Prognostic and predictive biomarkers for anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

RAS mutations affect prognosis in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and have been identified as strong negative predictive markers for anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody (anti-EGFR mAb) therapy, but many tumors containing wild-type RAS genes still do not respond to these therapies. Some additional biomarkers may have prognostic or predictive roles, but conclusions remain controversial.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing anti-EGFR mAb therapy with alternative therapy that investigated the prognostic and predictive impact of additional biomarkers in RAS wild-type (wt) mCRC patients. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and odds ratios (ORs) for objective response rate (ORR) were calculated. The prognostic value of biomarkers was investigated by separately pooling HR and OR for different treatment groups in an individual study. The predictive value was assessed by pooling study interactions between treatment effects and biomarker subgroups.

RESULTS

Thirty publications reporting on eighteen trials were selected, including a total of 13,507 patients. In prognostic analysis, BRAF mutations were associated with poorer PFS [HRs = 3.76 (2.47-5.73) and 2.69 (1.82-3.98)] and OS [HRs = 2.66 (1.95-3.65) and 2.45 (1.55-3.88)] in both the experimental and control arms; low miR-31-3p expression appeared to have longer PFS and OS. In terms of predictive effect, a lack of response to anti-EGFR therapy was observed in patients with BRAF mutant tumors (Pinteraction < 0.01 for PFS). Patients with tumors with any mutation in the KRAS/NRAS/BRAF/PIK3CA gene also showed similar results compared with all wild-type tumors (Pinteraction for PFS, OS, and ORR were < 0.01, < 0.01 and 0.01, respectively). While low miR-31-3p expression could predict PFS (Pinteraction = 0.01) and OS (Pinteraction = 0.04) benefit. The prognostic and predictive value regarding PIK3CA mutations, PTEN mutations or deletions, EGFR, EREG/AREG, HER2, HER3, and HER4 expression remains uncertain.

CONCLUSIONS

In RAS wt mCRC patients receiving EGFR-targeted therapy, BRAF mutation is a powerful prognostic and therapy-predictive biomarker, with no effect found for PIK3CA mutation, PTEN mutation or deletion, but the combined biomarker KRAS/NRAS/BRAF/PIK3CA mutations predict resistance to anti-EGFR therapy. Low miR-31-3p expression may have positive prognostic and therapy predictive effects. Evidence on the prognostic and predictive roles of EGFR and its ligands, and HER2/3/4 is insufficient.

Blood-based markers of efficacy and resistance to cetuximab treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: results from CALGB 80203 (Alliance)

Circulating protein markers were assessed in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with cetuximab in CALGB 80203 to identify prognostic and predictive biomarkers. Patients with locally advanced or metastatic CRC received FOLFOX or FOLFIRI chemotherapy (chemo) or chemo in combination with cetuximab. Baseline plasma samples from 152 patients were analyzed for six candidate markers [epidermal growth factor (EGF), heparin‐binding EGF (HBEGF), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), HER2, HER3, and CD73]. Analyte levels were associated with survival endpoints using univariate Cox proportional hazards models. Predictive markers were identified using a treatment‐by‐marker interaction term in the Cox model. Plasma levels of EGF, HBEGF, HER3, and CD73 were prognostic for overall survival (OS) across all patients (KRAS mutant and wild‐type). High levels of EGF predicted for lack of OS benefit from cetuximab in KRAS wild‐type (WT) patients (chemo HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.74–1.29; chemo+cetuximab HR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.05–2.25; interaction P = 0.045) and benefit from cetuximab in KRAS mutant patients (chemo HR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.02–2.92; chemo+cetuximab HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.67–1.21; interaction P = 0.026). Across all patients, higher HER3 levels were associated with significant OS benefit from cetuximab treatment (chemo HR = 4.82, 95% CI = 1.68–13.84; chemo+cetuximab HR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.31–2.95; interaction P = 0.046). CD73 was also identified as predictive of OS benefit in KRASWT patients (chemo HR = 1.28, 95% CI = 0.88–1.84; chemo+cetuximab HR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.32–1.13; interaction P = 0.049). Although these results are preliminary, and confirmatory studies are necessary before clinical application, the data suggest that HER3 and CD73 may play important roles in the biological response to cetuximab.

Patterns of Biologics Use Across Treatment Lines in Elderly (Age >65) Medicare Patients With Metastatic Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

We explored biologics receipt in metastatic colon cancer.

METHODS

We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data of 4,545 elderly patients diagnosed with incident metastatic colon cancer from 2003 to 2009, treated with chemotherapy and/or biologics, and followed up through 2010.

RESULTS

A total of 2,504 (55%) patients received a biologics-containing regimen. Treatment with biologics fluctuated between 46% and 63% of first-line regimens and 67% and 73% of second-line regimens. Bevacizumab accounted for 95% of first-line and 68% of second-line biologics use. Cetuximab accounted for 33% of second-line and 48% of third-line use. Panitumumab accounted for 5% of second-line and 27% of third-line use. The adjusted odds of biologics receipt decreased rapidly with age, resulting in a threefold difference between the youngest and the oldest study participants in the sample (odds ratio [OR] 0.35, p < .01). African Americans (OR 0.77, p = .03) and patients with Charlson Comorbidity Index of 1 (OR 0.83, p = .02) or >1 (OR 0.75, p < .01) were considerably less likely to receive biologics therapy. Medicare state buy-in was associated with 2% lower odds of receiving biologics (OR 0.98, p = .04).

CONCLUSION

After controlling for sociodemographic and clinical differences, age, race, comorbidities, and low income had a statistically significantly negative effect on the likelihood of receiving biologics among treated patients. Use of biologics varied over time, across the treatment continuum, and by chemotherapy regimen. Bevacizumab was most frequently used in both first- and second-line treatment. Cetuximab was the second most prescribed biologic. Panitumumab use was mostly limited to third-line treatment.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

It is well-known that patients in the "real world" receive cancer treatments that do not reflect the strict treatment protocols of clinical trials. This is particularly true for complex and elderly patients with metastatic disease, who are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials. Although this article does not provide any additional evidence about the effectiveness of one treatment regimen or treatment sequence over another, it enhances our understanding of oncology practice outside of the clinical trial setting and provides useful information for future health services and health economics research in metastatic colon cancer.

The role of personalized medicine in metastatic colorectal cancer: an evolving landscape

Advances in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer have led to an improvement in survival from 12 months with fluorouracil monotherapy to approximately 2 years. This is partly as a result of the addition of irinotecan and oxaliplatin, but is also due to the use of monoclonal antibodies against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and antiangiogenic drugs such as bevacizumab. However, there are significant molecular differences between tumours which can affect both prognosis and response to treatment. Personalized medicine aims to tailor treatment according to the characteristics of the individual patient and is now a clinical reality as testing for KRAS mutations to guide treatment with the anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab is now part of routine clinical practice. However, not all patients who are KRAS wild type respond to anti-EGFR therapy and a validated biomarker for antiangiogenic therapy is still lacking. Therefore, other biomarkers are needed to assist with predicting response to both existing drugs as well as to drugs currently under investigation. This review summarizes the molecular biology of colorectal cancer, focusing on the genetic features that are currently most clinically relevant. Current and emerging biomarkers are reviewed along with their roles in selecting patients for targeted treatment with currently licensed therapies and drugs being evaluated in clinical trials. The value of predictive biomarkers of chemosensitivity and potential future treatment strategies are also discussed.

Validation of companion diagnostic for detection of mutations in codons 12 and 13 of the KRAS gene in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of the NCIC CTG CO.17 trial

CONTEXT

The therascreen KRAS RGQ polymerase chain reaction kit is being developed as a companion diagnostic to aid clinicians, through detection of KRAS mutations, in the identification of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who are more likely to benefit from cetuximab.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether KRAS mutation status, determined by using the therascreen KRAS kit, is a predictive marker of cetuximab efficacy.

DESIGN

Tissue samples were obtained from patients with mCRC treated on the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (NCIC CTG) CO.17 phase 3 study of cetuximab plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone. Tumor DNA samples were assessed for the presence of KRAS mutations by using the therascreen KRAS kit. Efficacy and safety were assessed to determine whether mutation status was predictive of outcomes. Results.-Evaluable samples were available from 453 patients (79.2%) enrolled in the NCIC CTG CO.17 trial. The KRAS wild-type subset represented 54.1% (245 of 453) of the evaluated population. Median overall survival of patients with KRAS wild-type tumors was 8.6 months among those who received cetuximab plus BSC and 5.0 months among patients who received BSC alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; P = .002). Among patients with KRAS mutant mCRC, no meaningful difference in overall survival was observed between arms (HR, 0.91; P = .55). These results are consistent with a previous report that analyzed patient tumor samples by using bidirectional sequencing.

CONCLUSIONS

These data support the utility of the therascreen KRAS kit as a means of selecting patients who may benefit from cetuximab therapy.

Therapeutic efficiency of everolimus and lapatinib in xenograft model of human colorectal carcinoma with KRAS mutation

KRAS mutation is a negative predictive prognostic factor during metastatic colorectal cancer treatment with antiepidermal growth factor receptor antibodies. For affected patients, new therapeutics must be explored. Our objective was to study efficacy of two drugs with different mechanisms of action, everolimus (mTOR inhibitor) and lapatinib (tyrosine kinase inhibitor), in a mouse xenograft model. We chose a model obtained after engraftment of a tumor originating from a human tumor collection. The patient was affected by a metastasis colorectal carcinoma resistant to cetuximab with KRAS mutation. From a previous study in mice, we know that everolimus is a P-glycoprotein (P-gp) substrate and that a lapatinib pretreatment increases significantly (2.6-fold) everolimus AUC by inhibiting its intestinal P-gp efflux. We hence tested the effect of these drugs alone or combined. Mice bearing the xenografts were divided in four groups: control, lapatinib, everolimus, and L/E group (L/E: 2 days of lapatinib 200 mg/kg and then 3 days of everolimus 1 mg/kg). Tumor volumes and treatment toxicities were evaluated. Sixteen days after treatment initiation, the group L/E was the first one in which tumor volume average was significantly lower than the one of control group (193 ± 90 vs. 395 ± 171 mm(3) ; P = 0.0025). After 4 weeks of treatment, inhibition of tumor growth in lapatinib, everolimus, and L/E groups reached, respectively, 49, 53, and 57%. Each drug showed significant antitumor activity. Only moderate hematologic toxicity signs were observed. These results lead to new perspectives for new oral drugs in metastatic KRAS-mutated colorectal cancer resistant to standard chemotherapy.

Cetuximab in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Cetuximab is a chimeric mAb with avidity for the EGFR higher than that of the natural ligands of the receptor. Preclinical studies showed that cetuximab demonstrated synergy with topoisomerase I inhibitors in the treatment of human colorectal cancer (CRC) cell lines in vivo. Subsequent clinical trials have shown that cetuximab can reverse resistance to topoisomerase I inhibitors in addition to having modest monotherapy activity. These studies led to accelerated provisional FDA approval of the drug for the treatment of patients with irinotecan-refractory metastatic CRC. Its clinical utility has been improved with the discovery of negative predictive biomarkers; these have shown that there is a lack of cetuximab benefit for patients whose tumors generally harbor a KRAS mutation, thus sparing these patients the toxicity of the agent which would not be of treatment benefit.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers the last decade of clinical trials that have determined the toxicity and efficacy of cetuximab when given to patients with CRC, as well as some of the molecular subgroups tumors from patients with CRC who appear to not derive benefit from this mAb.

EXPERT OPINION

Cetuximab has modest single-agent efficacy in the treatment of patients with metastatic CRC whose tumors do not harbor a KRAS mutation. In combination with irinotecan, it is associated with an overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) advantage in first-line therapy in patients with KRAS non mutant metastatic CRC; it can be combined with irinotecan to overcome resistance in patients with KRAS non mutant CRC who have previously progressed on prior irinotecan chemotherapy. Future studies of putative biomarkers are likely to give additional information to clearly define which patients with metastatic CRC receive therapeutic benefit from cetuximab and other monoclonal anti-EGFR therapies.

Additional value of EGFR downstream signaling phosphoprotein expression to KRAS status for response to anti-EGFR antibodies in colorectal cancer

KRAS mutations are a strong predictive marker of resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) but only a subset of wild-type (WT) KRAS patients are responders, suggesting the existence of additional markers of resistance to this treatment. The activation of EGFR downstream signaling pathways may be one of these ones. In a series of 42 patients with advanced CRC treated with cetuximab/panitumumab, for whom KRAS status was previously determined, we retrospectively analyzed the intratumor expression of EGFR downstream signaling phosphoproteins of the RAS/MAPK and PI3K/AKT pathways (pERK1/2, pMEK1, pAKT, pP70S6K and pGSK3beta) using Bio-Plex phosphoprotein array. Association with tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed. The expression of all the phosphoproteins was higher in KRAS mutated tumors than in WT tumors. The expression of pP70S6K was lower in responders than in nonresponder patients. In univariate analysis, patients with high pMEK1 or pP70S6K expression had a shorter PFS than those with low expression. Patients with high pP70S6K expression also had a shorter OS. In multivariate analysis, PFS was shorter for patients with high pMEK1 or pP70S6K expression, independently of KRAS status, as OS for patients with high pP70S6K expression. Therefore, WT KRAS patients with high pP70S6K expression had a shorter survival than those with low expression. Our results suggest the importance of EGFR downstream signaling phosphoproteins expression in addition to KRAS status to define the subgroup of patients who will not benefit from anti-EGFR therapy.

A review of the most promising biomarkers in colorectal cancer: one step closer to targeted therapy

Rapidly growing insights into the molecular biology of colorectal cancer (CRC) and recent developments in gene sequencing and molecular diagnostics have led to high expectations for the identification of molecular markers to be used in optimized and tailored treatment regimens. However, many of the published data on molecular biomarkers are contradictory in their findings and the current reality is that no molecular marker, other than the KRAS gene in the case of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)- targeted therapy for metastatic disease, has made it into clinical practice. Many markers investigated suffer from technical shortcomings, resulting from lack of quantitative techniques to capture the impact of the molecular alteration. This understanding has recently led to the more comprehensive approaches of global gene expression profiling or genome-wide analysis to determine prognostic and predictive signatures in tumors. In this review, an update of the most recent data on promising biological prognostic and/or predictive markers, including microsatellite instability, epidermal growth factor receptor, KRAS, BRAF, CpG island methylator phenotype, cytotoxic T lymphocytes, forkhead box P3-positive T cells, receptor for hyaluronic acid-mediated motility, phosphatase and tensin homolog, and T-cell originated protein kinase, in patients with CRC is provided.

Predictive and prognostic value of KRAS mutations in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with cetuximab: a meta-analysis of 22 studies

The published data on the predictive and prognostic value of KRAS mutations in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with cetuximab seemed inconclusive. To derive a more precise estimation of the relationship, a meta-analysis was performed. Systematic computerised searches of the PubMed, EMBase, BIOSIS, and SCOPUS were performed. A total of 22 studies were identified. Random-effects model or fix-effects model was used according to between-study heterogeneity. A total of 2188 mCRC patients were included in the final meta-analysis. The rate of KRAS mutations was 38% (829/2188). The overall response rate (ORR) of mutant KRAS patients was 14% (119/829), whereas the ORR of wild-type KRAS patients was 39% (529/1359). The overall pooled relative ratio (RR) for ORR was 0.24 (95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.16-0.38; P<0.01) when mutant KRAS patients were compared with wild-type KRAS patients. Median PFS was significantly shorter in mutant KRAS patients compared with that in wild-type KRAS patients (3.0 versus 5.8 months; HR=1.94; 95% CI: 1.62-2.33; P<0.01). Similarly, median OS was significantly shorter in mutant KRAS patients compared with that in wild-type KRAS patients (6.9 versus 13.5 months; HR=2.17; 95% CI: 1.72-2.74; P<0.01). The meta-analysis strongly suggests that KRAS mutations represent adverse predictive and prognostic biomarkers for tumour response and survival in mCRC patients treated with cetuximab. Patients with tumours that harbour mutant-type KRAS are more likely to have a worse response, PFS, and OS when treated with cetuximab.

Therapeutic modulation of k-ras signaling in colorectal cancer

KRAS has an important role in colorectal carcinogenesis and mutant KRAS leads to a permanently activated k-ras protein. To exert its biological activity, k-ras requires post-translational modification by prenylation. K-ras modulation has become a promising concept for new therapies, mostly by interference with the mevalonate pathway and subsequently by the prenylation of k-ras. Clinical data of agents interfering with the mevalonate pathway and the prenylation of ras are summarized and suggest that these agents might be effective when administered in combination with anticancer drugs that target k-ras. Here, we discuss the novel concept that modulation of k-ras might potentiate EGFR therapy by altering the KRAS phenotype.

Oncogenic mutations as predictive factors in colorectal cancer

The anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab have been demonstrated to be new therapeutic options for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Oncogenic activation of intracellular signalling pathways downstream of EGFR has a major role in colorectal carcinogenesis but has also been reported to be an important mechanism of resistance to anti-EGFR antibodies. Among the activating mutations found in colorectal cancers, tumour KRAS mutations, which are found in approximately 40% of the cases, have been widely demonstrated as a major predictive marker of resistance to cetuximab or panitumumab, therefore, opening the way to individualized treatment for patients with mCRC. Other oncogenic mutations, such as BRAF or PIK3CA mutations or loss of PTEN expression, may also be additional interesting predictive markers of response to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies but required further evaluation before being incorporated in clinical practice. The identification of these molecular markers involved in the resistance of anti-EGFR antibodies will allow the development of new therapies that should target 'escape mechanisms' used by tumours to circumvent a pathway that has been pharmacologically blocked by anti-EGFR.

KRAS mutational status as a predictor of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor efficacy in colorectal cancer

Inhibitors of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have demonstrated promising potential in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. However, a proportion of patients do not respond to therapy with EGFR inhibitors, and therefore, there has been interest in identifying those patients most likely to benefit from therapy with these agents. KRAS, a member of the RAS family of signaling proteins, plays an important role in EGFR-mediated regulation of cellular proliferation and survival. Although there is still some debate regarding the prognostic importance of KRAS mutations in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, several recent phase 2 and 3 studies have identified the presence of mutations at codons 12 and 13 of KRAS as predictors of poor response to the anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies panitumumab and cetuximab. Patients with wild-type KRAS were found to have significantly better progression-free survival, overall survival, and/or objective response rate compared with patients harboring KRAS mutations. As a result, there has been growing interest in the development of KRAS mutational status as a biomarker for predicting patient response to EGFR-targeted therapy. Screening colorectal tumors for the absence of KRAS mutations may help identify patients most likely to benefit from anti-EGFR therapies.

Pharmacogenomic and pharmacoproteomic studies of cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer: biomarker analysis of a phase I dose-escalation study

PURPOSE

This study assessed biomarkers for cetuximab efficacy in tissue samples collected during a phase I dose-escalation study exploring every second week administration of cetuximab as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-two patients received cetuximab monotherapy for 6 weeks, followed by cetuximab plus infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan until disease progression. Patients in the control arm received cetuximab as a 400 mg/m(2) initial dose then 250 mg/m(2) per week; patients in the dose-escalation arms received 400 to 700 mg/m(2) every second week. Tumor and skin biopsies were taken for immunohistochemical and microarray expression analyses (tumor only) at baseline and week 4. Plasma was collected for proteomic analysis at baseline and week 4. KRAS tumor mutation status was assessed.

RESULTS

In subsets of paired skin samples from 35 patients, cetuximab treatment was associated with substantial downregulation of phospho(p)-EGFR, p-MAPK and proliferation and substantial upregulation of p27(Kip1) and p-STAT3 levels. No marked difference in these effects was noted for different schedules of administration and dose levels. In the cetuximab monotherapy phase, responses were seen only in patients whose tumors were wild-type for KRAS (eight of 29 v zero of 19 for KRAS mutant tumors; P = .015). Progression-free survival was longer for patients with KRAS wild-type compared with KRAS mutant tumors (log-rank P = .048). Genomics/proteomics analyses (42 and 45 patients, respectively) identified candidate biomarkers associated with response.

CONCLUSION

Biomarker analysis supported the functional equivalence of weekly and every second week administration of cetuximab and provided further confirmation that patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC were those most likely to benefit from cetuximab treatment.

KRAS mutation testing in human cancers: The pathologist's role in the era of personalized medicine

A number of studies have shown that although antiepidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies are effective treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), only patients with wild-type KRAS tumors derive clinical benefit from these therapies. The anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies panitumumab and cetuximab are approved in the United States for treatment of mCRC refractory to chemotherapy but are not recommended for use in patients with mutations in KRAS codons 12 or 13. Similarly, panitumumab is approved for the treatment of mCRC only in patients with wild-type KRAS in Europe and Canada. It is clear that KRAS mutational analysis will become an important aspect of disease management in patients with mCRC. Consequently, it will be important for pathologists and oncologists to develop and agree on standardized KRAS testing and reporting procedures to ensure optimum patient care. Pathologists will be central to this process because of their crucial role in selecting appropriate tumor specimens for testing, choosing the molecular diagnostic laboratory to be used, assisting in the selection of a suitable KRAS test, and interpreting the results of KRAS mutational analysis. Guidelines for KRAS testing that address these and other important points of consideration have recently been proposed in the United States and the European Union.

KRAS mutation in colon cancer: a marker of resistance to EGFR-I therapy

Introduction and Design

The introduction of the epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFR-I) has increased the treatment options available for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Two EGFR-I agents currently approved for the treatment of mCRC are the fully human monoclonal antibody panitumumab and the mouse-human chimeric monoclonal antibody cetuximab. While these agents have demonstrated activity across multiple lines of therapy, early studies suggested that clinical benefit was confined to a subset of patients treated. Mutation of the KRAS oncogene has emerged as a powerful negative predictive biomarker to identify patients with mCRC who do not benefit from EGFR-I therapy. Multiple retrospective analyses have demonstrated that clinical benefit from treatment with EGFR-I is limited to patients with tumors harboring the wild-type KRAS gene. In this review, the KRAS pathway and studies evaluating KRAS as a prognostic marker in CRC are discussed along with advances in KRAS gene mutation testing. Clinical trials evaluating the role of KRAS status in response to EGFR-I monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy are also highlighted along with ongoing studies evaluating the role of EGFR-I treatment on curative resections rates.

Results and Conclusion

Future studies investigating EGFR-I therapy in mCRC should incorporate KRAS mutation testing into the study protocol in order to more accurately determine the patient population that will obtain clinical benefit from these novel agents.

Implications of KRAS mutation status for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

Targeted agents have become an integral part of the treatment of a number of malignant diseases and regimens containing agents that disrupt the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling pathway are now considered a standard therapeutic approach for a range of tumor types. Recently, the mutational status of the KRAS gene in tumors was shown to be predictive of outcome to treatment with EGFR-targeted therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The immoglobulin (Ig) G1 EGFR-targeting monoclonal antibody (mAb), cetuximab, has been shown to provide significant clinical benefits when added to standard irinotecan- and oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy regimens, first-line, in patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC. Its effects on tumor response and resectability of metastases make cetuximab a particularly useful treatment option for patients with bulky or initially unresectable disease. With an ever-increasing array of management options available, it is important that patients with mCRC receive the treatment that offers them the best chance of prolonged survival. In view of this, testing for tumor KRAS mutation status should be mandatory at diagnosis of mCRC, prior to treatment decision-making.

Biomarkers predicting clinical outcome of epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer

The monoclonal antibodies panitumumab and cetuximab that target the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have expanded the range of treatment options for metastatic colorectal cancer. Initial evaluation of these agents as monotherapy in patients with EGFR-expressing chemotherapy-refractory tumors yielded response rates of approximately 10%. The realization that detection of positive EGFR expression by immunostaining does not reliably predict clinical outcome of EGFR-targeted treatment has led to an intense search for alternative predictive biomarkers. Oncogenic activation of signaling pathways downstream of the EGFR, such as mutation of KRAS, BRAF, or PIK3CA oncogenes, or inactivation of the PTEN tumor suppressor gene is central to the progression of colorectal cancer. Tumor KRAS mutations, which may be present in 35%-45% of patients with colorectal cancer, have emerged as an important predictive marker of resistance to panitumumab or cetuximab treatment. In addition, among colorectal tumors carrying wild-type KRAS, mutation of BRAF or PIK3CA or loss of PTEN expression may be associated with resistance to EGFR-targeted monoclonal antibody treatment, although these additional biomarkers require further validation before incorporation into clinical practice. Additional knowledge of the molecular basis for sensitivity or resistance to EGFR-targeted monoclonal antibodies will allow the development of new treatment algorithms to identify patients who are most likely to respond to treatment and could also provide rationale for combining therapies to overcome primary resistance. The use of KRAS mutations as a selection biomarker for anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody (eg, panitumumab or cetuximab) treatment is the first major step toward individualized treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Assessment of K-ras mutation: a step toward personalized medicine for patients with colorectal cancer

Some of the most significant therapeutic advances in the treatment of cancer have occurred in the management of colorectal metastases. The introduction of new cytotoxic chemotherapeutic and biologic agents has changed the approach to these patients from both an oncologic and a surgical perspective. In addition, an understanding of the molecular mechanisms by which these agents affect tumors is developing. This molecular information will be critical in the future in designing therapeutic regimens based on an individual tumor's genetic profile rather than treatment for a specific tumor type. The rapidly evolving treatment of colon cancer has provided several interesting genetic biomarkers/pathways/genes-/kinases that have been targeted or seem to play an important role. Of particular interest is the blockade of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) with monoclonal antibodies. This treatment is efficacious when used alone or combined with chemotherapy. However, recent data revealed that patients with tumors positive for the K-ras mutation do not benefit from EGFR blockade. Compelling evidence has indicated that mutated K-ras is an important oncogene involved at the early stage of the development of colorectal cancer. Furthermore, mutations in the K-ras gene have been associated with aggressive tumor biology. K-ras mutational analysis is an important step in the overarching goal of developing personalized medicine. New treatment strategies are needed to more effectively treat patients with the K-ras mutation.

Mutations and response to epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors

Novel therapeutic agents targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have improved outcomes for a subgroup of patients with colorectal, lung, head and neck, and pancreatic cancers. In these tumors, the EGFR activation turns on at least five different signaling pathways (RAS/mitogen-activated protein kinase, phospholipase C, phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT, signal transducer and activator of transcription, and SRC/FAK pathways), which are intimately interconnected, and frequent mutations involving either the receptor itself or downstream effectors have been found. Up to now, it seems that alterations at the EGFR level has major importance in EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor response, whereas modifications of downstream effectors could lead to treatment resistance. Furthermore, our understanding of the mechanism of the EGFR network activation provides new hypotheses on potential new anticancer drugs that may be effective.

KRAS Mutations and Sensitivity to Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors in Colorectal Cancer: Practical Application of Patient Selection

Recent retrospective evidence from several randomized studies has established that advanced colorectal cancer patients with tumors harboring a mutation in the KRAS gene do not derive benefit from the administration of epidermal growth factor receptor–directed monoclonal antibodies, such as cetuximab or panitumumab. This represents a paradigm-changing event and will have substantial impact on current and future anticancer drug development. These results add to the economic and ethical considerations involved in the development of novel targeted therapies and should increase our scrutiny of mechanisms of resistance and predictive biomarkers while in earlier developmental stages. In this article we will review the available clinical data, discuss the potential implications for future drug development in colorectal cancer, and provide a comprehensive overview of the technical aspects of KRAS mutation testing. In particular we aimed at enumerating the available procedures for mutation detection and their main characteristics, as well as comparing them from a clinical feasibility standpoint. While the true specificity and sensitivity of these methods have yet to be fully characterized, a better understanding of the differences between tests will be critical so that clinicians and pathologists can fully integrate this testing into the routine care of patients with colorectal cancer.

The role of salvage treatment in advanced colorectal cancer

The selection of salvage therapy after first-line treatment failure for metastatic colorectal cancer patients has become more complex with the development of several active drugs in this setting. The addition of oxaliplatin and irinotecan to 5-fluorouracil in the first-line therapy has conditioned the election of the regimen used in second-line, becoming a standard of care the switch between both schedules at the time of disease progression. The recent introduction of new targeted drugs has complicated the scenario even more, allowing different possible combinations in first-, second-, third- and even fourth-line therapy. The role of hepatic arterial infusions has been reconsidered with the availability of new and more active cytotoxic drugs and has become an approach to be taken in mind in the management of these patients. With the possibility of active salvage therapy, surgery rescue approaches should be taken in account during all the course of the patients' disease.

Current situation of Panitumumab, Matuzumab, Nimotuzumab and Zalutumumab

EGFR overexpression usually correlates with a more advanced disease stage, a poorer prognosis and a worse chemotherapy response. EGFR expression increase has been observed in many tumours. For all the aforementioned reasons, EGFR inhibition can be considered an attractive approach in cancer treatment. One strategy has been receptor inhibition of extracellular domain using monoclonal antibodies. Cetuximab is the most developed one and there is plenty information on the literature about its current status. In this review we focus on other EGFR monoclonal antibodies under clinical development. The more developed one is Panitumumab. Its clinical development is taking place very quickly and it has mainly been studied in colorectal cancer showing promising results. There are also other interesting drugs such as Matuzumab, Nimotuzumab and Zalutumumab.

EPIC: Phase III Trial of Cetuximab Plus Irinotecan After Fluoropyrimidine and Oxaliplatin Failure in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Purpose

To determine whether adding cetuximab to irinotecan prolongs survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin.

Patients and Methods

This multicenter, open-label, phase III study randomly assigned 1,298 patients with epidermal growth factor receptor–expressing mCRC who had experienced first-line fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin treatment failure to cetuximab (400 mg/m2day 1 followed by 250 mg/m2weekly) plus irinotecan (350 mg/m2every 3 weeks) or irinotecan alone. Primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and quality of life (QOL).

Results

Median OS was comparable between treatments: 10.7 months (95% CI, 9.6 to 11.3) with cetuximab/irinotecan and 10.0 months (95% CI, 9.1 to 11.3) with irinotecan alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.975; 95% CI, 0.854 to 1.114; P = .71). This lack of difference may have been due to post-trial therapy: 46.9% of patients assigned to irinotecan eventually received cetuximab (87.2% of those who did, received it with irinotecan). Cetuximab added to irinotecan significantly improved PFS (median, 4.0 v 2.6 months; HR, 0.692; 95% CI, 0.617 to 0.776; P ≤ .0001) and RR (16.4% v 4.2%; P < .0001), and resulted in significantly better scores in the QOL analysis of global health status (P = .047). Cetuximab did not exacerbate toxicity, except for acneform rash, diarrhea, hypomagnesemia, and associated electrolyte imbalances. Neutropenia was the most common severe toxicity across treatment arms.

Conclusion

Cetuximab and irinotecan improved PFS and RR, and resulted in better QOL versus irinotecan alone. OS was similar between study groups, possibly influenced by the large number of patients in the irinotecan arm who received cetuximab and irinotecan poststudy.

Systemic treatment of colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is the fourth most common noncutaneous malignancy in the United States and the second most frequent cause of cancer-related death. Over the past 12 years, significant progress has been made in the systemic treatment of this malignant condition. Six new chemotherapeutic agents have been introduced, increasing median overall survival for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer from less than 9 months with no treatment to approximately 24 months. For patients with stage III (lymph node positive) colon cancer, an overall survival benefit for fluorouracil-based chemotherapy has been firmly established, and recent data have shown further efficacy for the inclusion of oxaliplatin in such adjuvant treatment programs. For patients with stage II colon cancer, the use of adjuvant chemotherapy remains controversial, but may be appropriate in a subset of individuals at higher risk for disease recurrence. Ongoing randomized clinical trials are evaluating how best to combine currently available therapies, while smaller studies are evaluating new agents, with the goal of continued progress in prolonging life among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and increasing cure rates among those with resectable disease.

Targeted therapy of cancer: new roles for pathologists in colorectal cancer

Personalized/individualized/tailored therapy for each patient is an important goal for improving the outcome of patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma and includes the intention to maximize efficacy and minimize toxicity of chemotherapeutic agents. Numerous barriers must be overcome to reach this goal because outcome is affected by an unholy trinity of tumor characteristics that include somatic alterations at the DNA, RNA, and protein level; patient characteristics that include germline genetic differences such as polymorphisms in enzymes affecting the metabolism of chemotherapeutic agents; and environmental exposures and factors that include diet and physical activity. At present, evaluation of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression by immunohistochemistry in colorectal adenocarcinoma is generally required for treatment with one of the monoclonal antibody therapies directed against that target, despite the absence of evidence for predictive value of the assay, whereas EGFR fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) may be predictive. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration of the United States now requires a 'black box' warning on the packaging of irinotecan for evaluation of germline polymorphism in UGT1A1, the gene mutated in Gilbert's syndrome, for potential reduction of drug dosage in patients with the UGT1A1*28 polymorphism. Numerous other potential markers have been identified but have not yet reached levels of evidence that support their routine usage. For example, KRAS gene mutation appears to preclude improved survival after therapy with monoclonal antibody therapy directed at EGFR, and extensive DNA methylation is associated with lack of efficacy of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy. Additional markers will come into routine usage as reports of research studies continue to appear in the literature. Clinical trials driven by molecular targets and agents directed against them, and understanding of the conflicting data on utility of markers reported in the literature, are needed to advance the field.

Cetuximab in combination with weekly 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid and oxaliplatin (FUFOX) in untreated patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a phase Ib/II study of the AIO GI Group

BACKGROUND

This two-part phase Ib/II study investigated the feasibility of administering cetuximab in combination with oxaliplatin and infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/folinic acid (FA) in a weekly schedule (AIO FUFOX protocol) as first-line treatment in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor-detectable advanced colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Cetuximab was administered weekly: 400 mg/m(2) initial dose, then 250 mg/m(2) and FUFOX: oxaliplatin 50 mg/m(2), FA 500 mg/m(2) and 5-FU as a 24-h infusion at either 1500 or 2000 mg/m(2) administered for 4 weeks followed by a 1-week rest (one cycle).

RESULTS

Dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 diarrhea) occurred in 3 of 14 assessable patients receiving 5-FU at standard 2000 mg/m(2). This dose was administered to a further 25 patients. Cetuximab combined with FUFOX was generally well tolerated with the most common grade 3/4 adverse events being diarrhea (27%) and paresthesia (16%). The confirmed response rate for patients receiving 5-FU at standard 2000 mg/m(2) (N = 41) was 56%, with a median duration of 9.3 months. Median progression-free and overall survival times including all 49 patients were 8.1 (95% confidence interval 6.0-9.7) and 28.2 months, respectively. Cetuximab pharmacokinetics seemed not to be different for combination with FUFOX compared with cetuximab/irinotecan combinations.

CONCLUSION

This protocol is well tolerated and shows promising efficacy supporting further investigation.

Where to position monoclonal antibodies in first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer

The treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer with modern cytotoxic agents in combination with monoclonal antibodies against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has improved median overall survival from 6 months to almost 2 years. Uncertainty remains over the optimal chemotherapy combination and sequencing, and to which line of treatment monoclonal antibodies should be added. This article reviews the rationale and evidence for the use of monoclonal antibodies in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in both general and specific situations, and provides a perspective on how to position their use in contemporary practice.

EGF-receptor targeting with monoclonal antibodies in colorectal carcinomas: rationale for a pharmacogenomic approach

Monoclonal antibodies directed against the EGF-receptor (EGFR) have recently been approved for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with EGFR-positive tumors at immunohistochemistry (IHC). Surprisingly, data demonstrate a lack of correlation between the tumor’s EGFR expression at IHC and outcome. Indeed, as pointed out from small experiences, patients with EGFR-IHC-negative metastatic CRC have the same chance as EGFR-IHC-positive patients to benefit from an anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody, underlying the importance of different, more reliable, selection criteria. In particular, the identification of such predictive factors is important as these agents are expensive, have side effects and are really only effective in a minority of patients. Several potential clinical and biological predictive markers of activity and/or efficacy for such agents have been evaluated in retrospective series with promising results. Moving from clinical data suggesting that there could be a subpopulation of CRC patients that are more liable to benefit from anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies, here we review major studies on determinants of outcome in this field.

KRAS wild-type state predicts survival and is associated to early radiological response in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab

BACKGROUND

KRAS mutation status is a candidate marker for predicting survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with cetuximab (CTX).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We studied the KRAS mutation status of 113 patients with irinotecan refractory mCRC treated with CTX in clinical trials. A predictive model for objective response (OR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was constructed using logistic and Cox regression.

RESULTS

OR was seen in 27 of 66 KRAS wild-type (WT) patients versus 0 of 42 in KRAS mutants. Median OS was significantly better in KRAS WT versus mutants (43.0 versus 27.3 weeks; P = 0.020). Decrease in tumor sizes was significantly larger at all time points in WT patients. KRAS WT patients with an initial relative decrease of tumor size >9.66% at week 6 had a significantly better median OS compared with all other patients (74.9 versus 30.6 weeks; P = 0.0000025). Within KRAS WT patients OS was significantly better in patients with an initial decrease compared with those without [median OS: 74.9 versus 30.6 weeks (P = 0.00000012)].

CONCLUSIONS

KRAS WT status is associated to survival benefit in CTX treated mCRC. This benefit is even more pronounced in those patients with early radiological response. These characteristics may be exploited for response prediction.