Panitumumab versus cetuximab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (ASPECCT): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study

Receptor tyrosine kinases and downstream pathways as druggable targets for cancer treatment: the current arsenal of inhibitors

Searching for targets that allow pharmacological inhibition of cell proliferation in over-proliferative states, such as cancer, leads us to finely understand the complex mechanisms orchestrating the perfect control of mitosis number, frequency and pace as well as the molecular arrangements that induce cells to enter functional quiescence and brings them back to cycling in specific conditions. Although the mechanisms regulating cell proliferation have been described several years ago, never before has so much light been shed over this machinery as during the last decade when therapy targets have been explored and molecules, either synthetic or in the form of antibodies with the potential of becoming cancer drugs were produced and adjusted for specific binding and function. Proteins containing tyrosine kinase domains, either membrane receptors or cytoplasmic molecules, plus the ones activated by those in downstream pathways, having tyrosine kinase domains or not, such as RAS which is a GTPase and serine/threonine kinases such as RAF, play crucial role in conducting proliferation information from cell surroundings to the nucleus where gene expression takes place. Tyrosine kinases phosphorylate tyrosine residues in an activating mode and are found in important growth factor receptors, such as for ligands from families collectively known as VEGF, PDGF and EGF, to name a few and in intracellular downstream molecules. They all play important roles in normal physiology and are commonly found mutated or overexpressed in neoplastic states. Our objective here is to present such kinases as druggable targets for cancer therapy, highlighting the ones for which the pharmacological arsenal is available, discussing specificity, resistance mechanisms and treatment alternatives in cases of resistance, plus listing potential targets that have not been successfully worked yet.

Hypomagnesemia and clinical benefits of anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies in wild-type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Hypomagnesemia is a recognized side-effect of cetuximab- or panitumumab-based chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The clinical relevance of hypomagnesemia is under debate. Thus, a systematic review and meta-analysis of retrospective studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing hypomagnesemia with normal magnesium levels in wild-type KRAS mCRC was performed. One RCT, two retrospective studies, and two American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) conference presentations from phase III RCTs involving 1723 patients were included in this study. Patients with hypomagnesemia demonstrated better progression-free survival (PFS) (Hazard ratio [HR]: 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.47–0.88), overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.53–0.92), and objective response rate (ORR) (Risk ratio [RR]: 1.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.30–2.52). By subgroup analysis, frontline, later lines or combination therapy with hypomagnesemia were associated with PFS benefits (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.62–0.98; HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40–0.90; HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.41–0.94, respectively). In patients with wild-type KRAS mCRC, hypomagnesemia is associated with better clinical benefits of PFS, OS and ORR when treated with cetuximab- or panitumumab-based chemotherapy. Future clinical trials should corroborate its predictive role.

Using Genome Sequence to Enable the Design of Medicines and Chemical Probes

Rapid progress in genome sequencing technology has put us firmly into a postgenomic era. A key challenge in biomedical research is harnessing genome sequence to fulfill the promise of personalized medicine. This Review describes how genome sequencing has enabled the identification of disease-causing biomolecules and how these data have been converted into chemical probes of function, preclinical lead modalities, and ultimately U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs. In particular, we focus on the use of oligonucleotide-based modalities to target disease-causing RNAs; small molecules that target DNA, RNA, or protein; the rational repurposing of known therapeutic modalities; and the advantages of pharmacogenetics. Lastly, we discuss the remaining challenges and opportunities in the direct utilization of genome sequence to enable design of medicines.

A Comprehensive Review of Sequencing and Combination Strategies of Targeted Agents in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

The emergence of targeted therapies for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has considerably improved survival, but has also resulted in a dilemma of identifying the optimal sequence and combination of various agents in the mCRC treatment landscape. A number of cytotoxic agents, including irinotecan, oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, capecitabine, and TAS-102, are available for treatment of mCRC. Additionally, whereas patients harboring rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (RAS)-wild type mCRC can be treated with the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab or antiangiogenic agents (bevacizumab, ziv-aflibercept, and ramucirumab), patients with RAS-mutant mCRC are limited to antiangiogenic agents as biologic options. Regorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor, can be used in both RAS subgroups. As such, the recommended sequence of therapies that should be received by each subgroup must also be considered separately. This review provides an overview of recent clinical data for approved and investigational targeted therapies that have been studied across different mCRC treatment lines and patient subgroups. It also examines emerging trends in the treatment landscape for mCRC, including treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and the utilization of genomic profiling.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Currently, there are no established guidelines for optimal sequencing of cytotoxic or targeted agents in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This review provides a snapshot of the current mCRC treatment paradigm and examines the latest clinical data that support the utilization of several targeted agents alone or in combination with backbone chemotherapy across different lines of treatment and patient populations, highlighting recommendations for their usage. Recent advances in the treatment landscape are also summarized, including genomic profiling and preliminary results with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Assessment of the cardiac safety between cetuximab and panitumumab as single therapy in Chinese chemotherapy-refractory mCRC

OBJECTIVE

The cardiac safety of cetuximab and panitumumab, particularly as single agents, has not been investigated extensively. This trial was designed to specifically evaluate the cardiac safety of cetuximab and panitumumab as single therapy in Chinese chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-one patients received cetuximab at an initial dose of 400 mg/m2 intravenously over 120 minutes on day 1 (week 1), followed by a maintenance dose of 250 mg/m2 intravenously over 60 minutes on day 1 of each 7-day cycle. Forty-three patients received panitumumab at a dose of 6 mg/kg intravenously every 14 days. Routine laboratory tests and electrocardiogram (ECG) were performed at baseline, during therapy and after the treatment (4th and 10th months). The incidence of elevation of troponin I ultra (TNI Ultra), abnormal ECGs, cardiac events and noncardiac adverse events (AEs) were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

The incidence of elevation of TNI Ultra between the two groups had no significance (p=0.681), and TNI Ultra+ was observed more frequently in patients with metastases to more than three organs and they received fourth or above lines of chemotherapy. The most frequent abnormal ECG manifestations were nonspecific ST changes and QTc prolongation in the two groups. At 10 months after treatment, most of the abnormal ECG manifestations were reversed. The most common cardiac AEs of cetuximab and panitumumab included palpitations, dyspnea, chest pain and arrhythmias requiring treatment. Most of the events were mild and transient. The incidence of cardiac AEs had no significant difference between the two groups. Rash was still the most common noncardiac AE in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Cetuximab and panitumumab showed favorable cardiac safety as single agents for Chinese chemotherapy-refractory mCRC patients. But monitoring for cardiac AEs is still necessary throughout the entire treatment process.

Near infrared fluorescence imaging of EGFR expression in vivo using IRDye800CW-nimotuzumab

Nimotuzumab is a humanized anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody that is approved in many countries for the treatment of EGFR-positive cancers. Near infrared (NIR) fluorescent dye-labeled antibodies represent an attractive class of image-guided surgical probes because of their high specificity, tumor uptake, and low dissociation from tumor cells that express the antigen. In this study, we developed a NIR fluorescent dye-labeled nimotuzumab immunoconjugate, IRDye800CW-nimotuzumab, and evaluated in vitro binding with EGFR-positive cells, in vivo tumor uptake by NIR fluorescent imaging, and ex vivo biodistribution. There was no difference in binding between nimotuzumab and IRDye800CW-nimotuzumab to EGFR-positive cells. In mice bearing EGFR-positive xenografts, IRDye800CW-nimotuzumab uptake peaked at 4 days post injection and slowly decreased thereafter with high levels of accumulation still observed at 28 days post injection. In EGFR-positive xenografts, IRDye800CW-nimotuzumab showed more than 2-fold higher uptake in tumors compared to IRDye800CW-cetuximab. In addition, liver uptake of IRDye800CW-nimotuzumab was two-fold lower than cetuximab. The lower liver uptake of IRDye800CW-nimotuzumab could have implications on the selected dose for clinical trials of the immunoconjugate. In summary, this study shows that nimotuzumab is a good candidate for NIR fluorescent imaging and image-guided surgery.

Dermatologic Toxicity Occurring During Anti-EGFR Monoclonal Inhibitor Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review

Monoclonal antibody inhibitors of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have been shown to improve outcomes for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) without RAS gene mutations. However, treatment with anti-EGFR agents can be associated with toxicities of the skin, nails, hair, and eyes. Because these dermatologic toxicities can result in treatment discontinuation and affect patient quality of life, their management is an important focus when administering anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. The present systematic review describes the current data reporting the nature and incidence of, and management and treatment options for, dermatologic toxicities occurring during anti-EGFR treatment of mCRC. A search of the National Library of Medicine PubMed database from January 1, 2009, to August 18, 2016, identified relevant reports discussing dermatologic toxicity management among patients with mCRC receiving anti-EGFR therapy. The studies were grouped by type and rated by level of evidence using the GRADE approach developed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Overall, 269 reports were reviewed (nonrandomized trials, n = 120; randomized trials, n = 31; retrospective studies, n = 15; reviews, n = 39). Dermatologic toxicity of any grade occurs in most patients who receive anti-EGFR therapy; approximately 10% to 20% of patients experienced grade 3/4 toxicity. The most common dermatologic toxicities include papulopustular/acneiform rash, xerosis, and pruritus; however, nail changes, hair abnormalities, and ocular conditions also occur. Guidance for managing these toxicities includes the use of inexpensive emollient ointments and moisturizers, avoidance of sun exposure, avoidance of irritants, and the use of short showers. Several studies also found that preemptive treatment was more effective than reactive treatment at limiting the incidence and severity of skin toxicity. With appropriate treatment, the dermatologic toxicities associated with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy can be managed, minimizing patient discomfort and the need for therapy interruption and/or discontinuation. Additionally, preemptive treatment can reduce dermatologic toxicity severity, ultimately yielding better quality of life.

A Prospective, Multicenter Phase II Study of the Efficacy and Feasibility of 15-minute Panitumumab Infusion Plus Irinotecan for Oxaliplatin- and Irinotecan-refractory, KRAS Wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (Short Infusion of Panitumumab Trial)

BACKGROUND

In some recently updated clinical guidelines, the fully humanized monoclonal antibody panitumumab, combined with irinotecan, has been recommended as an optional third-line chemotherapy for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The present prospective, multicenter phase II study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of short 15-minute panitumumab infusions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2011 to December 2011, patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC were enrolled at 8 centers. The key eligibility criteria were age ≥ 20 years and resistance or intolerance to irinotecan, fluoropyrimidine, and oxaliplatin. All patients received 6 mg/kg of panitumumab and 150 mg/m² or the previous tolerated dose of irinotecan, biweekly, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The initial panitumumab infusion was 60 minutes, followed by a 30-minute infusion and then 15-minute infusions. The primary endpoint was the confirmed response rate using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors, version 1.0. The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, overall survival, and toxicity. The trial is registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN no. 000004647).

RESULTS

Of the 43 patients, the median age was 62 years (range, 32-75 years), 58% were male, and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was 0 to 1. The total response rate was 37.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.0-53.3), and the confirmed response rate was 18.6% (95% CI, 8.4-33.4). The median progression-free and overall survival were 5.8 months (95% CI, 3.3-8.4 months) and 13.6 months (95% CI, 10.8-16.5 months), respectively. The most frequent grade 3/4 toxicities were anorexia (12%), leukopenia (9%), and neutropenia (9%). Nine patients did not reach the 15-minute infusion, primarily because of disease progression. No infusion-related reactions were observed.

CONCLUSION

The short 15-minute panitumumab infusion regimen was well tolerated, without compromising safety or efficacy in patients with KRAS wild-type, oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-refractory mCRC.

Molecular Basis for Necitumumab Inhibition of EGFR Variants Associated with Acquired Cetuximab Resistance

Acquired resistance to cetuximab, an antibody that targets the EGFR, impacts clinical benefit in head and neck, and colorectal cancers. One of the mechanisms of resistance to cetuximab is the acquisition of mutations that map to the cetuximab epitope on EGFR and prevent drug binding. We find that necitumumab, another FDA-approved EGFR antibody, can bind to EGFR that harbors the most common cetuximab-resistant substitution, S468R (or S492R, depending on the amino acid numbering system). We determined an X-ray crystal structure to 2.8 Å resolution of the necitumumab Fab bound to an S468R variant of EGFR domain III. The arginine is accommodated in a large, preexisting cavity in the necitumumab paratope. We predict that this paratope shape will be permissive to other epitope substitutions, and show that necitumumab binds to most cetuximab- and panitumumab-resistant EGFR variants. We find that a simple computational approach can predict with high success which EGFR epitope substitutions abrogate antibody binding. This computational method will be valuable to determine whether necitumumab will bind to EGFR as new epitope resistance variants are identified. This method could also be useful for rapid evaluation of the effect on binding of alterations in other antibody/antigen interfaces. Together, these data suggest that necitumumab may be active in patients who are resistant to cetuximab or panitumumab through EGFR epitope mutation. Furthermore, our analysis leads us to speculate that antibodies with large paratope cavities may be less susceptible to resistance due to mutations mapping to the antigen epitope. Mol Cancer Ther; 17(2); 521-31. ©2017 AACR.

Multiple criteria decision analysis in the context of health technology assessment: a simulation exercise on metastatic colorectal cancer with multiple stakeholders in the English setting

BACKGROUND

Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) has appeared as a methodology to address limitations of economic evaluation in health technology assessment (HTA), however there are limited empirical evidence from real world applications. The aim of this study is to test in practice a recently developed MCDA methodological framework known as Advance Value Framework (AVF) through a proof-of-concept case study engaging multiple stakeholders.

METHODS

A multi-attribute value theory methodological process was adopted involving problem structuring, model building, model assessment and model appraisal phases. A facilitated decision analysis modelling approach was used as part of a decision conference with thirteen participants. An expanded scope of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) remit acted as the study setting with the use of supplementary value concerns. Second-line biological treatments were evaluated for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients having received prior chemotherapy, including cetuximab monotherapy, panitumumab monotherapy and aflibercept in combination with FOLFIRI chemotherapy. Initially 18 criteria attributes were considered spanning four value domains relating to therapeutic impact, safety profile, innovation level and socioeconomic impact.

RESULTS

Nine criteria attributes were finally included. Cetuximab scored the highest overall weighted preference value score of 45.7 out of 100, followed by panitumumab with 42.3, and aflibercept plus FOLFIRI with 14.4. The relative weights of the two most important criteria (overall survival and Grade 4 adverse events) added up to more than the relative weight of all other criteria together (52.1%). Main methodological limitation was the lack of comparative clinical effects across treatments and challenges included the selection of "lower" and "higher" reference levels on criteria attributes, eliciting preferences across attributes where participants had less experience, and ensuring that all attributes possess the right decision theory properties.

CONCLUSIONS

This first application of AVF produced transparent rankings for three mCRC treatments based on their value, by assessing an explicit set of evaluation criteria while allowing for the elicitation and construction of participants' value preferences and their trade-offs. It proved it can aid the evaluation process and value communication of the alternative treatments for the group participants. Further research is needed to optimise its use as part of policy-making.

The current status of treatment for colorectal cancer in China: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers all over the world, but its epidemiology is obviously different in various regions.

METHODS

The treatment of CRC also has varying characteristics due to differences in economy, geography, disease onset, chemotherapy, and other factors, although international guidelines are used to guide the treatment of CRC in China.

RESULTS

This paper summarizes the current status of CRC treatment, including surgical therapy, neoadjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy, postoperative chemotherapy, targeted therapy, maintenance therapy, and immunotherapy, according to the clinical situation in China, so as to provide better therapy and improve clinical practice for patients with CRC.

CONCLUSION

This research shows that the treatment of colorectal cancer continues to progress, and the patient's efficacy and quality of life have improved.

Durable complete remission following anti-EGFR antibodies in recurrent metastatic colorectal cancer

In this case report, we describe a patient who remains in complete remission two years after the discontinuation of anti-EGFR monotherapy as a third-line treatment, accompanied by persistent severe hypomagnesemia. A 45-year-old Caucasian woman with mCRC started chemotherapy with weekly cetuximab. After ten months of treatment, the therapy was stopped because the patient had persistent grade III hypomagnesemia despite amiloride, oral, and intravenous magnesium. A month later, the patient was switched to panitumumab 6 mg/kg every two weeks for four additional months to avoid weekly visits to the clinic. Following discontinuation of panitumumab, PET scans remain negative to this day, two years after anti-EGFR therapy discontinuation. No factor has been identified to explain the complete and sustained response experienced by this patient. Hypomagnesemia is a common adverse effect of anti-EGFR therapy that can lead to treatment interruption and discontinuation if severe. This case highlights the importance of pursuing anti-EGFR therapy when a response is observed in spite of severe hypomagnesemia. It also provides preliminary information that anti-EGFR therapy could be stopped after a complete response is obtained.

Antibody Isotypes for Tumor Immunotherapy

Compared to the evolutionary diversity of antibody isotypes, the spectrum of currently approved therapeutic antibodies is biased to the human IgG1 isotype. Detailed studies into the different structures and functions of human isotypes have suggested that other isotypes than IgG1 may be advantageous for specific indications - depending on the complex interplay between the targeted antigen or epitope, the desired mode of action, the pharmacokinetic properties, and the biopharmaceutical considerations. Thus, it may be speculated that with the increasing number of antibodies becoming available against a broadening spectrum of target antigens, identification of the optimal antibody isotype for particular therapeutic applications may become critical for the therapeutic success of individual antibodies. Thus, investments into this rather unexplored area of antibody immunotherapy may provide opportunities for distinction in the increasingly busy 'antibody space'. Therefore, IgG, IgA, IgE as well as IgM isotypes will be discussed in this review.

How health-related quality of life assessment should be used in advanced colorectal cancer clinical trials

Traditionally, the efficacy of cancer treatment in patients with advance or metastatic disease in clinical studies has been studied using overall survival and more recently tumor-based end points such as progression-free survival, measurements of response to treatment. However, these seem not to be the relevant clinical end points in current situation if such end points were no validated as surrogate of overall survival to demonstrate the clinical efficacy. Appropriate, meaningful, primary patient-oriented and patient-reported end points that adequately measure the effects of new therapeutic interventions are then crucial for the advancement of clinical research in metastatic colorectal cancer to complement the results of tumor-based end points. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is effectively an evaluation of quality of life and its relationship with health over time. HRQoL includes the patient report at least of the way a disease or its treatment affects its physical, emotional and social well-being. Over the past few years, several phase III trials in a variety of solid cancers have assessed the incremental value of HRQoL in addition to the traditional end points of tumor response and survival results. HRQoL could provide not only complementary clinical data to the primary outcomes, but also more precise predictive and prognostic value. This end point is useful for both clinicians and patients in order to achieve the dogma of precision medicine. The present article examines the use of HRQoL in phase III metastatic colorectal cancer clinical trials, outlines the importance of HRQoL assessment methods, analysis, and results presentation. Moreover, it discusses the relevance of including HRQoL as a primary/co-primary end point to support the progression-free survival results and to assess efficacy of treatment in the advanced disease setting.

Inclusion of elderly or frail patients in randomized controlled trials of targeted therapies for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review

Treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has been modified since the launching of targeted therapies. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is common in elderly patients; their representation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is thus crucial. This study aimed to evaluate and quantify the inclusion of elderly/frail patients in RCTs of targeted therapies in mCRC. A systematic review using Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Database and ISI Web of Science was performed to identify all phase II/III RCTs of bevacizumab, cetuximab, panitumumab, regorafenib and aflibercept in mCRC until January 2015. Two reviewers independently performed studies selection, and data extraction. The protocol was registered in Prospero (CRD42015016163). Among 1,369, identified publications, 54 RCTs were selected. Nine RCTs (17%) excluded elderly patients; median age of the included population was <65years old in 50 RCTs (93%). Twenty RCTs (37%) excluded frail patients, and many RCTs excluded patients with uncontrolled hypertension or heart failure, patients treated with specific drugs (mainly anticoagulants), and patients with inadequate creatinine clearance. Elderly/frail patients are underrepresented in RCTs studying targeted therapies in mCRC, and those elderly patients included in RCTs do not reflect well the general elderly population with mCRC because of the exclusion criteria. RCTs results concerning targeted therapies can be inferred only to relatively healthy elderly subjects.

Anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody panitumumab for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: an overview of current practice and future perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Targeted agents alone or in combination with chemotherapy are current standard of treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Panitumumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody which inhibits the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). It is currently approved in combination with chemotherapy in first- and second-line and as a monotherapy in chemorefractory patients. RAS gene mutations confer resistance to anti-EGFR agents; thus, panitumumab is restricted to the treatment of RAS wild-type (WT) tumors. Areas covered: This review explores the available data on panitumumab and presents new perspectives on predictive markers of anti-EGFR efficacy including primary tumor sidedness and BRAF mutations. Other details covered include panitumumab's mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety aspects of the therapy as well as mechanisms of secondary resistance and future prospects of treatment in different settings. Expert opinion: Panitumumab has significantly added to the treatment armamentarium for RAS WT mCRC. The effort spent in identifying predictive biomarkers of panitumumab efficacy has been of pivotal importance to development of the molecular selection of patients with mCRC. Primary and secondary resistance, however, still represent important issues. Novel strategies to overcome those issues are currently underway with promising results which highlight the potential use of panitumumab in combination with other targeted agents in the future.

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

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

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors for metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors prevent cell growth and have shown benefit in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, whether used as single agents or in combination with chemotherapy. Clear benefit has been shown in trials of EGFR monoclonal antibodies (EGFR MAb) but not EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKI). However, there is ongoing debate as to which patient populations gain maximum benefit from EGFR inhibition and where they should be used in the metastatic colorectal cancer treatment paradigm to maximise efficacy and minimise toxicity.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy, safety profile, and potential harms of EGFR inhibitors in the treatment of people with metastatic colorectal cancer when given alone, in combination with chemotherapy, or with other biological agents.The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival; secondary outcomes included overall survival, tumour response rate, quality of life, and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library, Issue 9, 2016; Ovid MEDLINE (from 1950); and Ovid Embase (from 1974) on 9 September 2016; and ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) on 14 March 2017. We also searched proceedings from the major oncology conferences ESMO, ASCO, and ASCO GI from 2012 to December 2016. We further scanned reference lists from eligible publications and contacted corresponding authors for trials for further information where needed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials on participants with metastatic colorectal cancer comparing: 1) the combination of EGFR MAb and 'standard therapy' (whether chemotherapy or best supportive care) to standard therapy alone, 2) the combination of EGFR TKI and standard therapy to standard therapy alone, 3) the combination of EGFR inhibitor (whether MAb or TKI) and standard therapy to another EGFR inhibitor (or the same inhibitor with a different dosing regimen) and standard therapy, or 4) the combination of EGFR inhibitor (whether MAb or TKI), anti-angiogenic therapy, and standard therapy to anti-angiogenic therapy and standard therapy alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures defined by Cochrane. Summary statistics for the endpoints used hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival and progression-free survival, and odds ratios (OR) for response rate (RR) and toxicity. Subgroup analyses were performed by Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) and neuroblastoma RAS viral (V-Ras) oncogene homolog (NRAS) status - firstly by status of KRAS exon 2 testing (mutant or wild type) and also by status of extended KRAS/NRAS testing (any mutation present or wild type).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 33 randomised controlled trials for analysis (15,025 participants), including trials of both EGFR MAb and EGFR TKI. Looking across studies, significant risk of bias was present, particularly with regard to the risk of selection bias (15/33 unclear risk, 1/33 high risk), performance bias (9/33 unclear risk, 9/33 high risk), and detection bias (7/33 unclear risk, 11/33 high risk).The addition of EGFR MAb to standard therapy in the KRAS exon 2 wild-type population improves progression-free survival (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.82; high-quality evidence), overall survival (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98; high-quality evidence), and response rate (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.70 to 3.41; high-quality evidence). We noted evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity in all three of these analyses (progression-free survival: I² = 76%; overall survival: I² = 40%; and response rate: I² = 77%), likely due to pooling of studies investigating EGFR MAb use in different lines of therapy. Rates of overall grade 3 to 4 toxicity, diarrhoea, and rash were increased (moderate-quality evidence for all three outcomes), but there was no evidence for increased rates of neutropenia.For the extended RAS wild-type population (no mutations in KRAS or NRAS), addition of EGFR MAb improved progression-free survival (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.75; moderate-quality evidence) and overall survival (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.88; high-quality evidence). Response rate was also improved (OR 4.28, 95% CI 2.61 to 7.03; moderate-quality evidence). We noted significant statistical heterogeneity in the progression-free survival analysis (I² = 61%), likely due to the pooling of studies combining EGFR MAb with chemotherapy with monotherapy studies.We observed no evidence of a statistically significant difference when EGFR MAb was compared to bevacizumab, in progression-free survival (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12; high quality evidence) or overall survival (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.01; moderate-quality evidence). We noted significant statistical heterogeneity in the overall survival analysis (I² = 51%), likely due to the pooling of first-line and second-line studies.The addition of EGFR TKI to standard therapy in molecularly unselected participants did not show benefit in limited data sets (meta-analysis not performed). The addition of EGFR MAb to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in people with KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve progression-free survival (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.29; very low quality evidence), overall survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.47; low-quality evidence), or response rate (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.12; very low-quality evidence) but increased toxicity (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.45 to 4.57; low-quality evidence). We noted significant between-study heterogeneity in most analyses.Scant information on quality of life was reported in the identified studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of EGFR MAb to either chemotherapy or best supportive care improves progression-free survival (moderate- to high-quality evidence), overall survival (high-quality evidence), and tumour response rate (moderate- to high-quality evidence), but may increase toxicity in people with KRAS exon 2 wild-type or extended RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (moderate-quality evidence). The addition of EGFR TKI to standard therapy does not improve clinical outcomes. EGFR MAb combined with bevacizumab is of no clinical value (very low-quality evidence). Future studies should focus on optimal sequencing and predictive biomarkers and collect quality of life data.

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors for metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors prevent cell growth and have shown benefit in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, whether used as single agents or in combination with chemotherapy. Clear benefit has been shown in trials of EGFR monoclonal antibodies (EGFR MAb) but not EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKI). However, there is ongoing debate as to which patient populations gain maximum benefit from EGFR inhibition and where they should be used in the metastatic colorectal cancer treatment paradigm to maximise efficacy and minimise toxicity.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy, safety profile, and potential harms of EGFR inhibitors in the treatment of people with metastatic colorectal cancer when given alone, in combination with chemotherapy, or with other biological agents.The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival; secondary outcomes included overall survival, tumour response rate, quality of life, and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library, Issue 9, 2016; Ovid MEDLINE (from 1950); and Ovid Embase (from 1974) on 9 September 2016; and ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) on 14 March 2017. We also searched proceedings from the major oncology conferences ESMO, ASCO, and ASCO GI from 2012 to December 2016. We further scanned reference lists from eligible publications and contacted corresponding authors for trials for further information where needed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials on participants with metastatic colorectal cancer comparing: 1) the combination of EGFR MAb and 'standard therapy' (whether chemotherapy or best supportive care) to standard therapy alone, 2) the combination of EGFR TKI and standard therapy to standard therapy alone, 3) the combination of EGFR inhibitor (whether MAb or TKI) and standard therapy to another EGFR inhibitor (or the same inhibitor with a different dosing regimen) and standard therapy, or 4) the combination of EGFR inhibitor (whether MAb or TKI), anti-angiogenic therapy, and standard therapy to anti-angiogenic therapy and standard therapy alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures defined by Cochrane. Summary statistics for the endpoints used hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival and progression-free survival, and odds ratios (OR) for response rate (RR) and toxicity. Subgroup analyses were performed by Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) and neuroblastoma RAS viral (V-Ras) oncogene homolog (NRAS) status - firstly by status of KRAS exon 2 testing (mutant or wild type) and also by status of extended KRAS/NRAS testing (any mutation present or wild type).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 33 randomised controlled trials for analysis (15,025 participants), including trials of both EGFR MAb and EGFR TKI. Looking across studies, significant risk of bias was present, particularly with regard to the risk of selection bias (15/33 unclear risk, 1/33 high risk), performance bias (9/33 unclear risk, 9/33 high risk), and detection bias (7/33 unclear risk, 11/33 high risk).The addition of EGFR MAb to standard therapy in the KRAS exon 2 wild-type population improves progression-free survival (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.82; high-quality evidence), overall survival (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98; high-quality evidence), and response rate (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.70 to 3.41; high-quality evidence). We noted evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity in all three of these analyses (progression-free survival: I2 = 76%; overall survival: I2 = 40%; and response rate: I2 = 77%), likely due to pooling of studies investigating EGFR MAb use in different lines of therapy. Rates of overall grade 3 to 4 toxicity, diarrhoea, and rash were increased (moderate-quality evidence for all three outcomes), but there was no evidence for increased rates of neutropenia.For the extended RAS wild-type population (no mutations in KRAS or NRAS), addition of EGFR MAb improved progression-free survival (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.75; moderate-quality evidence) and overall survival (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.88; high-quality evidence). Response rate was also improved (OR 4.28, 95% CI 2.61 to 7.03; moderate-quality evidence). We noted significant statistical heterogeneity in the progression-free survival analysis (I2 = 61%), likely due to the pooling of studies combining EGFR MAb with chemotherapy with monotherapy studies.We observed no evidence of a statistically significant difference when EGFR MAb was compared to bevacizumab, in progression-free survival (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12; high quality evidence) or overall survival (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.01; moderate-quality evidence). We noted significant statistical heterogeneity in the overall survival analysis (I2 = 51%), likely due to the pooling of first-line and second-line studies.The addition of EGFR TKI to standard therapy in molecularly unselected participants did not show benefit in limited data sets (meta-analysis not performed). The addition of EGFR MAb to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in people with KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve progression-free survival (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.29; very low quality evidence), overall survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.47; low-quality evidence), or response rate (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.12; very low-quality evidence) but increased toxicity (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.45 to 4.57; low-quality evidence). We noted significant between-study heterogeneity in most analyses.Scant information on quality of life was reported in the identified studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of EGFR MAb to either chemotherapy or best supportive care improves progression-free survival (moderate- to high-quality evidence), overall survival (high-quality evidence), and tumour response rate (moderate- to high-quality evidence), but may increase toxicity in people with KRAS exon 2 wild-type or extended RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (moderate-quality evidence). The addition of EGFR TKI to standard therapy does not improve clinical outcomes. EGFR MAb combined with bevacizumab is of no clinical value (very low-quality evidence). Future studies should focus on optimal sequencing and predictive biomarkers and collect quality of life data.

Clinical responses to ERK inhibition in BRAFV600E-mutant colorectal cancer predicted using a computational model

Approximately 10% of colorectal cancers harbor BRAFV600E mutations, which constitutively activate the MAPK signaling pathway. We sought to determine whether ERK inhibitor (GDC-0994)-containing regimens may be of clinical benefit to these patients based on data from in vitro (cell line) and in vivo (cell- and patient-derived xenograft) studies of cetuximab (EGFR), vemurafenib (BRAF), cobimetinib (MEK), and GDC-0994 (ERK) combinations. Preclinical data was used to develop a mechanism-based computational model linking cell surface receptor (EGFR) activation, the MAPK signaling pathway, and tumor growth. Clinical predictions of anti-tumor activity were enabled by the use of tumor response data from three Phase 1 clinical trials testing combinations of EGFR, BRAF, and MEK inhibitors. Simulated responses to GDC-0994 monotherapy (overall response rate = 17%) accurately predicted results from a Phase 1 clinical trial regarding the number of responding patients (2/18) and the distribution of tumor size changes ("waterfall plot"). Prospective simulations were then used to evaluate potential drug combinations and predictive biomarkers for increasing responsiveness to MEK/ERK inhibitors in these patients.

Optimal use of anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies for patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

This meta-analysis was performed to determine the optimal use of anti-EGFR mAb in the treatment of metastasized colorectal cancer (mCRC). Seventeen randomized clinical trials were included, all evaluating the added value of anti-EGFR mAb to standard treatment line in patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC. Hazard and odds ratios were pooled using a random effect model, weighted according to cohort size. Pooled data of six first- and two second-line studies demonstrated a significantly improved ORR (OR 1.62, CI 1.27-2.04; OR 4.78, CI 3.39-6.75, respectively) and PFS (HR 0.79, CI 0.67-0.94; HR 0.80, CI 0.71-0.91, respectively) with the addition of anti-EGFR mAb to chemotherapy, while OS remained similar. Two third-line anti-EGFR mAb monotherapy studies revealed an improved PFS and OS (HR 0.44, CI 0.35-0.52; HR 0.55, CI 0.41-0.74). Addition of anti-EGFR versus anti-VEGF mAb to first-line chemotherapy was evaluated in three studies; ORR and PFS were comparable, while OS was improved (HR 0.8, CI 0.65-0.97). The influence of the chemotherapy backbone on anti-EGFR mAb efficacy, evaluated with meta-regression, indicated a higher ORR with irinotecan-based versus oxaliplatin-based regimens, but comparable PFS and OS. Reported toxicity (≥3 grade) increased ~20% in all treatment lines with the addition of anti-EGFR mAb. Anti-EGFR treatment significantly improves response and survival outcome of patients with (K)RAS wild-type mCRC, regardless of treatment line or chemotherapeutic backbone. Saving anti-EGFR mAb as third-line monotherapy is a valid and effective option to prevent high treatment burden caused by combination therapy. Combination treatment with anti-EGFR mAb to achieve radical resection of metastases needs further investigation.

mTORC1-independent autophagy regulates receptor tyrosine kinase phosphorylation in colorectal cancer cells via an mTORC2-mediated mechanism

The intracellular autophagic degradative pathway can have a tumour suppressive or tumour-promoting role depending on the stage of tumour development. Upon starvation or targeting of oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs), autophagy is activated owing to the inhibition of PI3K/AKT/mTORC1 signalling pathway and promotes survival, suggesting that autophagy is a relevant therapeutic target in these settings. However, the role of autophagy in cancer cells where the PI3K/AKT/mTORC1 pathway is constitutively active remains partially understood. Here we report a role for mTORC1-independent basal autophagy in regulation of RTK activation and cell migration in colorectal cancer (CRC) cells. PI3K and RAS-mutant CRC cells display basal autophagy levels despite constitutive mTORC1 signalling, but fail to increase autophagic flux upon RTK inhibition. Inhibition of basal autophagy via knockdown of ATG7 or ATG5 leads to decreased phosphorylation of several RTKs, in particular c-MET. Internalised c-MET colocalised with LAMP1-negative, LC3-positive vesicles. Finally, autophagy regulates c-MET phosphorylation via an mTORC2-dependent mechanism. Overall, our findings reveal a previously unappreciated role of autophagy and mTORC2 in regulation of oncogenic RTK activation, with implications for understanding of cancer cell signalling.

Cetuximab plus irinotecan versus panitumumab in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer in Ontario, Canada

The addition of irinotecan to an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody has previously been shown to improve tumor response rate and time to progression but not overall survival (OS) for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We assessed the "real-world" effectiveness and toxicity of the combination versus monotherapy. In Ontario, Canada, universal public funding is available for either cetuximab plus irinotecan (Cmab + I) combination therapy or panitumumab (Pmab) monotherapy, only in patients with refractory nonmutated RAS mCRC. All patients diagnosed before December 2012 and treated with an EGFR antibody for mCRC were identified from the Ontario drug database and linked to the Ontario Cancer Registry and other administrative databases to ascertain baseline characteristics, health services utilization, and outcomes. Multivariable Cox and logistic models were constructed to compare the time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), OS, emergency department (ED) or hospital visits between Cmab + I and Pmab. Observable confounders were adjusted for using propensity score methods. One thousand and eighty-one patients were identified (Cmab + I: 278, Pmab: 803). Patients receiving Cmab + I were younger (mean age 61 vs 64 years) and had a longer duration of prior irinotecan treatment. The use of Cmab + I as compared to Pmab alone was associated with a prolonged TTD [median: 3.8 months vs 2.8 months] and an improved OS [median: 8.8 months vs. 5.9 months] with an adjusted HR of 0.62 [95% CI 0.53-0.73, p < 0.001]. Both treatment regimens afforded similar 14-day mortality and incidence of ED or hospital visits. The findings for patients over and below the age of 65 were similar.

Treatment decisions in metastatic colorectal cancer - Beyond first and second line combination therapies

Median overall survival (OS) of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has reached up to 30months in recent clinical trials of first line therapies. Following disease progression after the standard in both, 1st and 2nd line, combination chemotherapy with monoclonal antibodies, many patients maintain a good performance status and a significant proportion is motivated to undergo further therapy. Choices of treatment beyond the second line setting for mCRC are therefore becoming increasingly important. New options have entered the therapeutic field recently: Regorafenib is a multikinase inhibitor approved for mCRC patients who have progressed on chemotherapy (including fluoropyrimidines, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin), plus VEGF inhibitor(s) and - if RAS wild-type - an anti-EGFR inhibitor. Regorafenib significantly improved OS, compared to placebo, in two phase III trials (CORRECT and CONCUR) in mCRC patients. Trifluridine/Tipiracil, an oral fluoropyrimidine, also resulted in significantly improved OS when compared to placebo in the phase III RECOURSE trial, which was conducted in a similar patient population to CORRECT. Reintroduction of previously administered therapy is another valid and commonly used approach, especially for those regimens which were discontinued before progression, e.g. if associated with cumulative toxicities, such as peripheral neuropathy or due to treatment breaks. Re-challenge of drugs to which patients developed resistance is also feasible although evidence for this strategy is limited.

Update on optimal treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer from the ACTG/AGITG expert meeting: ECCO 2015

The treatment of metastatic CRC (mCRC) has evolved over the last 20 years, from fluoropyrimidines alone to combination chemotherapy and new biologic agents. Median overall survival is now over 24 months for RAS mutated (MT) patients and over 30 months for RAS wild-type (WT) patients. However, there are subgroups of patients with BRAF V600E MT CRC who have a significantly poorer outlook. Newer treatment options are also being explored in select subgroups of patients (anti-HER 2 in HER2 positive mCRC and immunotherapy in patients with defective mismatch repair (dMMR)). The best use of these systemic treatment options, as well as surgery in well-selected patients requires careful consideration of predictive biomarkers and importantly, the optimal sequence in which therapies should be given to derive maximal benefit. A group of colorectal subspecialty medical oncologists from Australia, USA, The Netherlands and Germany met during ECCO 2015 in Vienna to review current practice.

Cost-effectiveness of cetuximab and panitumumab for chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

Cetuximab and panitumumab are monoclonal antibodies targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor. Both drugs are active against RAS wild type metastatic colorectal cancer after chemotherapy failure, with similar efficacy and toxicity profiles. However, their cost and limited survival benefits may compromise incorporation in the Brazilian public healthcare system, the Unified Heath System (Sistema Único de Saúde) (SUS).

Methods

A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using a Markov model from the Brazilian Public health perspective and a lifetime horizon in patients with RAS -wt mCRC. Transition probabilities and mortality rates were extracted from randomized studies. Treatment costs were obtained from price tables regulated by the Brazilian Health Ministry. The World Health Organization recommendation of three times GDP per capita was used to define the cost-effectiveness threshold.

Results

The use of cetuximab or panitumumab for chemotherapy-refractory mCRC patients resulted in 0.22 additional life-years relative to BSC, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of $58,240 and $52,772 per LY, respectively. That exceeds the pre-specified threshold for cost-effectiveness. Acquisition of biological agents was the major driver of increased costs.

Conclusions

Our economic evaluation demonstrates that both cetuximab and panitumumab are not a cost-effective approach in RAS-wt mCRC patients. Discussion about drug price should be prioritized to enable incorporation of these monoclonal antibodies in the SUS.

Management of adverse events during treatment of gastrointestinal cancers with epidermal growth factor inhibitors

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is involved in development and progression of some gastrointestinal cancers, and is targeted by monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) used to treat these conditions. Targeted agents are generally better tolerated than conventional chemotherapy, but have characteristic toxicities that can affect adherence, dosing, and outcomes. Skin conditions are the most common toxicities associated with EGFR inhibitors, particularly papulopustular rash. Other common toxicities include mucosal toxicity, electrolyte imbalances (notably hypomagnesaemia), and diarrhoea, while the chimaeric mAb cetuximab is also associated with increased risk of infusion reactions. With appropriate prophylaxis, the incidence and severity of these events can be reduced, while management strategies tailored to the patient and the degree of toxicity can help to ensure continuation of anti-cancer therapy. Here, we review the main toxicities associated with EGFR-inhibiting mAbs and TKIs in patients with gastrointestinal cancers, and provide recommendations for prophylaxis and treatment.

Patient considerations in metastatic colorectal cancer - role of panitumumab

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is overexpressed in many malignancies, including colorectal cancer (CRC), making EGFR an attractive treatment option. Panitumumab and cetuximab, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed at EGFR, are both currently utilized in the management of metastatic CRC (mCRC). Through the development of these agents in mCRC, key issues surrounding each mAbs use have been revealed. These key issues include negative patient outcome avoidance when determining use, the economic burden with high-cost medication, predictive biomarkers, tumor location, patient geographic location, patient quality of life, and the prevention of debilitating adverse effects. CRC remains a common malignancy, with many of these patients expected to receive targeted therapy, including EGFR mAb therapy. Oncologists must recognize these EGFR mAb factors in order to improve outcomes. This review aims to provide a chronological timeline on the development of panitumumab, clinical pearls, and guidance on the current use of panitumumab in mCRC.

Clinical Pathways: Management of Quality and Cost in Oncology Networks in the Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Setting

PURPOSE

Via Pathways (clinical pathways for cancer) provide evidence-based guidance for specific patient presentations based on the merit of efficacy, then toxicity, and finally cost (if efficacy and toxicity are comparable). We evaluated the impact of a change to the guidance in the metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) setting across two large, integrated health networks.

METHODS

Cetuximab and panitumumab were determined to have equal efficacy in the treatment of mCRC with no significant difference in toxicity based on recent data from key clinical studies. A cost analysis using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services average sales data determined a cost advantage for panitumumab. A substitution of panitumumab for cetuximab in the clinical pathway for all mCRC lines of therapy was initiated as of August 2014.

RESULTS

In the preimplementation period, 86 (93.5%) and six (6.5%) treatment selections were for cetuximab and panitumumab, respectively. After the pathway change was implemented, 13 (18.1%) and 59 (81.9%) treatment selections were for cetuximab and panitumumab, respectively. The change in prescribing habits was rapidly altered by the pathway change. The estimated annualized cost savings for the two health networks resulting from the response to the pathway change was $711,021.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that clinical pathways can act as a tool to assist oncology practices in decreasing costs and quickly responding to changing treatment paradigms by providing clinicians with consensus-driven treatment recommendations that incorporate the most up-to-date clinical trial results, toxicity considerations, and regimen cost information.

DNA methylation epigenotype and clinical features of NRAS-mutation(+) colorectal cancer

Sporadic colorectal cancer (CRC) is classified into several molecular subtypes. We previously established two groups of DNA methylation markers through genome‐wide DNA methylation analysis to classify CRC into distinct subgroups: high‐, intermediate‐, and low‐methylation epigenotypes (HME, IME, and LME, respectively). HME CRC, also called CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP)‐high CRC, shows methylation of both Group 1 markers (CIMP markers) and Group 2 markers, while IME/CIMP‐low CRC shows methylation of Group 2, but not of Group 1 markers, and LME CRC shows no methylation of either Group 1 or Group 2 markers. While BRAF‐ and KRAS‐mutation(+) CRC strongly correlated with HME and IME, respectively, clinicopathological features of NRAS‐mutation(+) CRC, including association with DNA methylation, remain unclear. To characterize NRAS‐mutation(+) CRC, the methylation levels of 19 methylation marker genes (6 Group 1 and 13 Group 2) were analyzed in 61 NRAS‐mutation(+) and 144 NRAS‐mutation(−) CRC cases by pyrosequencing, and their correlation with clinicopathological features was investigated. Different from KRAS‐mutation(+) CRC,NRAS‐mutation(+) CRC significantly correlated with LME. NRAS‐mutation(+) CRC showed significantly better prognosis than KRAS‐mutation(+) CRC (P = 3 × 10⁻⁴). NRAS‐mutation(+) CRC preferentially occurred in elder patients (P = 0.02) and at the distal colon (P = 0.006), showed significantly less lymph vessel invasion (P = 0.002), and correlated with LME (P = 8 × 10⁻⁵). DNA methylation significantly accumulated at the proximal colon. NRAS‐mutation(+) CRC may constitute a different subgroup from KRAS‐mutation(+) CRC, showing significant correlation with LME, older age, distal colon, and relatively better prognosis.

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

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

Statistical design of noninferiority multiple region clinical trials to assess global and consistent treatment effects

Noninferiority multiregional clinical trials (MRCTs) have recently received increasing attention in drug development. While a major goal in an MRCT is to estimate the global treatment effect, it is also important to assess the consistency of treatment effects across multiple regions. In this paper, we propose an intuitive definition of consistency of noninferior treatment effects across regions under the random-effects modeling framework. Specifically, we quantify the consistency of treatment effects by the percentage of regions that meet a predefined treatment margin. This new approach enables us to achieve both goals in one modeling framework. We propose to use a signed likelihood ratio test for testing the global treatment effect and the consistency of noninferior treatment effects. In addition, we provide guidelines for the allocation rule to achieve optimal power for testing consistency among multiple regions. Extensive simulation studies are conducted to examine the performance of the proposed methodology. An application to a real data example is provided.

BRAZILIAN CONSENSUS FOR MULTIMODAL TREATMENT OF COLORECTAL LIVER METASTASES. MODULE 3: CONTROVERSIES AND UNRESECTABLE METASTASES

In the last module of this consensus, controversial topics were discussed. Management of the disease after progression during first line chemotherapy was the first discussion. Next, the benefits of liver resection in the presence of extra-hepatic disease were debated, as soon as, the best sequence of treatment. Conversion chemotherapy in the presence of unresectable liver disease was also discussed in this module. Lastly, the approach to the unresectable disease was also discussed, focusing in the best chemotherapy regimens and hole of chemo-embolization.

Oral mucosal changes induced by anticancer targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors

Development of biological targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors has redefined the treatment for many cancers; however, the increasing use of new protocols has led to physicians observing a new spectrum of toxicities. To date, oral adverse events induced by these new anticancer therapies have been mainly reported using nonspecific terminology ("stomatitis," "mucosal inflammation," "mucositis") and remain poorly characterized, with the exception of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor-associated stomatitis. Oral toxicities of targeted therapies often display very characteristic features which clearly differ from classic oral injuries observed with cytotoxic chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. In addition, they frequently affect more than 20% of treated patients and can lead to a significant morbidity or permanent treatment discontinuation. Oral mucosal toxicities described in this review include mTOR inhibitor-associated stomatitis (mIAS); stomatitis, benign migratory glossitis, and osteonecrosis of the jaw associated with multi-targeted kinase inhibitors of the VEGF and PDGF receptors; mucositis induced by EGFR inhibitors (in monotherapy or in combination with head and neck radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy); hyperkeratotic lesions with BRAF inhibitors; pigmentary changes and lichenoid reactions secondary to imatinib; and more recent data on the "Osler-Weber-Rendu-like syndrome" described with the antibody-drug conjugate, TDM-1. Finally, we provide, to our knowledge, the first available structured data on oral toxicities induced by the new recently FDA- and EMA-approved monoclonal antibodies targeting PD-1. Clinical management of these targeted therapy-related oral changes is also discussed.

Unravelling the pharmacologic opportunities and future directions for targeted therapies in gastro-intestinal cancers Part 1: GI carcinomas

Until the 1990s, cytotoxic chemotherapy has been the cornerstone of medical therapy for gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Better understanding of the molecular biology of cancer cell has led to the therapeutic revolution of targeted therapies, i.e. monoclonal antibodies or small molecule inhibitors directed against proteins that are specifically overexpressed or mutated in cancer cells. These agents being more specific to cancer cells were expected to be less toxic than cytotoxic agents. Targeted agents have provided clinical benefit in many GI cancer types. For example, antiangiogenics and anti-EGFR therapies have significantly improved survival of patients affected by metastatic colorectal cancer and have deeply changed the therapeutic strategy in this disease. However, their effects have sometimes been disappointing, due to intrinsic or acquired resistance mechanisms (e.g., RAS mutation for anti-EGFR therapies), or to an activity restricted to some tumour settings (e.g., lack of activity in other cancer types, or on the microscopic residual disease in adjuvant setting). Many studies are negative in overall population but positive in some specific patient subgroups (e.g., trastuzumab in HER2-positive gastric cancer), illustrating the importance of patient selection and early identification of predictive biomarkers of response to these therapies. We propose a comprehensive two-part review providing a panoramic approach of the successes and failures of targeted agents in GI cancers to unravel the pharmacologic opportunities and future directions for these agents in GI oncology. In this first part, we will focus on adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas, for which targeted therapies are mostly used in combination with chemotherapy.

Antibody-Based Cancer Therapy: Successful Agents and Novel Approaches

Since their discovery, antibodies have been viewed as ideal candidates or "magic bullets" for use in targeted therapy in the fields of cancer, autoimmunity, and chronic inflammatory disorders. A wave of antibody-dedicated research followed, which resulted in the clinical approval of a first generation of monoclonal antibodies for cancer therapy such as rituximab (1997) and cetuximab (2004), and infliximab (2002) for the treatment of autoimmune diseases. More recently, the development of antibodies that prevent checkpoint-mediated inhibition of T cell responses invigorated the field of cancer immunotherapy. Such antibodies induced unprecedented long-term remissions in patients with advanced stage malignancies, most notably melanoma and lung cancer, that do not respond to conventional therapies. In this review, we will recapitulate the development of antibody-based therapy, and detail recent advances and new functions, particularly in the field of cancer immunotherapy. With the advent of recombinant DNA engineering, a number of rationally designed molecular formats of antibodies and antibody-derived agents have become available, and we will discuss various molecular formats including antibodies with improved effector functions, bispecific antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, antibody-cytokine fusion proteins, and T cells genetically modified with chimeric antigen receptors. With these exciting advances, new antibody-based treatment options will likely enter clinical practice and pave the way toward more successful control of malignant diseases.

Second-line systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The therapeutic management of people with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) who did not respond to first-line treatment represents a formidable challenge.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and toxicity of second-line systemic therapy in people with metastatic CRC.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 4), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to May 2016), Ovid MEDLINE In-process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (1946 to May 2016) and Ovid Embase (1974 to May 2016). There were no language or date of publication restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy (survival, tumour response) and toxicity (incidence of severe adverse effects (SAEs)) of second-line systemic therapy (single or combined treatment with any anticancer drug, at any dose and number of cycles) in people with metastatic CRC that progressed, recurred or did not respond to first-line systemic therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Authors performed a descriptive analysis of each included RCT in terms of primary (survival) and secondary (tumour response, toxicity) endpoints. In the light of the variety of drug regimens tested in the included trials, we could carry out meta-analysis considering classes of (rather than single) anticancer regimens; to this aim, we applied the random-effects model to pool the data. We used hazard ratios (HRs) and risk ratios (RRs) to describe the strength of the association for survival (overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS)) and dichotomous (overall response rate (ORR) and SAE rate) data, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-four RCTs (enrolling 13,787 participants) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Available evidence enabled us to address multiple clinical issues regarding the survival effects of second-line systemic therapy of people with metastatic CRC.1. Chemotherapy (irinotecan) was more effective than best supportive care (HR for OS: 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.80; 1 RCT; moderate-quality evidence); 2. modern chemotherapy (FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin plus oxaliplatin), irinotecan) is more effective than outdated chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil) (HR for PFS: 0.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.73; 2 RCTs; high-quality evidence) (HR for OS: 0.69, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.94; 1 RCT; moderate-quality evidence); 3. irinotecan-based combinations were more effective than irinotecan alone (HR for PFS: 0.68, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.76; 6 RCTs; moderate-quality evidence); 4. targeted agents improved the efficacy of conventional chemotherapy both when considered together (HR for OS: 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.91; 6 RCTs; high-quality evidence) and when bevacizumab was used alone (HR for PFS: 0.67, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.75; 4 RCTs; high-quality evidence).With regard to secondary endpoints, tumour response rates generally paralleled the survival results; moreover, higher anticancer efficacy was generally associated with worse treatment-related toxicity, with the important exception of bevacizumab-containing regimens, where the addition of the targeted agent to chemotherapy did not result in a significant increase in the rate of SAE. Finally, we found that oral (instead of intravenous) fluoropyrimidines significantly reduced the incidence of adverse effects (without compromising efficacy) in people treated with oxaliplatin-based regimens.We could not draw any conclusions on other debated aspects in this field of oncology, such as ranking of treatments (not all possible comparisons have been tested and many comparisons were based on single trials enrolling a small number of participants) and quality of life (virtually no data available).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Systemic therapy offers a survival benefit to people with metastatic CRC who did not respond to first-line treatment, especially when targeted agents are combined with conventional chemotherapeutic drugs. Further research is needed to define the optimal regimen and to identify people who most benefit from each treatment.

Spectrum of Gene Mutations in Colorectal Cancer: Implications for Treatment

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

Immunotherapy for the treatment of colorectal tumors: focus on approved and in-clinical-trial monoclonal antibodies

Colorectal cancer is considered a disease of the elderly population. Since the number of geriatric patients continues to rise, monoclonal antibody therapy is the most promising therapy in the recent research. Presently, the monoclonal antibodies most frequently used in the treatment of colorectal tumors are bevacizumab, cetuximab, panitumumab, and ramucirumab. Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody that acts on VEGF. Cetuximab and panitumumab act on EGFR. Ramucirumab binds directly to the ligand-binding pocket of VEGFR-2 to block the binding of VEGF-A, VEGF-C, and VEGF-D. These monoclonal antibodies, alone or in association with radiotherapy or chemotherapy, are presenting good results and are increasing patient survival, despite the side effects. Due to the limited number of molecules available, several studies are trying to develop new monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of colorectal tumors. Among those being studied, some recent molecules are in phase I and/or II trials and are yielding advantageous results, such as anti-DR5, anti-Fn14, anti-IGF-1R, anti-EGFR, anti-NRP1, and anti-A33 antibodies. This has been successful in reducing side effects and in treating nonresponsive patients.

Recommendations for the Prophylactic Management of Skin Reactions Induced by Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors in Patients With Solid Tumors

: Inhibition of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is an established treatment that extends patient survival across a variety of tumor types. EGFR inhibitors fall into two main categories: anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies, such as cetuximab and panitumumab, and first-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as afatinib, gefitinib, and erlotinib. Skin reactions are the most common EGFR inhibitor-attributable adverse event, resulting in papulopustular (acneiform) eruptions that can be painful and debilitating, and which may potentially have a negative impact on patients' quality of life and social functioning, as well as a negative impact on treatment duration. Shortened treatment duration can, in turn, compromise antineoplastic efficacy. Similarly, appropriate management of skin reactions is dependent on their accurate grading; however, conventional means for grading skin reactions are inadequate, particularly within the context of clinical trials. Treating a skin reaction only once it occurs (reactive treatment strategies) may not be the most effective management approach; instead, prophylactic approaches may be preferable. Indeed, we support the viewpoint that prophylactic management of skin reactions should be recommended for all patients treated with EGFR inhibitors. Appropriate prophylactic management could effectively reduce the severity of skin reactions in patients treated with EGFR inhibitors and therefore has the potential to directly benefit patients and improve drug adherence. Accordingly, here we review published and still-emerging data, and provide practical and evidence-based recommendations and algorithms regarding the optimal prophylactic management of EGFR inhibitor-attributable skin reactions.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors extend patient survival across a variety of tumor types. The most common EGFR inhibitor-attributable adverse events are skin reactions. Prophylactic-rather than reactive-management of skin reactions for all patients receiving EGFR inhibitors should be recommended because appropriate prophylaxis could effectively reduce the severity of skin reactions; thus, the derivation of highly effective prophylactic strategies has the potential to directly benefit patients. Accordingly, a review of the available data leads to practical and evidence-based recommendations and algorithms regarding the optimal prophylactic management of EGFR inhibitor-attributable skin reactions.

Targeted Therapy of Colorectal Cancer

Over the past decades, considerable progress has been made in the management of colorectal cancer (CRC), leading to a significant improvement in overall survival. Although part of this success has been rightly attributed to aggressive surgical management and advances in other adjunct treatments, our understanding of the pathogenesis of CRC and emergence of newer molecular targets for colon cancer has created a powerful impact. In this review article, we will discuss various targeted therapies in the management of metastatic CRC (mCRC). In particular, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)- and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeting monoclonal antibodies have become integral components of the first-line treatment strategies for mCRC. Newer agents on the horizon soon to be incorporated in clinical practice will be briefly reviewed as well. Currently, the only predictive biomarker for treatment selection in patients with mCRC is tumor RAS mutational status.

A phase 3 trial evaluating panitumumab plus best supportive care vs best supportive care in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS or RAS metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

We assessed the treatment effect of panitumumab plus best supportive care (BSC) vs BSC on overall survival (OS) in patients with chemorefractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and report the first prospective extended RAS analysis in a phase 3 trial.

METHODS

Patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC were randomised 1 : 1 to panitumumab (6 mg kg^-1 Q2W) plus BSC or BSC. On-study crossover was prohibited. RAS mutation status was determined by central laboratory testing. The primary endpoint was OS in wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC; OS in wild-type RAS mCRC (KRAS and NRAS exons 2, 3, and 4) was a secondary endpoint.

RESULTS

Three hundred seventy seven patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC were randomised. Median OS was 10.0 months with panitumumab plus BSC vs 7.4 months with BSC (HR=0.73; 95% CI=0.57-0.93; P=0.0096). RAS ascertainment was 86%. In wild-type RAS mCRC, median OS for panitumumab plus BSC was 10.0 vs 6.9 months for BSC (HR=0.70; 95% CI=0.53-0.93; P=0.0135). Patients with RAS mutations did not benefit from panitumumab (OS HR=0.99; 95% CI=0.49-2.00). No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Panitumumab significantly improved OS in wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC. The effect was more pronounced in wild-type RAS mCRC, validating previous retrospective analyses.

Final results and outcomes by prior bevacizumab exposure, skin toxicity, and hypomagnesaemia from ASPECCT: randomized phase 3 non-inferiority study of panitumumab versus cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

The primary analysis of the ASPECCT study demonstrated that panitumumab was non-inferior to cetuximab for overall survival (OS) in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Here, we report the final analysis results of ASPECCT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC who progressed on or were intolerant to irinotecan- or oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy were randomised to receive panitumumab 6 mg/kg once every 2 weeks or cetuximab (400 mg/m²) followed by 250 mg/m² weekly. The primary end-point was OS assessed for non-inferiority. Patients were followed for survival for 24 months after the last patient was randomised and a final analysis was conducted. No formal hypothesis testing was done. Post hoc analyses of outcomes by prior bevacizumab exposure, worst-grade skin toxicity (0-1 versus 2-4) and worst-grade hypomagnesaemia (0 versus 1-4) were conducted.

RESULTS

Nine hundred ninety-nine patients were randomised and received ≥1 treatment dose (panitumumab, n = 499; cetuximab, n = 500). Median OS was 10.2 months with panitumumab versus 9.9 months with cetuximab (hazard ratio = 0.94; 95% confidence interval = 0.82-1.07). Median progression-free survival was 4.2 months with panitumumab and 4.4 months with cetuximab (hazard ratio = 0.98; 95% confidence interval = 0.87-1.12). Longer OS was observed for patients with increased skin toxicity and with hypomagnesaemia in both arms. Furthermore, OS was longer for patients with prior bevacizumab exposure treated with panitumumab than with cetuximab. The observed safety profiles were consistent with previous studies.

CONCLUSION

Consistent with the primary analysis, the final analysis of ASPECCT showed panitumumab was non-inferior to cetuximab for OS for patients with chemotherapy-refractory, wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01001377.

RAS and BRAF in metastatic colorectal cancer management

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

The Panitumumab EGFR Complex Reveals a Binding Mechanism That Overcomes Cetuximab Induced Resistance

Panitumumab and cetuximab target the epidermal growth factor receptor for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. These therapies provide a significant survival benefit to patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with wild-type RAS. A single point mutation in the ectodomain of EGFR (S468R) confers acquired or secondary resistance in cetuximab treated patients, which is not observed in panitumumab-treated patients. Structural and biophysical studies presented here show this mutation directly blocks cetuximab binding to EGFR domain III and describes a unique mechanism by which panitumumab uses a central cavity to accommodate this mutation.