The Best. First. Anti-EGFR before anti-VEGF, in the first-line treatment of RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: From bench to bedside. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2016;78:233-244. [PMID: 27091467 DOI: 10.1007/s00280-016-3032-8]

Precision medicine for metastatic colorectal cancer in clinical practice

Globally, metastatic colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes for cancer-related death. Treatment limited to conventional chemotherapeutics extended life for only a few months. However, advances in surgical approaches and medical treatment regimens have greatly increased survival, even leading to long-term remission in selected patients. Advances in multiomics analysis of tumors have built a foundation for molecular-targeted therapies. Furthermore, immunotherapies are on the edge of revolutionizing oncological practice. This review summarizes recent advances in the growing toolbox of personalized treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. We provide an overview of current multimodal therapy and explain novel immunotherapy and targeted therapy approaches in detail. We emphasize clinically relevant therapies, such as inhibitors of MAPK signaling, and give recommendations for clinical practice. Finally, we describe the potential predictive impact of molecular subtypes and provide an outlook on novel concepts, such as functional precision medicine.

Optimal Sequence and Second-Line Systemic Treatment of Patients with RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Although several sequential therapy options are available for treating patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the optimal sequence of these therapies is not well established. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials and 4 observational studies were performed, resulting from a search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases. Overall survival (OS) did not differ significantly in patients with RAS-WT failure who were administered a second-line regimen of changed chemotherapy (CT) plus anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) versus only changed CT, changed CT plus bevacizumab versus changed CT plus anti-EGFR, or changed CT versus maintaining CT plus anti-EGFR after first-line therapy with CT, plus bevacizumab. However, OS was significantly different with a second-line regimen that included changed CT plus bevacizumab, versus only changing CT. Analysis of first-line therapy with CT plus anti-EGFR for treatment of RAS-WT mCRC indicated that second-line therapy of changed CT plus an anti-EGFR agent resulted in better outcomes than changing CT without targeted agents. The pooled data study demonstrated that the optimal choice of second-line treatment for improved OS was an altered CT regimen with retention of bevacizumab after first-line bevacizumab failure. The best sequence for first-to-second-line therapy of patients with RAS-WT mCRC was cetuximab-based therapy, followed by a bevacizumab-based regimen.

KRAS and BRAF Mutations in Stage II/III Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

KRAS and BRAF mutations are well-established predictive and prognostic factors in metastatic colorectal cancer, however their impact in the adjuvant setting has not yet been established.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of adjuvant phase III trials in patients with stage II and III colon cancer with available data on the impact of KRAS/BRAF mutations on both disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Trials were subgrouped based on whether adjustment for microsatellite instability (MSI) was performed and the subgroup effect was analyzed through a meta-regression. To increase the precision of the estimates, a joint DFS/OS (so-called 'multivariate') meta-analysis was performed. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

RESULTS

Nine trials were selected (QUASAR 2, PETACC-8, N0147, CALGB-89803, NSABP-C07, NSABP-C08, PETACC-3, QUASAR, MOSAIC) including a total of 10893 patients. In the primary meta-analysis, KRAS mutation was associated with poor DFS (pooled HR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.15-1.61, P < .001) and OS (pooled HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.03-1.55, P = .03) and BRAF mutation was also associated with poor DFS (pooled HR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.00-1.78, P = .05) and OS (pooled HR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.31-1.70, P < .001). MSI adjustment enhanced the effect of the mutations on outcome in the MSI-adjusted subgroup for both the KRAS mutation (pooled HR for DFS = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.15-1.79, P = .001; and pooled HR for OS = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.03-1.71, P = .03) and the BRAF mutation (pooled HR for DFS = 1.59, 95% CI = 1.22-2.07, P = .001; and pooled HR for OS = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.37-2.04, P < .001). The interaction between BRAF and MSI adjustment was statistically significant for DFS (P interaction = 0.02). This interaction was even more pronounced in the DFS/OS multivariate meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Both KRAS and BRAF mutations were statistically significantly associated with both DFS and OS, with the mutation effect being enhanced by MSI adjustment. Effective adjuvant treatment for microsatellite stable BRAF or KRAS-mutated colon cancer represents an unmet clinical need and exploring the use of recently available BRAF and KRAS inhibitors in this setting would be highly desirable.

Evidence-Based Second-Line Treatment in RAS Wild-Type/Mutated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in the Precision Medicine Era

Target-oriented agents improve metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) survival in combination with chemotherapy. However, the majority of patients experience disease progression after first-line treatment and are eligible for second-line approaches. In such a context, antiangiogenic and anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) agents as well as immune checkpoint inhibitors have been approved as second-line options, and RAS and BRAF mutations and microsatellite status represent the molecular drivers that guide therapeutic choices. Patients harboring K- and N-RAS mutations are not eligible for anti-EGFR treatments, and bevacizumab is the only antiangiogenic agent that improves survival in combination with chemotherapy in first-line, regardless of RAS mutational status. Thus, the choice of an appropriate therapy after the progression to a bevacizumab or an EGFR-based first-line treatment should be evaluated according to the patient and disease characteristics and treatment aims. The continuation of bevacizumab beyond progression or its substitution with another anti-angiogenic agents has been shown to increase survival, whereas anti-EGFR monoclonals represent an option in RAS wild-type patients. In addition, specific molecular subgroups, such as BRAF-mutated and Microsatellite Instability-High (MSI-H) mCRCs represent aggressive malignancies that are poorly responsive to standard therapies and deserve targeted approaches. This review provides a critical overview about the state of the art in mCRC second-line treatment and discusses sequential strategies according to key molecular biomarkers.

CALM1 promotes progression and dampens chemosensitivity to EGFR inhibitor in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

Calmodulin1 (CALM1) has been identified as one of the overexpression genes in a variety of cancers and EGFR inhibitor have been widely used in clinical treatment but it is unknown whether CALM1 and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have a synergistic effect in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The aim of the present study was to explore the synergistic effects of knock-out CALM1 combined with EGFR inhibitor (Afatinib) and to elucidate the role of CALM1 in sensitizing the resistance to Afatinib in ESCC.

Method

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and qRT-PCR were used to examine the expression of CALM1 and EGFR in ESCC tissues. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was used to analyze the clinical and prognostic significance of CALM1 and EGFR expression in ESCC. Furthermore, to evaluate the biological function of CALM1 in ESCC, the latest gene editing technique CRISPR/Cas9(Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats)was applied to knockout CALM1 in ESCC cell lines KYSE150, Eca109 and TE-1. MTT, flow cytometry, Transwell migration, scratch wound-healing and colony formation assays were performed to assay the combined effect of knock-out CALM1 and EGFR inhibitor on ESCC cell proliferation and migration. In addition, nude mice xenograft model was used to observe the synergistic inhibition of knock-out CALM1 and Afatinib.

Results

Both CALM1 and EGFR were found to be significantly over-expressed in ESCC compared with paired normal control. Over-expressed CALM1 and EGFR were significantly associated with clinical stage, T classification and poor overall prognosis, respectively. In vitro, the combined effect of knock-out CALM1 mediated by the lentivirus and EGFR inhibitor was shown to be capable of inhibiting the proliferation, inducing cell cycle arrest at G1/S stage and increasing apoptosis of KYSE-150 and Eca109 cells; invasion and migration were also suppressed. In vivo, the results of tumor weight and total fluorescence were markedly reduced compared with the sgCtrl-infected group and sgCAML1 group.

Conclusion

Our data demonstrated that knock-out of CALM1 could sensitize ESCC cells to EGFR inhibitor, and it may exert oncogenic role via promotion of EMT. Taken together, CALM1 may be a tempting target to overcome Afatinib resistance.

Treatments after first progression in metastatic colorectal cancer. A literature review and evidence-based algorithm

Prolonging survival, achieving symptoms palliation and preserving quality of life are the primary therapeutic goals of treatments administered after disease progression in mCRC. Even if the impact of these therapies on the prognosis of affected patients is less relevant than the impact of the upfront treatment, tailoring the optimal second-line therapy is increasingly important. Several therapeutic options are available, and different factors including not only patient- and disease-related characteristics, but also the first-line treatment received (i.e., type, timing of disease progression, observed outcome and reported toxicities) may drive this choice. Herein, we describe the current state of the art in the landscape of treatments after progression in mCRC. Based on a critical review of the literature, we built a patient-oriented therapeutic algorithm, aiming to guide clinicians in their daily decision-making.

Loss of p120ctn causes EGFR-targeted therapy resistance and failure

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) plays a vital role in cell division and survival signaling pathways. EGFR is activated in nearly every cancer type, and its high expression in tumors is correlated with poor patient outcome. Altogether, EGFR is a prime candidate as a therapeutic target. While targeted EGFR therapy is initially effective in 75% of patients, a majority of patients relapse within the first year due to poorly understood mechanisms of resistance. p120-catenin (p120ctn) has recently been implicated as a biomarker for EGFR therapy. In previous studies, we demonstrated that p120ctn is a tumor suppressor and its loss is capable of inducing cancer. Furthermore, p120ctn down-regulation synergizes with EGFR overexpression to cause a highly invasive cell phenotype. The purpose of this present study was to investigate whether p120ctn down-regulation induced EGFR therapeutic resistance. Using human esophageal keratinocytes, we have found that EGFR-targeting compounds are toxic to cells overexpressing EGFR. Interestingly, these therapies do not cause toxicity in cells with EGFR overexpression and decreased p120ctn expression. These data suggest that decreased p120ctn causes resistance to EGFR therapy. We believe these findings are of utmost importance, as there is an unmet need to discover mechanisms of EGFR resistance.

Effects of Sorafenib and Arsenic Trioxide on U937 and KG-1 Cell Lines: Apoptosis or Autophagy?

Objective

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a clonal disorder of hemopoietic progenitor cells. The Raf serine/threonine (Ser/Thr) protein kinase isoforms including B-Raf and RAF1, are the upstream in the MAPK cascade that play essential functions in regulating cellular proliferation and survival. Activated autophagy-related genes have a dual role in both cell death and cell survival in cancer cells. The cytotoxic activities of arsenic trioxide (ATO) were widely assessed in many cancers. Sorafenib is known as a multikinase inhibitor which acts through suppression of Ser/Thr kinase Raf that was reported to have a key role in tumor cell signaling, proliferation, and angiogenesis. In this study, we examined the combination effect of ATO and sorafenib in AML cell lines.

Materials and Methods

In this experimental study, we studied in vitro effects of ATO and sorafenib on human leukemia cell lines. The effective concentrations of compounds were determined by MTT assay in both single and combination treatments. Apoptosis was evaluated by annexin-V FITC staining. Finally, mRNA levels of apoptotic and autophagy genes were evaluated using real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR).

Results

Data demonstrated that sorafenib, ATO, and their combination significantly increase the number of apoptotic cells. We found that the combination of ATO and sorafenib significantly reduces the viability of U937 and KG-1 cells. The expression level of selective autophagy genes, ULK1 and Beclin1 decreased but LC3-II increased in U937.

Conclusion

The expression levels of apoptotic and autophagy activator genes were increased in response to treatment. The crosstalk between apoptosis and autophagy is a complicated mechanism and further investigations seem to be necessary.

Continuation of Bevacizumab vs Cetuximab Plus Chemotherapy After First Progression in KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The UNICANCER PRODIGE18 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Second-line treatment with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab or cetuximab is a valid option for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Objective

To evaluate the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 4 months with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab vs cetuximab for patients with progression of metastatic colorectal cancer after bevacizumab plus chemotherapy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase 2 trial was conducted from December 14, 2010, to May 5, 2015. The main eligibility criterion was disease progression after bevacizumab plus fluorouracil with irinotecan or oxaliplatin in patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. All analyses were performed on the modified intent-to-treat population.

Interventions

Patients were randomized to arm A (FOLFIRI [fluorouracil and folinic acid combined with irinotecan] or modified FOLFOX6 [fluorouracil and folinic acid combined with oxaliplatin] plus bevacizumab) or arm B (FOLFIRI or modified FOLFOX6 plus cetuximab); the second-line chemotherapy regimen was chosen according to first-line treatment (crossover).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the 4-month PFS rate. Secondary end points included safety, objective response rate, overall survival, and PFS.

Results

A total of 132 patients (47 women and 85 men; median age, 63.0 years [range, 33.0-84.0 years]; 74 patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 54 patients with a performance status of 1, and 4 patients with unknown performance status) were included at 25 sites. The 4-month PFS rate was 80.3% (95% CI, 68.0%-88.3%) in arm A and 66.7% (95% CI, 53.6%-76.8%) in arm B. The median PFS was 7.1 months (95% CI, 5.7-8.2 months) in arm A and 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.2-6.5 months) in arm B (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.50-1.02; P = .06), and the median overall survival was 15.8 months (95% CI, 9.5-22.3 months) in arm A and 10.4 months (95% CI, 7.0-16.2 months) in arm B (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.46-1.04; P = .08). A central analysis of KRAS (exons 2, 3, and 4), NRAS (exons 2, 3, and 4), and BRAF (V600) was performed for 95 tumor samples. Eighty-one patients had wild-type KRAS and wild-type NRAS tumors.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of the PRODIGE18 (Partenariat de Recherche en Oncologie DIGEstive) study showed a nonsignificant difference but favored continuation of bevacizumab with chemotherapy crossover for patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer that progressed with first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01442649 and clinicaltrialsregister.eu identifier: EUDRACT 2009-012942-22.

How to Deal with Second Line Dilemma in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Monoclonal antibodies targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) or vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) have demonstrated efficacy with chemotherapy (CT) as second line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The right sequence of the treatments in all RAS (KRAS/NRAS) wild type (wt) patients has not precisely defined. We evaluated the impact of aforementioned targeted therapies in second line setting, analyzing efficacy and safety data from phase III clinical trials. We performed both direct and indirect comparisons between anti-EGFR and anti-VEGF. Outcomes included disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and G3-G5 toxicities. Our results showed significantly improved OS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72–0.94) and DCR (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.04–1.54) favouring anti-VEGF combinations in overall population; no statistically significant differences in all RAS wt patients was observed (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70–1.09). Anti-EGFR combinations significantly increased ORR in all patients (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31–0.96), showing a trend also in all RAS wt patients (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.48–0.83). No significant difference in PFS and DCR all RAS was registered. Our results provided for the first time a strong rationale to manage both targeted agents in second line setting.

Management of skin toxicities during panitumumab treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy is associated with skin adverse events not previously reported with conventional chemotherapy. Prophylactic actions are recommended, but routine clinical management of these toxicities and their impact on quality of life remain unknown.

AIM

To assess the dermatological toxicities reported after panitumumab initiation, their impact on the quality of life and the clinical practices for their management.

METHODS

Patients included in this prospective multicenter observational study were over 18 years of age and began treatment with panitumumab for wild-type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer. The incidence of dermatological toxicities, clinical practices for their management and impact on quality of life were recorded during a 6-mo follow-up.

RESULTS

Overall, 229 patients (males, 57.6%; mean age, 66.2 years) were included. At day 15, 59.3% of patients had dermatological toxicity; the rate peaked at month 2 (74.7%) and decreased at month 6 (46.5%). The most frequent dermatological toxicities were rash/acneiform rash, xerosis and skin cracks. At least one preventive treatment was administered to 65.9% of patients (oral antibiotics, 84.1%; emollients, 75.5%; both, 62.9%). The rates of patients who received at least one curative treatment peaked at month 2 (63.4%) and decreased at month 6 (44.8%). The impact of the dermatological toxicities on quality of life was limited as assessed with Dermatology Life Quality Index scores and inconvenience visual analogic scale score. The rates of topical corticosteroids administration and visits to specialists were low.

CONCLUSION

The rates of the different skin toxicities peaked at various times and were improved at the end of follow-up. Nevertheless, their clinical management could be optimized with a better adherence to current recommendations. The impact of skin toxicities on patient’s quality of life appeared to be limited.

Efficacy of second-line targeted agents in kras wild metastatic colorectal cancer patients who received prior targeted agent: First anti-epidermal growth factor receptor or vascular endothelial growth factor in right and left colon?

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to investigate the impact of first biological agents on second-line biological agents in kras wild-type metastatic colon patients in right and left colon.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The patients received anti-EGFR compared with anti-VEGF in right and left colon separately according to progression-free survival and overall survival in second line.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients were included in the study. In left colon, progression-free survival and overall survival were 9 and 14 months for anti-EGFR and 9 and 16 months for anti-VEGF in the second line. In right colon, progression-free survival and overall survival were 5 and 9 months for anti-EGFR and 4 and 6 months for anti-VEGF in the second line.

CONCLUSIONS

Progression-free survival was higher in patients who received bevacizumab first followed by anti-EGFR than reverse sequencing in right colon. Overall survival was similar between two groups.

Sequential cetuximab/bevacizumab therapy is associated with improved outcomes in patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer

Purpose

Combination of biological therapy and chemotherapy improves the survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the optimal biological therapy sequence remains unclear. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the clinical outcomes of patients with mCRC treated with different sequences of biological therapies as first‐ and third‐line therapy.

Methods

We only included patients with wild‐type KRAS exon 2 mCRC who had received cetuximab, bevacizumab, and standard chemotherapy. The patients were treated with cetuximab or bevacizumab as first‐ or third‐line therapy combined with a similar chemotherapy backbone.

Results

In total, 102 patients were included. Forty‐six patients received first‐line cetuximab therapy followed by third‐line bevacizumab therapy (cetuximab → bevacizumab group) and 56 patients received first‐line bevacizumab therapy followed by third‐line cetuximab therapy (bevacizumab → cetuximab group). The cetuximab → bevacizumab group was associated with increased survival (OS) compared with the bevacizumab → cetuximab group (median OS: 30.4 months vs 25.7 months, hazard ratio (HR): 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36‐0.86). When calculated from the start of second‐ and third‐line therapies, OS was also higher in the cetuximab → bevacizumab group (second‐line: 20.6 months vs 14.8 months, HR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.34‐0.81; third‐line: 12.5 months vs 9.9 months, HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.35‐0.83). The cetuximab → bevacizumab group was also associated with better progression‐free survival than the bevacizumab → cetuximab group (8.8 vs 4.5 months, HR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.25‐0.58) in the third‐line setting, but not in the first‐ or second‐line settings.

Conclusions

Our study demonstrated that first‐line cetuximab therapy followed by third‐line bevacizumab therapy was associated with favorable clinical outcomes as compared to the reverse sequence.

Treatment sequencing in metastatic colorectal cancer

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains incurable in most cases, but survival has improved with advances in cytotoxic chemotherapy and targeted agents. However, the optimal use and sequencing of these agents across multiple lines of treatment is unclear. Here, we review current treatment approaches and optimal treatment sequencing across the first-, second- and third-line settings in mCRC, including biological aspects affecting sequencing and rechallenge. Effective first-line therapy is a key determinant of treatment outcomes and should be selected after considering both clinical factors and biological markers, notably RAS and BRAF. The second-line regimen choice depends on the systemic therapies given in first-line. Anti-angiogenic agents (e.g. bevacizumab, ramucirumab and aflibercept) are indicated for most patients, whereas epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors do not improve survival in the second-line setting. Molecular profiling is important in third-line treatment, with options in RAS wild-type patients including EGFR inhibitors (cetuximab or panitumumab), regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil. Immunotherapy with pembrolizumab or nivolumab ± ipilimumab may be considered for patients with high microsatellite instability disease. Targeting HER2/neu amplification shows promise for the subset of CRC tumours displaying this abnormality. Sequencing decisions are complicated by the potential for any treatment break or de-escalation to evoke a distinct clinical progression type. Ongoing trials are investigating the optimal sequencing and timing of therapies for mCRC. Molecular profiling has established new targets, and increasing knowledge of tumour evolution under drug pressure will possibly impact on sequencing.

Increase in cetuximab-induced skin rash and hypomagnesemia in patients receiving concomitant treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs): a possible drug interaction?

INTRODUCTION

In a previous study, we found that co-administration of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) with cetuximab was associated with increased skin toxicity. Both these drugs can induce hypomagnesemia. The aim of this study was to retrospectively explore the possible influence of PPI drugs on cetuximab skin toxicity and the potential synergistic effect of hypomagnesemia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The files of all eligible patients treated with cetuximab during 2015-2016 with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) or head and neck (H&N) carcinoma were reviewed. The concomitant use of PPIs was defined if a drug belonging to that class was included in the patient's chronic medications list.

RESULTS

One hundred eighteen patients (61 with H&N carcinoma, 57 with mCRC) were included in the study, and 58 of the 118 patients received PPIs concomitantly with cetuximab. Skin toxicity of any grade was reported in 33/58 (56.9%) patients on PPIs compared with 22/60 (36.7%) patients (p = 0.08) with grade 3-4 in 19/58 (32.8%) and 2/60 (3.3%), respectively (p = 0.001). Hypomagnesemia (Mg serum level < 1.2 mg/dL) was reported in 14/58 (25.9%) PPI-treated patients, compared with 5/60 (10.4%) patients not on PPIs (p = 0.08). Grade 3-4 skin toxicity or hypomagnesemia (Mg < 0.9 mg/dL) was reported in 23/58 (39.7%) patients on concomitant treatment with PPIs, compared with 3/60 (5%) patients not on PPIs (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both the rate and the severity of cetuximab-induced skin toxicity and hypomagnesemia were increased by chronic concomitant administration of PPIs. A prospective study is needed to confirm the possible interaction between cetuximab and PPIs.

Oral mucositis associated with anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer: single institutional retrospective cohort study

Background

Chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis impairs the quality of life. The difference in severity of oral mucositis between different anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies combined with cytotoxic drugs in colorectal cancer is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in oral mucositis between panitumumab (Pmab) and cetuximab (Cmab) combined with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study. A total of 75 colorectal cancer outpatients treated with an anti-EGFR antibody combined with FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, or 5-FU/leucovorin as the first- to third-line treatment were included. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 2–3 oral mucositis. The secondary endpoint was the time to onset of oral mucositis. We also compared the incidence of toxicities of interest, skin toxicity, hypomagnesaemia and neutropenia, and time to treatment failure (TTF) between the two groups.

Results

Thirty-two patients treated with Pmab and 43 patients treated with Cmab were evaluated. Patient characteristics were similar between the two groups. The incidence of grade 2–3 oral mucositis was significantly higher with Pmab than with Cmab (31.3% vs 9.3%, P < 0.05). Moreover, the incidence of grade 3 oral mucositis was significantly higher in patients treated with Pmab (18.8% vs 0%, P < 0.01). The mean (SD) cycles to onset of the worst oral mucositis was 3.0 (2.9) in the Pmab group and 2.3 (1.7) in the Cmab group (P = 0.29). Oral mucositis was characterized by glossitis and cheilitis. The incidences of other toxicities were the following (Pmab vs Cmab): grade 2–3 skin toxicity: 68.8% vs 74.4% (P = 0.61), grade 2–3 hypomagnesaemia: 9.3% vs 7.0% (P = 1.00), grade 3–4 neutropenia: 28.1% vs 37.2% (P = 0.46). The median TTF was not significantly different, i.e., 223 days vs 200 days (P = 0.39) for Pmab vs Cmab.

Conclusions

Pmab-based chemotherapy resulted in significantly higher grades of oral mucositis compared with Cmab-based chemotherapy. The oral condition should be monitored carefully and early supportive care should be provided for patients treated with Pmab-based chemotherapy.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4862-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Relationships between tumour response and primary tumour location, and predictors of long-term survival, in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer receiving first-line panitumumab therapy: retrospective analyses of the PRIME and PEAK clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Data from two trials of panitumumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) were retrospectively analysed to investigate the effects of primary tumour location on early-tumour shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR), and identify factors predicting long-term survival.

METHODS

Patients with RAS wild-type mCRC from PRIME (NCT00364013) and PEAK (NCT00819780) were included. ETS was defined as a ≥30% reduction in the sum-of-the-longest-diameters of measurable target lesions at eight weeks. DpR was the maximum percentage change from baseline to nadir in patients with shrinkage. Univariate and multivariate logistic analyses of short- versus long-term survivor data were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 435/559 (78%) patients had left-sided disease. Of these, a higher proportion of patients treated with panitumumab versus comparator achieved ETS (PRIME: 62% vs. 36%; PEAK: 58% vs. 41%); median DpR was also higher with panitumumab (PRIME: 59% vs. 49%; PEAK: 70% vs. 48%). In pooled analyses of the studies, more patients with right-sided disease achieved ETS if treated with panitumumab than comparator (39% vs. 29%). Panitumumab treatment consistently predicted long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

First-line panitumumab was associated with improved ETS and DpR vs. comparator in patients with left-sided mCRC. ETS may identify a subgroup of patients with right-sided disease who might respond to panitumumab.

Biologic Response of Colorectal Cancer Xenograft Tumors to Sequential Treatment with Panitumumab and Bevacizumab

Recent studies in RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) suggest that the survival benefits of therapy using anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) antibodies combined with chemotherapy are maximized when the anti-EGFR antibody is given as first-line, followed by subsequent anti-VEGF antibody therapy. We report reverse-translational research using LIM1215 xenografts of RAS WT mCRC to elucidate the biologic mechanisms underlying this clinical observation. Sequential administration of panitumumab then bevacizumab (PB) demonstrated a stronger tendency to inhibit tumor growth than bevacizumab then panitumumab (BP). Cell proliferation was reduced significantly with PB (P < .01) but not with BP based on Ki-67 index. Phosphoproteomic analysis demonstrated reduced phosphorylation of EGFR and EPHA2 with PB and BP compared with control. Western blotting showed reduced EPHA2 expression and S897-phosphorylation with PB; RSK phosphorylation was largely unaffected by PB but increased significantly with BP. In quantitative real-time PCR analyses, PB significantly reduced the expression of both lipogenic (FASN, MVD) and hypoxia-related (CA9, TGFBI) genes versus control. These results suggest that numerous mechanisms at the levels of gene expression, protein expression, and protein phosphorylation may explain the improved clinical activity of PB over BP in patients with RAS WT mCRC.

The best strategy for RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients in first-line treatment: A classic and Bayesian meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

At present, there is uncertainty on the best systemic treatment in first-line setting for RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Indeed, several chemotherapy and biologics combinations showed an improvement on survival. We performed a systematic review with a pair-wise and bayesan meta-analysis to rank the best strategy for these patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search through March 2017 was performed to evaluate the association between several treatment combinations and overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and toxicity rate (TR) in RAS WT mCRC patients. Data were extracted from studies and pooled using the random-effect model for pair-wise meta-analyses and bayesan model for network meta-analysis (NMA).

RESULTS

Eight studies with a total of 2518 individuals were included in the meta-analyses. Pooled analyses for subgroups stratified by type of schedule and tumor location demonstrated that anti-EGFR + doublet had the best OS when compared to doublet ± bevacizumab (0.767; 95%CI, 0.695-0.846; P < 0.0001). This benefit is limited to LSCC when compared to a doublet-based schedule and doublet + bevacizumab (HRs, 0.692; 95%CI, 0.596-0.804; P < 0.001; 0.706; 95%CI, 0.584-0.854; P < 0.001; respectively). No significant differences are detected in PFS, whereas the cetuximab-based regimens showed the highest ORR and TR. In NMA our ranking showed the best performance for FOLFOX + panitumumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that FOLFOX + panitumumab has the major probability to provide an improvement of survival with a good safety profile in patients with RAS WT mCRC with an added value from selection based on sidedness.

Exploratory pooled analysis evaluating the effect of sequence of biological therapies on overall survival in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal carcinoma

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the optimal sequence of targeted therapies (epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRi) and vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGFi)), combined with chemotherapy, in patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC). Exploratory analyses of overall survival (OS) for patients treated with either first-line panitumumab (EGFRi) and second-line VEGFi therapy, or first-line bevacizumab (VEGFi) and second-line EGFRi, were conducted.

Methods

Patients from PEAK (NCT00819780), PRIME (NCT00364013) and Study 181 (NCT00339183), with RAS WT or RAS WT/BRAF WT tumours, were included in the analyses. OS data were pooled for patients receiving first-line panitumumab (PEAK and PRIME) or first-line bevacizumab (PEAK and 181), followed by second-line VEGFi or EGFRi, respectively.

Results

Overall, 104 RAS WT patients were included (n=66 panitumumab→VEGFi, n=38 bevacizumab→EGFRi). At the time of final data analysis, 63.6% versus 92.1% of patients in the panitumumab→VEGFi versus bevacizumab→EGFRi arms had died; median OS was 36.8 versus 27.8 months, respectively (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03). The OS HR for patients with RAS WT/BRAF WT mCRC overall was 0.58 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.95) and was 0.56 (95% CI 0.30 to 1.04) in those with left-sided tumours.

Conclusion

Although numbers are small, these exploratory analyses suggest a trend towards improved OS for first-line panitumumab plus chemotherapy followed by second-line VEGFi, compared with first-line bevacizumab followed by second-line EGFRi in patients with RAS WT and RAS WT/BRAF WT mCRC. Large prospective randomised trials are needed to further evaluate the optimum sequence of EGFRi/VEGFi in mCRC.

Optimizing the use of anti VEGF targeted therapies in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: review of literature

Colorectal cancer is one of the most frequent forms of cancer both in men and women, and patients with metastatic disease are now being exposed to an increasing number of therapeutic agents to improve the survival outcomes.

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has o key role in the tumor growth and spreading. The approval of 4 agents that target angiogenic pathways in combination with standard chemotherapy improve overall and progression free survival and offer many opportunities to sequencing the treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

However, the most effective strategy for the use of these agents remains unclear. This article presents an overview of the actual evidence for the use of agents that target angiogenesis in the treatment of mCRC.

Distinct effects of EGFR inhibitors on epithelial- and mesenchymal-like esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cells

Background

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) plays a pivotal role in the pathophysiology of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, the clinical effects of EGFR inhibitors on ESCC are controversial. This study sought to identify the factors determining the therapeutic efficacy of EGFR inhibitors in ESCC cells.

Methods

Immortalized-human esophageal epithelial cells (EPC2-hTERT), transformed-human esophageal epithelial cells (T-Epi and T-Mes), and ESCC cells (TE-1, TE-5, TE-8, TE-11, TE-11R, and HCE4) were treated with the EGFR inhibitors erlotinib or cetuximab. Inhibitory effects on cell growth were assessed by cell counting or cell-cycle analysis. The expression levels of genes and proteins such as involucrin and cytokeratin13 (a squamous differentiation marker), E-cadherin, and vimentin were evaluated by real-time polymerase chain reaction or western blotting. To examine whether mesenchymal phenotype influenced the effects of EGFR inhibitors, we treated T-Epi cells with TGF-β1 to establish a mesenchymal phenotype (mesenchymal T-Epi cells). We then compared the effects of EGFR inhibitors on parental T-Epi cells and mesenchymal T-Epi cells. TE-8 (mesenchymal-like ESCC cells)- or TE-11R (epithelial-like ESCC cells)-derived xenograft tumors in mice were treated with cetuximab, and the antitumor effects of EGFR inhibitors were evaluated.

Results

Cells were classified as epithelial-like or mesenchymal-like phenotypes, determined by the expression levels of E-cadherin and vimentin. Both erlotinib and cetuximab reduced cell growth and the ratio of cells in cell-cycle S phase in epithelial-like but not mesenchymal-like cells. Additionally, EGFR inhibitors induced squamous cell differentiation (defined as increased expression of involucrin and cytokeratin13) in epithelial-like but not mesenchymal-like cells. We found that EGFR inhibitors did not suppress the phosphorylation of EGFR in mesenchymal-like cells, while EGFR dephosphorylation was observed after treatment with EGFR inhibitors in epithelial-like cells. Furthermore, mesenchymal T-Epi cells showed resistance to EGFR inhibitors by circumventing the dephosphorylation of EGFR signaling. Cetuximab consistently showed antitumor effects, and increased involucrin expression in TE-11R (epithelial-like)-derived xenograft tumors but not TE-8 (mesenchymal-like)-derived xenograft tumors.

Conclusions

The factor determining the therapeutic effects of EGFR inhibitors in ESCC cells is the phenotype representing the epithelial-like or mesenchymal-like cells. Mesenchymal-like ESCC cells are resistant to EGFR inhibitors because EGFR signaling is not blocked. EGFR inhibitors show antitumor effects on epithelial-like ESCC cells accompanied by promotion of squamous cell differentiation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13046-017-0572-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Microheterogeneity of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies is governed by changes in the surface charge of the protein

It has previously been shown for individual antibodies, that the microheterogenity pattern can have a significant impact on various key characteristics of the product. The aim of this study to get a more generalized understanding of the importance of microheterogeneity. For that purpose, the charge variant pattern of various different commercially available therapeutic mAb products was compared using Cation-Exchange Chromatography with linear pH gradient antigen affinity, Fc-receptor affinity, antibody dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) and conformational stability. For three of the investigated antibodies, the basic charge variants showed a stronger binding affinity towards FcγRIIIa as well as an increased ADCC response. Differences in the conformational stability of antibody charge variants and the corresponding reference samples could not be detected by differential scanning calorimetry. The different biological properties of the mAb variants are therefore governed by changes in the surface charge of the protein and not by an altered structure. This can help to identify aspects of microheterogeneity that are critical for product quality and can lead to further improvements in the development and production of therapeutic antibody products.

Combined application of anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR attenuates the growth and angiogenesis of colorectal cancer mainly through suppressing AKT and ERK signaling in mice model

BACKGROUND

Angiogenesis is generally involved during the cancer development and hematogenous metastasis. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) are considered to have an important role in tumor-associated angiogenesis. However, the effects of simultaneously targeting on VEGF and EGFR on the growth and angiogenesis of colorectal cancer (CRC), and its underlying mechanisms remain unknown.

METHODS

Immunohistochemical staining was used to detect the VEGF and EGFR expression in different CRC tissue specimens, and the correlation between VEGF/EGFR expression with the clinicopathologic features was analyzed. Cell counting kit‑8 (CCK-8) and transwell assays were used to assess the cellular proliferation and invasion of CRC cells after treated with anti-VEGF antibody and/or anti-EGFR antibody in vitro, respectively. Moreover, in vivo tumor formation was performed on nude mice model, and the tumor microvessel density (MVD) was determined by anti-CD34 staining in different groups. Finally, we evaluated the impact of anti-VEGF antibody and/or anti-EGFR antibody on the activation of downstream signaling effectors using western blot.

RESULTS

VEGF and EGFR were upregulated in CRC tissues, and their expression levels were correlated with hepatic metastasis. Blockage on VEGF or EGFR alone could inhibit the cellular proliferation and metastasis while their combination could reach a good synergism in vitro. In addition, in vivo xenograft mice model demonstrated that the tumor formation and angiogenesis were strongly suppressed by combination treatment of anti-VEGF and anti-EGFR antibodies. Besides, the combination treatment significantly reduced the activation of AKT and ERK1/2, but barely affected the activation of c-Myc, NF-κB/p65 and IκBα in CRC cells tumors. Interestingly, anti-VEGF antibody or anti-EGFR antibody alone could attenuate the phosphorylation of STAT3 as compared with negative control group, whereas the combined application not further suppressed but at least partially restored the activation of STAT3 in vivo.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous targeting on VEGF and EGFR does show significant inhibition on CRC tumor growth and angiogenesis in mice model, and these effects are mainly attributed to suppression of the AKT and ERK signaling pathways.