumors. Importantly, recent evidence from unresectable metastatic CRC suggests that tumor laterality impacts prognosis only in those with wild-type tumors.

METHODS

Patients with rectal or transverse colon tumors and those with unknown KRAS mutational status were excluded from analysis. The prognostic impact of RS versus LS primary CRC was determined after stratifying by KRAS mutational status.

RESULTS

277 patients had a RS (38.6%) and 441 (61.4%) had a LS tumor. Approximately one-third of tumors (28.1%) harbored KRAS mutations. In the entire cohort, RS was associated with worse 5-year overall survival (OS) compared with LS (39.4% vs 50.8%, P = 0.03) and remained significantly associated with worse OS in the multivariable analysis (hazard ratio 1.45, P = 0.04). In wild-type patients, a worse 5-year OS associated with a RS tumor was evident in univariable analysis (43.7% vs 55.5%, P = 0.02) and persisted in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio 1.49, P = 0.01). In contrast, among patients with KRAS mutated tumors, tumor laterality had no impact on 5-year OS, even in the univariable analysis (32.8% vs 34.0%, P = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated, for the first time, that the prognostic impact of primary tumor side differs according to KRAS mutational status. RS tumors were associated with worse survival only in patients with wild-type tumors.

Treatment sequencing of metastatic colorectal cancer based on primary tumor location

Colorectal cancer is a heterogeneous disease with various clinical, molecular, and embryological differences related to the origin of the tumor from the right or left colon. Recent studies have demonstrated that tumor sidedness has both a prognostic and predictive value in metastatic colorectal cancer . Patients whose primary tumor originates from the left side of the colon and whose tumor's genome encodes wild-type RAS and BRAF should be offered cetuximab or panitumumab in the first-line treatment of metastatic disease or in subsequent lines. For tumors originating from the right side of the colon, anti-angiogenic treatment, particularly bevacizumab, is an option for this poor prognostic group until better options become available. Specifically, an aggressive initial approach with FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is a treatment option in right-sided tumors under investigation. This report reviews the available data for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer according to the location of the primary tumor and proposes the optimal treatment sequencing strategy incorporating the site of origin of the tumor and molecular information into the decision-making process.

Is the Effect of Tumor Localization on Prognosis Compatible with Real-life Data in Metastatic Colon Cancer? Single-Center Experience: A Retrospective Analysis

AIM

In recent years, the prognostic and predictive value of primary tumor localization in colon cancer has become increasingly important. This study aimed to retrospectively analyze the effect of colon cancer tumor localization on progression-free survival, overall survival, and response to treatments and present real-life data.

METHOD

Retrospective evaluation was made of 465 patients who were diagnosed with metastatic colorectal carcinoma between 2010 and 2015 in our clinic. The effect of primary tumor localization on progression-free survival, overall survival, and response to therapy was investigated.

RESULTS

The right colon cancer (RCC) was determined in 66 patients, 14.2% of the whole group, and left colorectal cancer (LCRC) in 399 patients which is 85.8% of patients. Mucinous adenocarcinoma was 16.7% in RCC; however, only 6.4% of LCRC had a mucinous tumor (p < 0.05). Nodal involvement in any stage (N1 and N2) was 46.9% in right colon cancer whereas in LCRC, it was 41.2% (p < 0.05). Primary tumor surgery (74.2% vs. 70.2%) and metastasectomy (33.3% vs. 19.4%) were also more common in RCC(p < 0.05). k-ras mutation status was similar in both groups (28.8% in RCC vs 26.8% in LCRC, p > 0.05). Median progression-free survival was 12.6 months in RCC, and 15.5 in LCRC (p > 0.05). Median overall survival was 28.4 months in RCC and 33.5 months in LCRC (p > 0.05). In k-ras wild-type patients, the median overall survival was 32.3 months (95% CI 25.2-39.5) in the anti-VEGF antibody treatment group and 55.1 months (95% CI 36.5-73.7) in the anti-EGFR antibody treatment group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Although tumors located in the right colon have been considered to be worse in terms of progression-free and overall survival in clinical trials, the results of this study showed that in daily practice, there was no difference between left and right colon localized tumors in progression-free and overall survival. Further, in k-ras wild-type colon cancers, tumor localization predicts the treatment response. This study is important with the presentation of real-life data and compatibility with the data of the studies to daily life.

Clinical impact of primary tumour location, early tumour shrinkage, and depth of response in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer with first-line chemotherapy plus cetuximab or bevacizumab

The primary tumour location is an important prognostic factor for previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the predictive efficacies of primary tumour location, early tumour shrinkage (ETS), and depth of response (DpR) on mCRC treatment has not been fully evaluated. This study aimed to investigate the predictive efficacies of these traits in mCRC patients treated with first-line 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy plus biologic agents, namely, cetuximab and bevacizumab. This was a retrospective analysis of the medical records of 110 patients with pathology-documented unresectable mCRC. Patients with left-sided mCRC receiving any first-line regimen showed better overall survival (OS) than those with right-sided mCRC [33.3 vs 16.3 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27-0.74; p < 0.001]. In patients with left-sided tumours, treatment with chemotherapy plus cetuximab yielded longer OS than chemotherapy plus bevacizumab (50.6 vs 27.8 months, HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.32-0.97; p = 0.0378). mCRC patients with ETS and high DpR showed better OS than those lacking ETS and with low DpR (33.5 vs 19.6 months, HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32-0.79, p = 0.023 and 38.3 vs 19.0 months, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.68, p < 0.001, respectively). Moreover, ETS and/or high DpR achieved in patients with right-sided mCRC receiving chemotherapy plus cetuximab were associated with significantly better OS than in those lacking ETS and with low DpR (34.3 vs 10.4 months, HR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.94, p = 0.025 and 34.3 vs 10.4 months, HR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.94, p = 0.0257, respectively). Taken together, our study demonstrates that primary tumour location is not only a well-known prognostic factor but also a relevant predictive factor in patients with mCRC receiving chemotherapy plus cetuximab. Additionally, both ETS and DpR could predict treatment outcomes and also potentially guide cetuximab treatment even in right-sided mCRCs.

Single-nucleotide variants, tumour mutational burden and microsatellite instability in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Next-generation sequencing results of the FIRE-3 trial

BACKGROUND

Molecular biomarkers and primary tumour sidedness guide treatment decisions in metastatic colorectal cancer. Comprehensive molecular profiling aims to identify targetable alterations and measure tumour mutational burden (TMB) to enable precision oncology.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

FoundationOne® next-generation sequencing identified single-nucleotide variants (SNVs), copy number alterations, high TMB (TMB-H) and high-grade microsatellite instability (MSI-H) in patients treated in the FIRE-3 trial. Data were correlated with objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Three hundred seventy-three (49.6%) of 752 patients provided material for this analysis. Frequent SNVs included TP53, APC, KRAS, PIK3CA, BRAF, SMAD4 and FBXW7. KRAS, BRAF V600E and SMAD4 mutations were confirmed as prognostic biomarkers by logistic penalised regression for ORR. OS was significantly longer in patients with SMAD4 wild-type (WT) tumours than in those with SMAD4-mutated tumours (hazard ratio = 0.59 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 0.34-1.01], p = 0.05), with a higher probability of ORR [odds ratio, SMAD4 SNV versus WT = 0.32 [95% CI = 0.10-0.98], p = 0.05] when treated with cetuximab. MSI-H (30.0%, p = 0.03) and TMB-H (17.3%, p = 0.003) tumours were enriched by FBXW7 mutations. Numerically lower ORR, OS and PFS were observed in MSI-H tumours.

CONCLUSIONS

RAS, BRAF V600E and SMAD4 mutations were identified as poor prognostic biomarkers in patients of the FIRE-3 trial, whereas improved outcome was observed for BRAF non-V600E mutation. SMAD4 mutation might provide predictive relevance for cetuximab efficacy. MSI-H tumours showed numerically lower ORR, OS and PFS.

Clinicopathological differences and correlations between right and left colon cancer

BACKGROUND

The differences in histopathology and molecular biology between right colon cancer (RCC) and left colon cancer (LCC) were first reported in the literature by Bufill in 1990. Since then, a large number of studies have confirmed their differences in epidemiology, clinical presentation, comorbidities and biological behaviours, which may be related to the difference in prognosis and overall survival (OS) between the two groups.

AIM

To investigate statistically significant differences between Greek patients with LCC and RCC.

METHODS

The present observational study included 144 patients diagnosed with colon cancer of any stage who received chemotherapy in a Greek tertiary oncology hospital during a 2.5-year period. Clinical information, comorbidities, histopathologic characteristics and molecular biomarkers were collected from the patients’ medical records retrospectively, while administered chemotherapy regimens, targeted agents, progression-free survival (PFS) periods with first- and second-line chemotherapy and OS were recorded retroactively and prospectively. Data analysis was performed with the SPSS statistical package.

RESULTS

Eighty-six males and 58 females participated in the study. One hundred (69.4%) patients had a primary lesion in the left colon, and 44 (30.6%) patients had a primary lesion in the right colon. Patients with RCC were more likely to display anaemia than patients with LCC [odds ratio (OR) = 3.09], while LCC patients were more likely to develop rectal bleeding (OR = 3.37) and a feeling of incomplete evacuation (OR = 2.78) than RCC patients. Considering comorbidities, RCC patients were more likely to suffer from diabetes (OR = 3.31) and coronary artery disease (P = 0.056) than LCC patients. The mucinous differentiation rate was higher in the right-sided group than in the left-sided group (OR = 4.49), as was the number of infiltrated lymph nodes (P = 0.039), while the percentage of high-grade differentiation was higher in the group of patients with left-sided colon cancer than in RCC patients (OR = 2.78). RAS wild-type patients who received anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR): Treatment experienced greater benefit (PFS: 16.5 mo) than those who received anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment (PFS: 13.7 mo) (P = 0.05), while among RAS wild-type patients who received anti-EGFR treatment, LCC patients experienced greater benefit (PFS: 15.8 mo) than the RCC subgroup (PFS: 5.5 mo) in the first-line chemotherapy setting (P = 0.034). BRAF-mutant patients had shorter PFS (9.3 mo) than BRAF wild-type patients (14.5 mo) (P = 0.033). RCC patients showed a shorter tumour recurrence period (7.7 mo) than those with LCC (14.5 mo) (P < 0.001), as well as shorter (OS) (58.4 mo for RCC patients; 82.4 mo for LCC patients) (P = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

RCC patients present more comorbidities, worse histological and molecular characteristics and a consequently higher probability of tumour recurrence, poor response to targeted therapy and shorter OS than LCC patients.

Prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations in metastatic colorectal cancer patients by tumor sidedness: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Studies have shown that the prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations may differ by tumor sidedness among metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Both mutation status and tumor sidedness may impact survival and disease progression and RAS mutation status has been shown to predict response to anti‐epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy. A systematic literature review and meta‐analysis were conducted to estimate the pooled prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations by tumor sidedness in studies of mCRC patients. Forty‐four studies comprising 15 981 mCRC patients tested for RAS and/or BRAF mutations were included in the meta‐analyses. The prevalence of RAS mutations differed significantly by tumor side (32.4% among left‐sided tumors, 41.3% among right‐sided tumors; P = .017), as did the prevalence of KRAS mutations (35.8% among left‐sided tumors, 46.3% among right‐sided tumors; P < .0001) and BRAF mutations (4.3% among left‐sided tumors, 16.3% among right‐sided tumors; P < .0001). Among right‐sided tumors, the prevalence of RAS and KRAS mutations varied significantly by study design, with higher prevalence among observational studies than clinical trials, and there was significant variation by study location for the prevalence of KRAS mutations in left‐sided tumors and the prevalence of BRAF mutations in right‐sided tumors. These results help to better characterize the mCRC population to better inform clinicians and researchers. Few of the included studies reported overall or progression‐free survival (PFS) by both tumor sidedness and mutation status. As both of these factors may have prognostic impact, future studies should consider evaluating survival by these variables.

Tumour location and efficacy of first-line EGFR inhibitors in KRAS/RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: retrospective analyses of two phase II randomised Spanish TTD trials

Purpose

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a group of distinct diseases, with clinical and molecular differences between right-sided and left-sided tumours driving varying prognosis.

Methods

Patients with KRAS/RAS-wild type (wt) mCRC treated in first line with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFR-Is) (cetuximab or panitumumab) plus oxaliplatin or irinotecan-based chemotherapy from two phase II randomised trials conducted by the Spanish Cooperative for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours group were included in this retrospective study. The main objective was to analyse the prognostic effect of primary tumour location on objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

Patients with KRAS-wt right-sided tumours (n=52) had significantly lower efficacy as compared with patients with KRAS-wt left-sided tumours (n=209); confirmed ORR (25% vs 47%, respectively; OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.8, p=0.004); and shorter median PFS (7.2 vs 9.9 months; HR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4 to 0.9, p=0.0157) and OS (13.6 vs 27.7 months; HR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3 to 0.7, p<0.0001). Similar results were observed in the RAS-wt populations. The further classification of left-sided tumours as colon or rectum delivered similar survival outcomes, as well as a tendency to diminished ORR in patients with rectum tumours.

Conclusion

We observed significantly improved efficacy outcomes in patients with KRAS/RAS-wt mCRC treated with first-line EGFR-I plus chemotherapy in left-sided primary tumours as compared with right-sided primary tumours.

Trial registration numbers

NCT01161316 and NCT00885885.

Impact of primary tumor location in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colon cancer treated with first-line chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF monoclonal antibodies: a retrospective multicenter study

Emerging evidence supports a prognostic role of primary tumor location in metastatic colon cancer (mCC). We conducted a retrospective analysis to evaluate the effect of tumor location on prognosis and efficacy of biological agents (anti-EGFR, Cetuximab and Panitumumab, or anti-VEGF, Bevacizumab) added to first-line chemotherapy in patients with RAS wild-type (wt) mCC. Patients with newly diagnosed RAS wt mCC candidates to first-line chemotherapy with anti-EGFRs or Bevacizumab were selected. Clinical outcomes were assessed and stratified by tumor location and type of treatment. Overall, 351 patients met the inclusion criteria. Primary colon cancer was right-sided (RCC) in 105 (29.9%) patients and left-sided (LCC) in 246 (70.1%). Patients with LCC had a better OS compared to those with RCC (33.6 vs 23.5 months, HR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.99; p=0.049). In the overall study population, OS was not significantly different for patients treated with Cetuximab or Panitumumab as compared to those receiving Bevacizumab. However, when comparing treatment outcome according to tumor sidedness, patients with LCC treated with Cetuximab or Panitumumab had a significantly longer PFS (12.4 vs 10.7 months; HR: 0.69; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.93; p= 0.015) and OS (40.7 vs 28.6 months; HR: 0.67; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95; p= 0.026). No relevant differences were observed in patients with RCC.

We found evidence in support of the impact of tumor location in RAS wt mCC treated with first-line chemotherapy in association with targeted therapy. More favorable outcomes were observed in LCC patients, but not in RCC patients, treated with anti-EGFR agents compared with those who received Bevacizumab. Further, prospective and adequately sized studies are warranted to confirm our findings.

Precision medicine for metastatic colorectal cancer: an evolving era

Introduction: Metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a dilemma for cancer researchers with an increasing incidence in the younger patient population. Until the last decade, limited therapeutic options were available for metastatic CRC patients leading to relatively poor clinical outcomes.Areas covered: With advances in genome sequencing technology and reductions in the cost of next-generation sequencing, molecular profiling has become more accessible for cancer researchers and clinical investigators, which has furthered our understanding of the molecular behavior of CRC. This progress has recently translated into significant advances in molecular-based therapeutics and led to the development of new target-specific agents in metastatic CRC patients. In this review article, we extensively elaborate on genomic alterations seen in CRC patients including, but not limited to, EGFR, MMR, BRAF, HER2, NTRKs, FGFR, BRCA1/2, PALB2, POLE, and POLD1 genes, all of which are potentially actionable by either an FDA-approved agent or in a clinical trial setting.Expert opinion: We strongly recommend molecular profiling in metastatic CRC patients during the early course of their disease, as this may provide therapeutic and prognostic information that can guide clinicians to practice precision medicine. Patients with potentially actionable genes should be considered for targeting agents based on molecular alterations.

Impact of Delayed Addition of Anti-EGFR Monoclonal Antibodies on the Outcome of First-Line Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: a Retrospective Registry-Based Analysis

BACKGROUND

The addition of monoclonal antibodies targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR Abs) to chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) is commonly delayed in the real-world clinical practice, usually because of late RAS testing results.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether delayed addition of anti-EGFR mAbs up to the fourth cycle of backbone chemotherapy adversely affected outcomes of mCRC patients treated with first-line regimens.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Clinical data of patients with histologically verified, RAS wild-type mCRC treated with first-line systemic therapy regimens containing anti-EGFR mAbs were retrospectively analysed from a national database. Patients were divided into three groups according to the timing of anti-EGFR mAbs addition to the chemotherapy backbone. Cohort A (n = 401) included patients in whom anti-EGFR mAbs were added to chemotherapy from the first cycle, cohort B (n = 71) patients with anti-EGFR mAbs added to chemotherapy from the second cycle, and cohort C (n = 101) patients who had anti-EGFR mAbs added to chemotherapy from the third or fourth cycle.

RESULTS

Three hundred and thirty-six (58.6%) patients received panitumumab and 237 (41.4%) patients received cetuximab. The median progression-free survival (PFS) of the whole cohort was 12.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.9-13.5), and the median overall survival (OS) was 33.5 months (95% CI 27.6-39.4). The median PFS and OS for patients treated with anti-EGFR mAbs added to chemotherapy were 12.9 (95% CI 11.5-14.3) and 30.6 months (95% CI 25.2-36.1) for cohort A, 9.7 (95% CI 9.1-10.3) and not reached for cohort B, compared to 11.5 (95% CI 9.8-13.2) and 37.9 months (95% CI 28.6-47.3) for cohort C, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed addition of anti-EGFR mAbs to first-line chemotherapy was not associated with inferior survival or response rates.

Association of Primary Tumor Site With Mortality in Patients Receiving Bevacizumab and Cetuximab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Importance

Biologic therapy (BT) (eg, bevacizumab or cetuximab) is increasingly used to treat metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Recent investigations have suggested that right- or left-sided primary tumor origin affects survival and response to BT.

Objective

To evaluate the association of tumor origin with mortality in a diverse population-based data set of patients receiving systemic chemotherapy (SC) and bevacizumab or cetuximab for mCRC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based nonconcurrent cohort study of statewide California Cancer Registry data included all patients aged 40 to 85 years diagnosed with mCRC and treated with SC only or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2014. Patients were stratified by tumor origin in the left vs right sides.

Interventions

Treatment with SC or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Mortality hazards by tumor origin (right vs left sides) were assessed for patients receiving SC alone or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab. Subgroup analysis for patients with wild-type KRAS tumors was also performed.

Results

A total of 11 905 patients with mCRC (6713 men [56.4%] and 5192 women [43.6%]; mean [SD] age, 60.0 [10.9] years) were eligible for the study. Among these, 4632 patients received SC and BT. Compared with SC alone, SC plus bevacizumab reduced mortality among patients with right- and left-sided mCRC, whereas SC plus cetuximab reduced mortality only among patients with left-sided tumors and was associated with significantly higher mortality for right-sided tumors (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.14-1.51; P < .001). Among patients treated with SC plus BT, right-sided tumor origin was associated with higher mortality among patients receiving bevacizumab (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.25-1.36; P < .001) and cetuximab (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.68-2.12; P < .001) BT, compared with left-sided tumor origin. In patients with wild-type KRAS tumors (n = 668), cetuximab was associated with reduced mortality among only patients with left-sided mCRC compared with bevacizumab (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.90; P = .002), whereas patients with right-sided mCRC had more than double the mortality compared with those with left-sided mCRC (HR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.83-3.25, P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Primary tumor site is associated with response to BT in mCRC. Right-sided primary tumor location is associated with higher mortality regardless of BT type. In patients with wild-type KRAS tumors, treatment with cetuximab benefited only those with left-sided mCRC and was associated with significantly poorer survival among those with right-sided mCRC. Our results underscore the importance of stratification by tumor site for current treatment guidelines and future clinical trials.

Microarray‑based analysis of COL11A1 and TWIST1 as important differentially‑expressed pathogenic genes between left and right‑sided colon cancer

Colonic cancer has become a main reason of mortality associated with cancer; however, left and right-sided colonic cancer have diverse outcomes in terms of epidemiological, histological, clinical parameters and prognosis. We aimed to examine the discrepancies between these two types of colon cancers to identify potential therapeutic targets. In the present study, three gene expression profiles (GSE44076, GSE31595, GSE26906) from Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database were downloaded and further analyzed. A PPI (protein-protein interaction) network of the differentially-expressed genes (DEGs) of GSE44076 between tumor and normal was established with the Search Tool for the Retrieval of Interacting Genes database. Then, the DEGs of these two colon cancers (left, right) samples were identified. Subsequently, the intersection of DEGs of left and right-sided colon cancer samples obtained from three databases, and DEGs of tumor and normal samples were analyzed. Collagen type XI α1 chain (COL11A1), Twist family bHLH transcription factor 1 (TWIST1), insulin-like 5 and chromogranin A were upregulated proteins, while 3β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase was downregulated protein in right colon cancer than in left-sided tumor samples. Through further experimental verification, we revealed that COL11A1 and TWIST1 were significantly upregulated at the mRNA and protein levels within right-sided colon cancer compared with in left-sided colon cancer samples (P<0.05), consistent with bioinformatical analysis. Furthermore, a positive correlation between COL11A1 and TWIST1 protein expression was observed (P<0.0276). Collectively, our data showed that COL11A1 and TWIST1 may be potential prognostic indicators and molecular targets for the treatment of right-sided colon cancer.

Repurposing EGFR Inhibitor Utility in Colorectal Cancer in Mutant APC and TP53 Subpopulations

BACKGROUND

EGFR is a major therapeutic target for colorectal cancer. Currently, extended RAS/RAF testing identifies only nonresponders to EGFR inhibitors (EGFRi). We aimed to develop a mutation signature that further refines drug-sensitive subpopulations to improve EGFRi outcomes.

METHODS

A prespecified, 203-gene expression signature score measuring cetuximab sensitivity (CTX-S) was validated with two independent clinical trial datasets of cetuximab-treated patients with colorectal cancer (n = 44 and n = 80) as well as an in vitro dataset of 147 cell lines. The CTX-S score was then used to decipher mutated genes that predict EGFRi sensitivity. The predictive value of the identified mutation signature was further validated by additional independent datasets.

RESULTS

Here, we report the discovery of a 2-gene (APC+TP53) mutation signature that was useful in identifying EGFRi-sensitive colorectal cancer subpopulations. Mutant APC+TP53 tumors were more predominant in left- versus right-sided colorectal cancers (52% vs. 21%, P = 0.0004), in microsatellite stable (MSS) versus microsatellite instable (MSI) cases (47% vs. 2%, P < 0.0001), and in the consensus molecular subtype 2 versus others (75% vs. 37%, P < 0.0001). Moreover, mutant APC+TP53 tumors had favorable outcomes in two cetuximab-treated patient-derived tumor xenograft (PDX) datasets (P = 0.0277, n = 52; P = 0.0008, n = 98).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the APC and TP53 combination mutation may account for the laterality of EGFRi sensitivity and provide a rationale for refining treated populations. The results also suggest addition of APC+TP53 sequencing to extended RAS/RAF testing that may directly increase the response rates of EGFRi therapy in selected patients.

IMPACT

These findings, if further validated through clinical trials, could also expand the utility of EGFRi therapies that are currently underutilized.

Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Patients with KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated in First Line with Bevacizumab- or Cetuximab-Containing Regimens

PURPOSE

Patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene wild-type (KRAS WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated in first line with bevacizumab (B) or cetuximab (C) plus standard chemo backbones had comparable outcomes in phase III Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 80405. We examined comparative effectiveness of B and C regimens in real-world community settings.

METHODS

This retrospective study examined progression-free survival (PFS) and OS in a US community sample of KRAS WT mCRC patients treated with first-line B (n = 254) or C (n = 146) regimens. Medical records from the Vector Oncology Data Warehouse were used. Disease progression was determined from patient charts. OS was measured from the start of first-line treatment until death.

RESULTS

There were no significant difference in either PFS or OS respectively between B-treated compared to C-treated patients (HR = 1.324, 95% CI 0.901, 1.947; HR = 1.080, 95% CI 0.721, 1.617). More B patients received oxaliplatin backbones (74.8 vs. 36.3%), and more C patients received irinotecan backbones (51.4 vs. 20.1%), ps < 0.001. Multivariate survival analyses showed a significant difference indicating a greater risk for death among C-treated patients with right-sided tumors vs. left-sided tumors (HR = 2.263, 95% CI 1.394, 3.673, p = 0.0009), but not for B-treated patients (HR = 1.209, 95% CI 0.825, 1.771, p = 0.3297).

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with CALGB 80405, median PFS and OS for these community oncology KRAS WT mCRC patients treated with first-line B or C regimens did not differ significantly.

Potential prognostic factors for predicting the chemotherapeutic outcomes and prognosis of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to explore whether pretreatment potential prognostic factors are related to chemotherapeutic outcomes and the prognosis of inpatients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) undergoing chemotherapy.

Materials and methods

Data from 71 patients with mCRC were analyzed retrospectively. The relationship between the potential prognostic factors before first‐line chemotherapy and the clinicopathological characteristics and chemotherapy response of the patients was calculated using Fisher's exact test and the chi‐square test. The prognostic factors were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analyses. We analyzed the subgroups using the Mann‐Whitney U test.

Results

Four factors were eventually used as prognostic factors, namely the albumin‐to‐globulin ratio (AGR), the fibrinogen‐to‐albumin ratio (FAR), the prealbumin‐to‐globulin ratio (PGR), and the fibrinogen‐to‐prealbumin ratio (FPR); the cutoff values of the four potential prognostic factors were 1.40, 10.63, 5.44, and 18.49, respectively. The high AGR and PGR groups had a higher response rate than that of the low groups. Patients in the low FAR and FPR groups showed a higher objective response rate than the high FAR and FPR groups. Patients with low FPR were associated with a higher disease control rate than patients with high FPR. Higher progression‐free survival (PFS) was observed in the high AGR and PGR and low FAR and FPR groups. The AGR, FAR, PGR, and FPR were considered reliable prognostic factors for PFS in a univariate analysis.

Conclusions

The prechemotherapy AGR, FAR, PGR, and FPR were good prognostic factors to predict the chemotherapy response and PFS in patients with mCRC.

The Impact of Primary Tumor Sidedness on the Effect of Regorafenib in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Recently, the sidedness of the primary tumor (right versus left) has been investigated for its ability to prognosticate and predict outcomes. We evaluated the effect of regorafenib based on KRAS mutation status and the sidedness of the primary tumor in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We analyzed 135 patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) being treated with regorafenib at Samsung Medical Center, between January 2014 and January 2018. Primary tumors originating in the splenic flexure, descending colon, sigmoid colon, rectum, or proximal third of the transverse colon were defined as left-sided CRC (LC). Primary tumors originating in the appendix, cecum, ascending colon, hepatic flexure, or distal two-thirds of the transverse colon were defined as right-sided CRC (RC). Among all 135 patients, 100 (74.1%) had left sided colon cancer and 35 (25.9%) had right-sided colon cancer. No patients achieved a complete response, but four achieved a partial response, revealing a response rate (RR) of 3.0%. Thirty-seven patients had stable disease, yielding a disease control rate (DCR) of 30.4%. There was no difference in RR or DCR according to the location of the primary tumor (LC vs. RC). A significant difference in progression free survival (PFS) with regorafenib was observed between the LC and RC groups (2.6 months; 95% CI, 2.0 to 3.1 vs. 1.9 months; 95% CI, 1.6 to 2.3; P = 0.04, respectively). In a subpopulation with wild type KRAS, PFS with regorafenib was also significantly different between the LC and RC groups (2.9 months; 95% CI, 1.5 to 4.3 vs. 2.1 months; 95% CI, 0.6 to 3.6; P = 0.04). On multivariate analysis, the sidedness of the primary tumor (LC vs. RC) and the number of metastatic sites (≤1 vs. 2>) had a prognostic effect on PFS (P = 0.01 and P = 0.01, respectively). Regorafenib is a current standard treatment for CRC, but treatment outcomes may be improved if regorafenib is administered based on the appropriate biomarker.

Right versus left sided metastatic colorectal cancer: Teasing out clinicopathologic drivers of disparity in survival

BACKGROUND

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with a right-sided primary (RC) have an inferior survival to mCRC arising from a left-sided primary (LC). Previous analyses have suggested multiple factors contribute.

METHODS

The Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer (TRACC) Registry prospectively captured data on consecutive mCRC patients. RC were defined as tumors proximal to the splenic flexure; LC were those at and distal to the splenic flexure and included rectal cancers. Patient, tumor, treatment, and survival data were analyzed stratified by side.

RESULTS

Of 2306 patients enrolled from July 2009-March 2018, 747 (32%) had an RC. Patients with RC were older, more likely to be female and have a Charlson score ≥3. RC were more frequently BRAF mutated, deficient in mismatch repair, associated with peritoneal metastases, and less likely to receive chemotherapy. Progression-free survival on first-line systemic therapy was inferior for RC patients (8.1 vs. 10.8 months, hazard ratio [HR] for progression in RC 1.38, P < 0.001). Median overall survival for all RC patients was inferior (19.6 vs. 27.5 months, HR for death in RC 1.44, P < 0.001), and inferior within the treated (21 vs. 29.5 months, HR 1.52, P < 0.001) and untreated subgroups (5.9 vs. 10.3 months, HR 1.38, P = 0.009). Primary side remained a significant factor for overall survival in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Our data from a real-world population confirms the poorer prognosis associated with RC. Primary tumor location remains significantly associated with overall survival even when adjusting for multiple factors, indicating the existence of further side-based differences that are as yet undefined.

Comparison of Right-side and Left-side Colon Cancers Following Laparoscopic Radical Lymphadenectomy

PURPOSE

The colon originates from the midgut and hindgut, with subsequent differentiation into the right and left colon. The embryology, clinical symptoms, incidence, molecular pathways, and oncologic outcomes differ between right and left colorectal cancers. However, the differences have not been fully accepted.

AIM OF THE STUDY

This study compared short- and long-term outcomes between right and left colon cancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 966 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection with radical lymph node dissection for stage I, II, and III colon cancers between 2009 and 2014 at a tertiary teaching hospital. We excluded cases with fewer than 12 retrieved lymph nodes, emergency operations, synchronous or multiple cancers, and those located in the transverse colon and rectum.Results: The right colon group included 343 (35.5%) patients and the left colon group 623. Female patients had a high incidence of right colon cancer (p < 0.001). Right colon cancer had longer operative times (p = 0.012), and more bleeding during the operation (p = 0.001). The size of the tumor was larger (p < 0.001) and more lymph nodes were harvested (p < 0.001) on the right side. Vascular (p = 0.006) and lymphatic (p = 0.004) invasion was greater in the right colon, but left colon cancer showed greater neural invasion (p = 0.008). Cancers on the right side also had a tendency to be poorly differentiated (p < 0.001). The groups did not differ in disease-free, overall, and cancer-specific survival rates for stage.

CONCLUSION

Although the oncologic outcomes show no significant differences, colon cancer has characteristic, perioperative, and histopathologic differences according to its embryologic origin.

The primary tumor location impacts survival outcome of colorectal liver metastases after hepatic resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Location of the primary tumor side has become an increasingly prognostic factor for colorectal liver metastasis. The present study was to perform a meta-analysis to investigate if primary right-sided tumor impacted on long-term survival outcome of colorectal liver metastases following local treatment.

METHOD

Eligible trials were identified from the Embase, PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane database that were published before October in 2018. English language trials that compared long-term survival outcome of primary left-sided tumor with right-sided tumor colorectal liver metastases following local treatment were included. Hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases was investigated. The main study outcomes included overall survival and disease free survival of primary right-sided colorectal liver metastases following local treatment. The risk factors of largest tumor size, primary node metastases, multiple tumor and RAS mutation were also analyzed. A systematic review and meta-analysis was done using a fixed-effects model. Hazard ratio with a 95% confidence interval was used to measure the pooled effect.

RESULTS

A total of twelve studies with 6387 patients were included. For primary right-sided colorectal liver metastases patients following hepatic resection, the overall pooled HR for 5-year overall survival rate was 1.354 (95% CI: 1.238-1.482; p = 0.000; I² = 33.7%, p = 0.138). The pooled HR for 5-year disease free survival rate of primary right-sided CRLM in the included studies calculated using the fix-effects model was 1.104 (95% CI: 0.987-1.235; p = 0.084; I² = 0%, p = 0.477).

CONCLUSION

It demonstrated that primary right-sided for colorectal liver metastases location was a significantly worse prognostic factor in terms of overall survival.

Targeting EGFR and RAS/RAF Signaling in the Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: From Current Treatment Strategies to Future Perspectives

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and RAS/RAF signaling pathway plays pivotal roles in tumor progression via proliferation, survival, invasion, and immune evasion. Two anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies, cetuximab and panitumumab, have become essential components in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Treatment with these anti-EGFR antibodies has shown definite benefits when administered in all treatment lines and is strongly recommended as the preferred regimen to prolong survival, especially when administered in the first- and third-lines. Recent efforts have revealed not only mechanisms responsible for resistance to anti-EGFR antibodies, including expanded RAS mutations as a negative predictive biomarker, but also the possibility of continuing anti-EGFR antibody treatment in combination with chemotherapy. Furthermore, the challenges associated with the pharmaceutical development of treatments for patients with mutant-type BRAF mCRC are ongoing. In this review, we provide an overview of the EGFR and RAS/RAF signaling pathway and antitumor activity, focusing on practical aspects such as established treatments including patient selection, treatment strategies, and future perspectives for drug development targeting the EGFR and RAS/RAF signaling pathway.

Impact of primary colorectal Cancer location on the KRAS status and its prognostic value

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) originating from the right-sided or left-sided colon is distinct clinicopathological entity. The KRAS status and its prognostic value in CRC remain controversial. This study aimed to investigate the association of KRAS status with clinicopathological features and prognostic value in CRC.

METHODS

178 colon cancer and 145 rectal cancer patients were enrolled. KRAS mutation test was performed on paraffin-embedded tumor samples using PCR methods. The colon cancer was divided into right-sided colon cancer (RCC) and left-sided colon cancer (LCC). Studies that reported the association of KRAS mutation with CRC clinical features and prognosis in databases were searched prior to 2018. The data of the present study was combined with the data of published studies using meta-analysis methods.

RESULTS

No significant difference between colon cancer and rectal cancer regarding the KRAS status. The KRAS mutation was much frequent in RCC than in LCC (p = 0.010). 17 studies with 11,385 colon cancer patients were selected, the pooled results of our data and previous published data showed that KRAS mutation was more frequent in RCC compared with in LCC (p < 0.01); KRAS mutation was not associated with the prognosis in RCC patient; however, KRAS mutation indicated a poor prognosis in LCC patients compared with KRAS wild type (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

KRAS status has no difference between colon cancer and rectal cancer. KRAS mutation was more frequent in RCC than in LCC, and associated with a poor prognosis in LCC patients, but not in RCC patients.

Right or Left Primary Site of Colorectal Cancer: Outcomes From the Molecular Analysis of the AGITG MAX Trial

BACKGROUND

For metastatic colorectal cancer, previous reports have described differences in biology and outcome, including response to biologic agents, based on whether the primary tumor is right- or left-sided. We explored the molecular markers from the AGITG MAX trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The AGITG MAX trial was a randomized study comparing capecitabine versus capecitabine + bevacizumab versus capecitabine + bevacizumab + mitomycin C as first-line therapy in advanced colorectal cancer. Patients were classified as having right-sided (caecum to transverse colon) or left-sided (descending colon to rectum) disease according to anatomic location. Baseline characteristics and previously described molecular profiles were compared by side of primary tumor. Survival outcomes were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier approach and proportional hazards regression modeling.

RESULTS

Among the 471 patients, the location of primary tumor was known in 440 patients (93%). Molecular profile was known in 298 patients (63%). Twenty-eight percent had right-sided primary tumors. Major differences between right and left are as follows: female 49% versus 33% (P < .01), BRAF mutant 16% versus 3.5% (P ≤ .001), and phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) loss 27.6% versus 53% (P = .01). There were no differences in RAS mutation, PIK3CA mutation, or high versus low expression of assessed angiogenic markers. Right-sided primary lesion predicted a poor outcome for median overall survival: right-sided disease 13.2 months versus left-sided disease 20 months (P = .001; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.85), but not for progression-free survival (HR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.78-1.20). The relative treatment effect did not differ significantly according to location of primary tumor: right primary tumor HR (bevacizumab containing arm vs. capecitabine monotherapy arm) was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.54-1.22), and left primary HR (bevacizumab containing arm vs. capecitabine monotherapy arm) was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.4-0.63) (interaction P = .10).

CONCLUSION

There are more negative prognostic factors in patients with right-sided primary tumors, in particular high BRAF mutations, and these patients have inferior overall survival compared to those with a left-sided primary tumor. There was no suggestion that side of primary site had any impact on bevacizumab effect on progression-free survival.

The impact of primary tumor location in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a Korean Cancer Study Group CO12-04 study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Colorectal cancer is associated with different anatomical, biological, and clinical characteristics. We determined the impact of the primary tumor location in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

Demographic data and clinical information were collected from 1,115 patients from the Republic of Korea, who presented with mCRC between January 2009 and December 2011, using web-based electronic case report forms. Associations between the primary tumor location and the patient's clinical characteristics were assessed, and factors inf luencing overall survival were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression models.

RESULTS

Of the 1,115 patients recruited to the study, 244 (21.9%) had right colon cancer, 483 (43.3%) had left colon cancer, and 388 (34.8%) had rectal cancer. Liver and lung metastases occurred more frequently in patients with left colon and rectal cancer (p = 0.005 and p = 0.006, respectively), while peritoneal and ovarian metastases occurred more frequently in patients with right and left colon cancer (p < 0.001 and p = 0.031, respectively). The median overall survival of patients with tumors originating in the right colon was significantly shorter than that of patients whose tumors had originated in the left colon or rectum (13.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 12.0 to 15.5] vs. 18.0 months [95% CI, 16.3 to 19.7] or 19.9 months [95% CI, 18.5 to 21.3], respectively; p = 0.003). Tumor resection, the number of metastatic sites, and primary tumor location correlated with overall survival in the univariate and multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSION

Primary tumor location influences the metastatic sites and prognosis of patients with mCRC.

Sequential therapy with bevacizumab and EGFR inhibitors for metastatic colorectal carcinoma: a national registry-based analysis

Purpose

Although inhibitors of vascular endothelial growth factor and inhibitors of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFRi) are commonly used for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the optimal sequencing of these agents is currently unclear.

Methods

A national registry of targeted therapies was used to analyze baseline characteristics and outcomes of patients with mCRC and wild-type KRAS exon 2 status who received bevacizumab and EGFRi (cetuximab or panitumumab) as a part of first- and second-line treatment in either sequence.

Results

The cohort included 490 patients (181 patients treated with first-line EGFRi and second-line bevacizumab and 309 patients treated with first-line bevacizumab and second-line EGFRi). Median overall survival (OS) from the initiation on first-line therapy was similar for patients treated with either sequence, reaching 31.8 (95% CI 27.5-36.1) vs 31.4 months (95% CI 27.8-35.0) for EGFRi → bevacizumab vs bevacizumab → EGFRi cohort, respectively. Time from first-line initiation to progression on the second-line therapy [progression-free survival (PFS)] was 21.1 (95% CI 19.3-23.0) vs 19.3 months (95% CI 17.3-21.3) for bevacizumab → EGFRi vs EGFRi → bevacizumab cohort, respectively (P=0.016).

Conclusion

This retrospective analysis of real-world data of patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC showed no differences in OS between cohorts treated with bevacizumab → EGFRi vs the reverse sequence while combined PFS favored the bevacizumab → EGFRi sequence.

To resect or not to resect: The hamletic dilemma of primary tumor resection in patients with asymptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer

Primary tumor resection (PTR) in advanced asymptomatic colorectal cancer (CRC) has been a matter of intense debate for long time. With the advances in systemic treatments, this practice has decreased over the years, although it remains still pervasive. Although the removal of primary tumor has been extensively interrogated both in retrospective and prospective studies, it still remains a clinical conundrum. There are many arguments for and against PTR in CRC both from the preclinical and the clinical point of view. Two scoring models have been published aiming at identifying patients who are suitable candidate for PTR, but they deserve further investigations in larger datasets. While awaiting the results of ongoing randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on this controversial topic, both upfront systemic treatment and PTR followed by chemotherapy should be considered valid options in patients with asymptomatic mCRC. Clinical selection and a shared-decision making approach are the keys to success.

The location of the primary colon cancer has no impact on outcomes in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery for peritoneal metastasis

BACKGROUND

The impact of the location of colorectal cancer on patient outcomes has been reported in several settings. The objective of this study was to assess the prognostic impact of the location of the primary colon cancer among patients with colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases undergoing complete cytoreductive surgery.

METHODS

Using the prospectively maintained clinical and biological digestive peritoneal metastasis database of the BIG-RENAPE network, we identified 796 patients treated by a complete cytoreductive surgery between January 2004 and January 2017 for colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases in 16 different institutions. The 2 primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival. To evaluate the impact on overall survival and progression-free survival of potential prognostic factors (including the location of the primary colorectal cancer), these factors were included in univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Right-sided colorectal cancers were more often BRAF mutated and had microsatellite instability, whereas the frequency of RAS mutation was similar between right-sided and left-sided colorectal cancers. After a median follow-up time of 3.3 years, there was no significant difference in overall survival or progression-free survival according to tumor side. The lack of effect of tumor location on overall survival and progression-free survival was consistent across subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Among patients undergoing complete cytoreductive surgery for peritoneal metastases, the site of the primary colorectal cancer was not associated with differences in progression-free survival or overall survival. Tumor side should not be used as a stratification factor in trials of colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases and should not be used in the selection process of patients for cytoreductive surgery.

Do Patients with Second Primary Colorectal Cancer Hold the Similar Prognosis and Therapeutic Benefits as Those with Initial Primary Colorectal Cancer?

Aim

The objective is to compare the differences on prognosis and the therapeutic benefits between initial and second primary colorectal cancer (pCRC).

Methods

A dataset containing 377,271 initial pCRC cases and 18,617 second pCRC cases from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 1988-2015 was evaluated. Survival comparisons were made using the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the survival benefits.

Results

The cancer-specific survival rate of patients with initial pCRC was significantly higher than that of patients with second pCRC (5-years survival rate: 64.85% vs. 60.22%, P<0.001). The Chi-square of stratified log rank for age at diagnosis was lower than that for primary site, pTNM stage, sex, race, histology, and grade (Chi-square=86.73). There were almost no differences on therapeutic benefits between patients with initial and second pCRC except that treatments with chemotherapy were significantly associated with longer survival rate compared with treatments without chemotherapy among stage III surgical initial and second primary left-sided colon cancers patients (HR=0.764 vs. 0.581; P for interaction =0.008).

Conclusion

Patients with second pCRC have worse prognosis than those with initial pCRC primarily because of older age in the former group. The results evidenced that the therapeutic benefits on the prognosis for colorectal cancer were generally similar between patients with initial and second pCRC.

Difference between right and left colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignant tumors around the world. The incidence of CRC has increasing, but the prognosis is quite different. In recent years, the impact of tumor site on the treatment and prognosis of CRC has attracted widespread attention, and the research for differences between tumors provides a theoretical basis for precise treatment. This review aims to summarize the difference between right and left CRC.

Outcomes of Chemotherapy for Microsatellite Instable-High Metastatic Colorectal Cancers

PURPOSE

Microsatellite instable-high (MSI-H) colorectal cancers (CRCs) are known to carry better survival in the local disease stage even without treatment. The influence of types of treatment on survival of MSI-H metastatic CRCs (mCRCs) is still unclear and is evaluated in this study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with MSI-H mCRC treated with first-line chemotherapy, with or without bevacizumab, identified in the Israeli population-based Molecular Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer (MECC) study, were diagnosed between 1998 and 2013 and followed up until May 2017; MSI status was determined by comparing 10 markers in tumor and normal tissue. Dates of metastases and death and treatment details were extracted from oncology records.

RESULTS

Among 590 patients treated for mCRC, 106 (18%) had MSI-H tumors. Patients with MSI-H had a median overall survival (OS, from start of first-line treatment) of 1.6 years. The presence of a somatic B-Raf proto-oncogene (BRAF) mutation was a significant adverse prognostic factor in the MSI-H group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1 to 3.0; P = .026). MSI-H tumors without BRAF mutation (n = 87) had similar OS benefit from fluorouracil (FU) only as from any combination protocols (HR, 0.93; P = .78), whereas microsatellite-stable (MSS) tumors without BRAF mutation (n = 456) showed improved OS over FU-only regimens when combination chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab was used (HR, 0.58; P < .01; P value for interaction = .07). Patients with MSI-H/BRAF wild type (WT) had survival advantage over patients with MSS disease (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.98) when treated with FU-only protocols.

CONCLUSION

Clinical outcomes differ substantially between patients with MSS/BRAF-WT mCRC and MSI-H/BRAF-WT mCRC, with measurable differences between chemotherapy regimens. MSI-H mCRCs are a clinically distinct subset of colorectal cancers. Their current poor outcome suggests that new clinical trials are needed to identify therapeutic options, potentially taking advantage of the new developments in the field of immunotherapy.

Characteristics of right-sided colonic neoplasia and colonoscopy barriers limiting their early detection and prognosis: a review of the literature

Colonoscopy provides less protection from colorectal cancer in the right colon than the left. Areas covered: This review examines patient outcomes and colonoscopy success rates to identify factors that limit the protective effect of colonoscopy in the right colon. The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for literature from 2000 onwards, on the long-term outcomes and differences in screening practice between the right and left colon. In total, 12 systematic reviews (including nine meta-analyses) and 44 primary data records were included. Differences in patient outcomes and colonoscopy practice were identified between the right and left colon, suggesting that several factors, many of which disproportionally affect the right colon, impact lesion detection rates. Shorter withdrawal times reduce detection rates, while longer times significantly increase detection; mostly of adenomas in the right colon. Colonoscope attachments often only show a significant improvement in detection rates in the right colon, suggesting detection is more challenging due to visibility of the right colonic mucosa. Higher bowel cleansing grades significantly improve detection rates in the right colon compared to the left. Expert commentary: These findings confirm the need for continued improvement of colonoscopy effectiveness, and obligatory quality assessment, overall and especially in the right colon.

Primary tumor sidedness has an impact on prognosis and treatment outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer: results from two randomized first-line panitumumab studies

Background

Previous studies have reported the prognostic impact of primary tumor sidedness in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and its influence on cetuximab efficacy. The present retrospective analysis of two panitumumab trials investigated a possible association between tumor sidedness and treatment efficacy in first-line mCRC patients with RAS wild-type (WT) primary tumors.

Materials and methods

Data from two randomized first-line panitumumab trials were analyzed for treatment outcomes by primary tumor sidedness for RAS WT patients. PRIME (phase 3; NCT00364013) compared panitumumab plus FOLFOX versus FOLFOX alone; PEAK (phase 2; NCT00819780) compared panitumumab plus FOLFOX versus bevacizumab plus FOLFOX. Primary tumors located in the cecum to transverse colon were coded as right-sided, while tumors located from the splenic flexure to rectum were considered left-sided.

Results

Tumor sidedness ascertainment (RAS WT population) was 83% (n = 559/675); 78% of patients (n = 435) had left-sided and 22% (n = 124) had right-sided tumors. Patients with right-sided tumors did worse for all efficacy parameters compared with patients with left-sided disease in the RAS WT population and also in the RAS/BRAF WT subgroup. In patients with left-sided tumors, panitumumab provided better outcomes than the comparator treatment, including on median overall survival (PRIME: 30.3 versus 23.6 months, adjusted hazard ratio = 0.73, P = 0.0112; PEAK: 43.4 versus 32.0 months, adjusted hazard ratio = 0.77, P = 0.3125).

Conclusion

The results of these retrospective analyses confirm that in RAS WT patients, right-sided primary tumors are associated with worse prognosis than left-sided tumors, regardless of first-line treatment received. RAS WT patients with left-sided tumors derive greater benefit from panitumumab-containing treatment than chemotherapy alone or combined with bevacizumab, including an overall survival advantage (treatment difference: PRIME 6.7 months; PEAK 11.4 months). No final conclusions regarding optimal treatment could be drawn for RAS WT patients with right-sided mCRC due to the relatively low number of paxtients. Further research in this field is warranted.

Trial registration (Clinicaltrials.gov)

PRIME (NCT00364013), PEAK (NCT00819780).