Prospective study of a molecular selection profile for RAS wild type colorectal cancer patients receiving irinotecan-cetuximab

Negative Ultraselection of Patients With RAS/BRAF Wild-Type, Microsatellite-Stable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Receiving Anti-EGFR-Based Therapy

Several uncommon genomic alterations beyond RAS and BRAFV600E mutations drive primary resistance to anti–epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFRs) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Our PRESSING panel (including PIK3CA exon 20/AKT1/PTEN mutations, ERBB2/MET amplifications, gene fusions, and microsatellite instability-high status) represented a paradigm of negative hyperselection with more precise tailoring of EGFR blockade. However, a modest proportion of hyperselected mCRC has intrinsic resistance potentially driven by even rarer genomic alterations.

Beyond RAS/BRAF: rarer alterations drive negative ultraselection for anti-EGFR therapy in mCRC

Retrospective Comparative Analysis of KRAS G12C vs. Other KRAS Mutations in mCRC Patients Treated With First-Line Chemotherapy Doublet + Bevacizumab

Background

KRAS mutations in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) define a subset of tumors that have primary resistance to anti-EGFR-based therapy. Data concerning whether different KRAS mutations may also have a prognostic value are lacking. Furthermore, novel KRAS G12C inhibitors are currently in development. The aim of our analysis was to compare response rates in patients treated with first-line chemotherapy doublet + Bevacizumab among different KRAS variants. Secondary end-points were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Methods

Patients with KRAS mutated mCRC treated with either FOLFIRI/FOLFOX/XELOX + Bevacizumab were eligible for enrollment. Patients whose tumor harbored NRAS mutations or that coexpressed also BRAF mutations were excluded from this retrospective analysis. Patients’ individual data were collected from patients’ records. Propensity score matching (nearest method, 1:2 ratio) was used to define the two different groups of patients for comparison (KRAS G12C mutated vs other KRAS variants). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS), sex, metastatic site of involvement, synchronous vs metachronous metastatic disease, tumor sidedness, mucinous histology, primary tumor surgery, more than two lines of treatment for metastatic disease, and radical surgery of metastases were used as matching factors. Response rate (RR) was calculated by RECIST 1.1 criteria. Both progression free-survival and overall survival were calculated by Kaplan–Meier method. Categorical variables were compared by Fisher exact test for binomial variables and by chi-square test for all other instances. The level of statistical significance p was set at 0.05 for all tests.

Results

A total of 120 patients were assessed in the final analysis. Out of the 120 patients, 15 (12%) were KRAS G12C mutated. In the whole cohort of patients, 59/120 (49%) had partial response (PR), 42/120 (35%) had stable disease (SD), and 19/120 (16%) had progressive disease (PD) as the best response. In KRAS G12C patients, 4/15 (27%) had PR, 6/15 (40%) had SD, and the remaining 5/15 (33%) had PD as the best response. In patients with other KRAS mutations, 55/105 (52%) had PR, 37/105 (35%) had SD, and the remaining 13/105 (12%) had PD as the best response. The difference in RR between the two groups of patients was statistically significant (p=0.017). On the other hand, no difference in PFS (p=0.76) and OS (p=0.56) was observed. After matching procedures, the difference in response rates between KRAS G12C mutated patients vs the matched cohort of patients with other KRAS mutations remained statistically significant (p=0.016). KRAS G12C mutations were not associated with differences in sites of metastatic involvement, sex, and ECOG PS. On the other hand, synchronous vs metachronous metastatic disease (p=0.039), age > 75 years (p=0.043), and mucinous histology (p=0.008) were more frequent in G12C mutated tumors.

Conclusions

In our cohort of patients, it was observed that KRAS G12C mutations are associated with worse response rates compared to other KRAS variants when treated with standard chemotherapy doublet + Bevacizumab. On the other hand, both PFS and OS were not significantly different. Based on these findings, we believe that new treatment options focused on KRAS G12C inhibition should be tested mainly in first-line setting and in addition to standard chemotherapy doublet + Bevacizumab for mCRC patients, as they might “fill the gap” in response rates that was seen in our study.

Associations Between Molecular Classifications of Colorectal Cancer and Patient Survival: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a heterogeneous disease with different mechanisms of pathogenesis. Classification systems have been proposed based on molecular features of tumors, but none are used in clinical practice. We performed a systematic review of studies on the associations between molecular classifications of CRC and patient survival.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for combinations of terms related to CRC, molecular markers, subtype classifications, and survival (overall survival, disease-specific survival, disease-free survival). We included only studies that used at least 3 molecular markers to classify tumors and provided an estimate of survival associated with each subtype. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by 2 reviewers.

RESULTS

We identified 6 studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In these studies, molecular subtypes were assigned based on pathways associated with tumor development or findings from gene expression clustering analyses. Most studies proposed classification systems with 5 subtypes, including information on microsatellite instability, mutations in BRAF, and mutations in KRAS. None of the studies included TNM stage in their classification system. Three classification systems used similar definitions. Only 3 studies provided internal or external validation of the proposed classification schemes. Tumors with microsatellite stability and mutations in KRAS or BRAF were associated with decreased survival times, compared with tumors with microsatellite stability and no mutations.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review of studies of molecular classifications of CRC and patient survival, we found that most subtypes were not significantly or not differentially associated with survival. None of the systems integrated TNM staging. Further research and validation are needed to develop molecular subtype classification systems for clinical practice.

RAS and RAF mutation status in the selection of patients for anti-EGFR therapy

Anti-EGFR therapy in combination or not with chemotherapy is one of the mainstays of treatment for advanced colorectal cancer. KRAS exon 2 mutations have been validated as negative predictors of response, despite of it, an important percentage of patients do not benefit from anti-EGFR therapy. Factors like other RAS and BRAF mutations could contribute to primary resistance to cetuximab and panitumumab. Evidence surrounding RAS and BRAF status determination before anti-EGFR therapy administration is reviewed here.