A study-level meta-analysis of efficacy data from head-to-head first-line trials of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors versus bevacizumab in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer

A meta-analysis of efficacy and safety data from head-to-head first-line trials of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors versus bevacizumab in adult patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer by sidedness

The first-line treatment choice of EGFRIs plus doublet chemotherapy vs. bevacizumab plus doublet chemotherapy remains a topic of interest for patients with left-sided RAS WT mCRC. We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of clinical trial data published between 2015 and 2024. We evaluated the relative efficacy and safety of first-line EGFRIs plus doublet chemotherapy (FOLFIRI or FOLFOX) vs. bevacizumab plus doublet chemotherapy for patients with RAS WT left-sided mCRC, as well as in all- and right-sided tumors. We identified eight trials with 2624 patients. Five trials reported outcomes by tumor sidedness. In the left-sided population, overall survival (OS) (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.80, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.71-0.90) and objective response rate (ORR) (Odds ratio [OR]=1.61, 95% CI: 1.30-1.99) favored EGFRI plus chemotherapy, while no statistically significant differences were observed for progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=0.93, 95% CI: 0.84-1.04) or resection rate (RR). Similar results were found in the all-sided population. In the right-sided population, PFS favored bevacizumab plus chemotherapy (HR=1.45, 95% CI: 1.19-1.78), while no statistically significant differences were observed for OS (HR=1.17, 95% CI: 0.95-1.44), ORR (OR=0.99, 95% CI: 0.69-1.41), and RR. Early tumor shrinkage in the all-sided population favored EGFRI plus chemotherapy (OR=1.72; 95% CI: 1.36-2.17); limited data precluded evaluation by sidedness. Safety was available in 6 trials for all-sided tumors and 1 trial for left-sided tumors, each demonstrating typical class-specific adverse events. This most comprehensive meta-analysis indicates a benefit for first-line EGFRI plus chemotherapy over bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with left-sided RAS WT mCRC.

Real-world treatment outcomes from nationwide Onco-colon Turkey registry in RAS wild-type patients treated with biologics second-line mCRC

BACKGROUNDS AND OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of mortality both globally and in our country. In Turkey, we conducted a multicenter investigation into the effectiveness of second-line treatments and real-life data for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (NCT04757311).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, records from 28 centers were collected, and histopathological, molecular, and clinical characteristics were documented. Patients were categorized into groups based on their second-line biological treatments: anti-EGFR (Group A and Group B, panitumumab and cetuximab) and anti-VEGF (Group C, bevacizumab and aflibercept). They were then compared within these groups.

RESULTS

A total of 588 patients with documented RAS wild-type status were evaluated. The median OS was 15.7, 14.3 and 14.7 months in Group A, Group B and Group C, respectively (p  =  0.764). The median PFS of the patients in second-line setting that received panitumumab, cetuximab and bevacizumab/aflibercept were 7.8, 6.6 and 7.4 months, respectively (p  =  0.848).

CONCLUSION

According to the results of our real-life data study, there is no significant difference in efficiency between the combination of biological agent and chemotherapy used in the second-line treatments.

Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Irinotecan Plus Cetuximab Versus Cetuximab as Maintenance Therapy in First-Line Therapy for RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Phase III ERMES Study

PURPOSE

The intensity of anti-EGFR-based first-line therapy for RAS/BRAF wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), once disease control is achieved, is controversial. A de-escalation strategy with anti-EGFR monotherapy represents a potential option to maintain efficacy while reducing cytotoxicity.

METHODS

In this multicenter, open-label, phase III trial, patients with untreated RAS/BRAF wt mCRC were randomly assigned to receive either fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan/cetuximab (FOLFIRI/Cet) until disease progression (arm A) or FOLFIRI/Cet for eight cycles followed by Cet alone (arm B). The coprimary end points were a noninferior progression-free survival (PFS) in the modified per-protocol (mPP) population (>eight cycles) and a lower incidence of grade (G) 3-4 adverse events (AEs) for arm B compared with arm A.

RESULTS

Overall, 606 patients were randomly assigned, with 300 assigned to arm A and 306 to arm B. The median follow-up was 22.3 months. In the mPP population, 291 events occurred with a PFS of 10 versus 12.2 months for arms B and A, respectively (P of noninferiority = .43). In the intention-to-treatment (ITT, ≥one cycle) population, 503 events occurred with a PFS of 9 versus 10.7 months (P = .39). The overall survival was 35.7 versus 30.7 months (P = .119) and 31.0 versus 25.2 months (P = .32) in the mPP and ITT population, respectively. Arm B had lower G3-4 AEs during the maintenance period than arm A (20.2% v 35.1%).

CONCLUSION

The ERMES study did not demonstrate noninferiority of maintenance with Cet alone. Despite a more favorable safety profile, maintenance with single-agent Cet after induction with FOLFIRI/Cet cannot be recommended for all patients but could represent an option in selected cases.

Prospective, open-label, and observational study of cetuximab for metastatic colorectal carcinoma: The OPTIM1SE study

AIM

The OPTIM1SE study observed long-term real-world outcomes of cetuximab-based infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) regimens for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) across Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions, aiming to characterize their use, effectiveness, and safety in routine practice.

METHODS

OPTIM1SE was a prospective, open-label, observational study. Patients with untreated KRAS wild-type mCRC and distant metastases were treated per locally approved labels and monitored for 3 years via electronic medical records. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included safety, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

From November 19, 2013, to June 30, 2016, 520 patients were enrolled in 51 sites. Patients were mostly male (61.2%), with a mean age of 58.5 (±12.0) years; 420 patients received leucovorin, 5-FU, and irinotecan-based regimens and 94 received leucovorin, 5-FU, and oxaliplatin. The most common primary tumor site was the rectum (38.8%), with liver metastases (65.0%). ORR was 45.4% (95% CI, 41.1%-49.7%), including 26 patients (5.0%) with a complete response. Median PFS was 9.9 months (95% CI, 8.2-11.0); median OS (mOS) was 30.8 months (95% CI, 27.9-33.6). Higher mOS was associated with tumors of left compared with right-sided origin (hazard ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.49-0.99]); higher ORR was also associated with liver metastases compared with all other metastases (55.4% vs. 40.2%). Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of cetuximab.

CONCLUSION

Cetuximab-based 5-FU regimens were effective first-line treatments for mCRC in routine practice, particularly in patients with left-sided disease and liver metastases only.

[What is confirmed in the treatment of colon cancer?]

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer diagnosed in Germany and is the third most frequent cause of cancer-related death in both males and females. The majority of colorectal cancers occur via the adenoma-carcinoma sequence of origin. This means that colorectal cancers can be endoscopically detected in premalignant stages and can be curatively treated within the framework of early detection. Screening colonoscopy and, to a lesser extent, fecal occult blood testing, have led to a reduction in the colon cancer-related incidence and mortality. The acceptance and the use of screening colonoscopy should therefore be developed further. Treatment strategies for colorectal cancer are based on TNM staging, supplemented by anatomical and histopathological risk features as well as individual patient characteristics and treatment preferences. The molecular tumor profile is increasingly used to complement decision-making in the surgical, adjuvant and palliative treatment of colorectal cancer. Colon and rectal cancer have many similarities; however, they differ in the preoperative, surgical and adjuvant treatment strategies. This article focuses on colon cancer.

Treatment Costs of Colorectal Cancer by Sex and Age: Population-Based Study on Health Insurance Data from Germany

Objective: Evidence on the cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) in the German general population remains scarce as key input parameters, the costs to treat CRC, are largely unknown. Here, we provide detailed estimates on CRC treatment costs over time. Methods: Using insurance claims data from the Vilua healthcare research database, we included subjects with newly diagnosed CRC and subjects who died of CRC between 2012 and 2016. We assessed annualized CRC-related inpatient, outpatient and medication costs for up to five years after first diagnosis and prior to death, stratified by sex and age. Findings: We identified 1748 and 1117 subjects with follow-up data for at least 1 year after diagnosis and prior to death, respectively. In those newly diagnosed, average costs were highest in the first year after diagnosis (men, EUR 16,375−16,450; women, EUR 10,071−13,250) and dropped steeply in the following years, with no consistent pattern of differences with respect to age. Costs prior to death were substantially higher as compared to the initial phase of care and consistently on a high level even several years before death, peaking in the final year of life, with strong differences by sex and age (men vs. women, <70 years, EUR 34,351 vs. EUR 31,417; ≥70 years, EUR 14,463 vs. EUR 9930). Conclusion: Once clinically manifest, CRC causes substantial treatment costs over time, particularly in the palliative care setting. Strong differences in treatment costs by sex and age warrant further investigation.

Resource Oriented Decision Making for Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC) in a Lower-Middle Income Country: Egyptian Foundation of Medical Sciences (EFMS) Consensus Recommendations 2020

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide and the second cause of cancer related mortality. Treatment options for patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) expanded during the last two decades, with introduction of new chemotherapeutic and targeted agents. Egypt is a lower middle-income country; Egyptian health care system is fragmented with wide diversity in drug availability and reimbursement policies across different health care providing facilities. We report the results of consensus recommendations for treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer developed by Egyptian Foundation of Medical Sciences (EFMS), aiming to harmonize clinical practice through structured expert consensus-based recommendations consistent with the national status. EFMS recommendations could be utilized in other countries with similar economic status.

METHODS

EFMS recommendations were developed using a modified Delphi process, with three rounds of voting till the final recommendations were approved. A non-systematic review of literature was conducted before generating the provisional statements. Content experts were asked to vote on some recommendations in two different resource groups (restricted resources and non-restricted resources). External review board of experts from a low income and lower-middle countries voted on the applicability of EFMS recommendations in their countries.

RESULTS

The current recommendations highlighted the discrepancy in health care between restricted and non-restricted resources with expected survival loss and quality of life deterioration. Access to targeted agents in first line is very limited in governmental institutions, and no access to agents approved for third line in patients who failed oxaliplatin and irinotecan containing regimens for patients treated in restricted resource settings.

CONCLUSION

Management of mCRC in developing countries is a challenge. The currently available resource-stratified guidelines developed by international cancer societies represent a valuable decision-making tool, adaptation to national status in each country based on healthcare system status is required.

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.

Modern Approaches to Testing Drug Sensitivity of Patients' Tumors (Review)

Drug therapy is still one of the basic techniques used to treat cancers of different etiology. However, tumor resistance to drugs is a pressing problem limiting drug treatment efficacy. It is obvious for both modern fundamental and clinical oncology that there is the need for an individual approach to treating cancer taking into account the biological properties of a tumor when prescribing chemo- and targeted therapy. One of the promising strategies is to increase the antitumor therapy efficacy by developing predictive tests, which enable to evaluate the sensitivity of a particular tumor to a specific drug or a drug combination before the treatment initiation and, thus, make individual therapy selection possible.

The present review considers the main approaches to drug sensitivity assessment of patients’ tumors: molecular genetic profiling of tumor cells, and direct efficiency testing of the drugs on tumor cells isolated from surgical or biopsy material. There were analyzed the key directions in research and clinical studies such as: the search for predictive molecular markers, the development of methods to maintain tumor cells or tissue sections viable, i.e. in a condition maximum close to their physiological state, the development of high throughput systems to assess therapy efficiency. Special attention was given to a patient-centered approach to drug therapy in colorectal cancer.

Current therapy of advanced colorectal cancer according to RAS/RAF mutational status

Colorectal cancer is a clinically and molecularly heterogeneous disease. Currently, extended RAS and BRAF mutation testing is obligatory in routine clinical practice before starting any treatment in the metastatic setting. Treatment decision making also includes assessment of the clinical condition of the patient, definition of the treatment goal, and consideration of the primary tumor site. Biological treatment is part of the first-line drug combination unless contraindicated. Mutational status is significantly associated with the outcome of patients and is strongly predictive for anti-EGFR-targeted therapy. The prognosis of RAS mutant CRC is clearly inferior to wild-type cases. RAS remains an elusive target, and specific treatment options are not yet available. Recently, promising results of a direct KRAS G12C inhibitor have been reported; however, further confirmation is needed. The biomarker landscape in mCRC is evolving; new promising markers are awaited with the chance of more precise targeted treatment.

Up-to-date role of aflibercept in the treatment of colorectal cancer

Introduction: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major public health problem. Despite major progress understanding the biological basis of this tumor added to the incorporation of optimized diagnostic and therapeutic strategies, prognosis after progression on first-line standard treatment remains poor. Several antiangiogenic treatments have demonstrated improvement in overall survival (OS) in the second-line treatment being aflibercept, a fully humanized recombinant protein, one of them. The results of the VELOUR study showed that the addition of aflibercept to second-line FOLFIRI improved OS and progression-free survival.Areas covered: A literature review of published clinical studies was performed in order to discuss the clinical data on aflibercept in mCRC from early drug development to real-world data.Expert opinion: The combination of aflibercept with FOLFIRI provides a statistical improvement in OS and in all the efficacy endpoints analyzed in the VELOUR trial, showing efficacy independently on time to progression, molecular status, prior biological treatment, or age. Further studies are needed to find new biomarkers and molecular characterization in order to better select patients that could benefit from this treatment.

Relationships Between Köhne Category/Baseline Tumor Load and Early Tumor Shrinkage, Depth of Response, and Outcomes in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

In metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), there are limited data on associations between early tumor shrinkage (ETS), depth of response (DpR), and patient characteristics.

METHODS

Data from patients with RAS wild-type mCRC who had participated in the PRIME (NCT00364013) and PEAK (NCT00819780) studies were analyzed retrospectively. ETS and DpR were assessed by baseline Köhne category/BRAF status (PRIME) and baseline tumor load (pooled PRIME and PEAK).

RESULTS

Analysis populations included 436 to 665 patients. Patients' chances of achieving ETS of 30% or greater were 63.8%, 50.4%, and 41.9% in the low-, medium-, and high-risk Köhne categories, and 21.7% in those with BRAF mutations. Corresponding percentages for the highest DpR classification (71%-100%) were 47.7% (low risk), 23.6% (medium risk), 10.0% (high risk), and 4.2% (BRAF mutant). No clear relationship was observed between baseline tumor load and ETS or DpR. An ETS of 30% or greater and higher DpR values were associated with statistically significant prolongation of median progression-free survival and overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Patients with mCRC categorized at baseline by the Köhne criteria as high risk or with BRAF mutations have lower chances of achieving an ETS of 30% or greater or a high DpR. Baseline tumor load was not predictive of ETS or DpR. Favorable ETS or DpR is associated with improved progression-free and overall survival.

Patient profiles as an aim to optimize selection in the second line setting: the role of aflibercept

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. For metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients, it is recommended, as first-line treatment, chemotherapy (CT) based on doublet cytotoxic combinations of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) and fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX). In addition to CT, biological (targeted agents) are indicated in the first-line treatment, unless contraindicated. In this context, most of mCRC patients are likely to progress and to change from first line to second line treatment when they develop resistance to first-line treatment options. It is in this second line setting where Aflibercept offers an alternative and effective therapeutic option, thought its specific mechanism of action for different patient’s profile: RAS mutant, RAS wild-type (wt), BRAF mutant, potentially resectable and elderly patients. In this paper, a panel of experienced oncologists specialized in the management of mCRC experts have reviewed and selected scientific evidence focused on Aflibercept as an alternative treatment.

Relation of cetuximab-induced skin toxicity and early tumor shrinkage in metastatic colorectal cancer patients: results of the randomized phase 3 trial FIRE-3 (AIO KRK0306)

BACKGROUND

Cetuximab-induced skin toxicity (Cet-ST) is positively associated with outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Besides its predictive relevance for targeted therapy, we investigated its prognostic impact with early tumor shrinkage (ETS) ≥20%, another on-treatment surrogate for clinical outcome in FIRE-3.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

FIRE-3 evaluated first-line FOLFIRI (folinic acid, fluorouracil and irinotecan) plus cetuximab (FOLFIRI/Cet) versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (FOLFIRI/Bev) in mCRC patients with RAS-WT tumors (i.e. wild-type in KRAS and NRAS exons 2-4). Retrospective data on Cet-ST that occurred during cycles 1-3 of treatment were correlated with efficacy endpoints, including ETS. To control for guarantee-time bias, only patients who had completed three or more treatment cycles were considered.

RESULTS

Of 199 patients treated with FOLFIRI/Cet, 181 (91.0%) completed three or more treatment cycles. A significant survival benefit of FOLFIRI/Cet over FOLFIRI/Bev was only evident in patients developing Cet-ST grade 2-3 [41.0 versus 26.6 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61-0.87; P < 0.001] compared with Cet-ST grade 0-1 (HR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.67-1.20; P = 0.48). Regarding prognosis, Cet-ST grade 2-3 (n = 75; 41.4%), compared with Cet-ST grade 0-1 (n = 106; 58.6%), was associated with prolonged overall survival (OS; HR = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.42-0.91; P = 0.01). In multivariate analysis, both Cet-ST (HR = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.50-0.87; P = 0.003) and ETS (HR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.41-0.74; P < 0.0001) were independently prognostic for OS. Absence of both Cet-ST grade ≥2 and ETS identified a subgroup of patients with very poor prognosis (median OS 15.1 months).

CONCLUSIONS

In FIRE-3, the addition of cetuximab to FOLFIRI was associated with superior OS compared with FOLFIRI/Bev only in patients developing Cet-ST grade ≥2. Regarding prognostic relevance, both Cet-ST and ETS were independent and early predictors of survival. The present analysis supports that a combined evaluation of on-treatment parameters such as Cet-ST and ETS may help to guide treatment of mCRC.

FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab for advanced colorectal cancer: final survival and per-protocol analysis of FIRE-3, a randomised clinical trial

Background

Cetuximab plus FOLFIRI improved overall survival compared with bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in FIRE-3, but no corresponding benefit was found for progression-free survival. This analysis aimed to determine whether cetuximab improves response and survival versus bevacizumab among response-evaluable patients receiving first-line FOLFIRI for RAS wild-type mCRC and the effect of primary tumour side on outcomes.

Methods

The intent-to-treat population included 593 patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type mCRC. Further testing identified 400 patients with extended RAS wild-type disease; of these, 352 (88%) who received ≥3 cycles of therapy and had ≥1 post-baseline scan were evaluable for response and constituted the per-protocol population (169 cetuximab and 183 bevacizumab). Patients received 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) with either weekly cetuximab or biweekly bevacizumab given on day 1 of each 14-day cycle until response, progression or toxicity occurred. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) in the per-protocol population. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The effect of primary tumour location was evaluated.

Results

Median OS in the RAS wild-type population was 31 vs 26 months in the cetuximab and bevacizumab groups, respectively (HR 0.76, P = 0.012). In the per-protocol population, outcomes favoured cetuximab for ORR (77% vs 65%, P = 0.014) and median OS (33 vs 26 months, HR 0.75, P = 0.011), while PFS was comparable between groups. The advantage of cetuximab over bevacizumab occurred only in patients with left-sided primary tumours.

Conclusions

FOLFIRI plus cetuximab resulted in a significantly higher ORR and longer OS compared to FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab among patients with left-sided tumours. The superior response associated with cetuximab may particularly benefit patients with symptomatic tumours or borderline-resectable metastases.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT00433927.

Controversies in the treatment of RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer

Objective

To provide guidance for the management of RAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in daily practice.

Methods

Nominal group and Delphi techniques were used. A steering committee of seven experts analyzed the current management of RAS wt mCRC, through which they identified controversies, critically analyzed the available evidence, and formulated several guiding statements for clinicians. Subsequently, a group of 30 experts (the expert panel) was selected to test agreement with the statements, through two Delphi rounds. The following response categories were established in both rounds: 1 = totally agree, 2 = basically agree, 3 = basically disagree, 4 = totally disagree. Agreement was defined if ≥ 75% of answers were in categories 1 and 2 (consensus with the agreement) or 3 and 4 (consensus with the disagreement).

Results

Overall, 71 statements were proposed, which incorporated the following areas: (1) overarching principles; (2) tumor location; (3) triplets; (4) maintenance; (5) second-line and beyond treatments; (6) Rechallenge and liquid biopsy. After the two Delphi rounds, only six statements maintained a lack of clear consensus.

Conclusions

This document aims to describe the expert’s attitude when dealing with several common clinical questions regarding patients with RAS wt mCRC.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12094-020-02475-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Early response evaluation during preoperative chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases: Combined size and morphology-based criteria predict pathological response and survival after resection

BACKGROUND

Short treatment-duration with early restaging is crucial to avoid liver injury after preoperative chemotherapy (preopCTX) for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Response evaluation according to response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) criteria implies several limitations. Early tumor shrinkage (ETS; ≥20% size reduction <6-12 weeks) or morphological criteria (MC) may better predict oncological outcome.

METHODS

In patients undergoing resection after preopCTX between 2003-2017 pathological and radiological response was reassessed according to Blazer classification, ETS, MC, and RECIST within 90 days and correlated with survival.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were included, with a median of two (1-10) liver lesions, 53% bilobar involvement, and 7% extrahepatic disease. PreopCTX was applied for 3 months in median (1-6). During restaging after a median of 62 days, presence of ETS was associated with improved median overall survival (OS; 57.1 vs 33.7 months; P = .010) and disease-free survival (16 vs 7.2 months; P = .025). MC significantly correlated with major pathological response (P = .021). When combining ETS with optimal MC, presence of one or both factors was associated with pathological response (61.5% and 92.3%; P = .044) and OS in log-rank (P = .011), and multivariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19-0.90 and HR 0.32; 95%CI, 0.11-0.97).

CONCLUSION

Response-grading by combined ETS/MC criteria less than 90 days after preopCTX initiation predicts pathological response and postoperative survival in CRLM.

Comparison of computed tomography imaging analyses for evaluation after chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer: a retrospective pooled analysis of six phase II clinical trials

BACKGROUND

There are several methods for analyzing computed tomography (CT) images to evaluate chemotherapy efficacy in clinical studies. However, the optimal analysis method for each drug is still under debate. We conducted a pooled analysis using data from six phase II studies to evaluate four analysis methods in colorectal cancers (CRCs): morphological responses (MRs), early tumor shrinkage (ETS), depth of response (DpR), and response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) ver.1.1.

METHODS

We included 249 patients in this analysis. Pretreatments and findings of subsequent CT imaging were analyzed based on the MR, ETS, DpR, and RECIST ver.1.1. Differences in overall survival (OS) between the responders and non-responders according to each method were evaluated using survival analysis.

RESULTS

The responders had significantly better hazard ratios (HRs) for OS, in terms of DpR (≥ median), ETS, objective response rate (ORR) [complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)], and disease control rate [CR + PR + stable disease (SD)]. Patients with right-sided colon cancers showed better HRs for DpR, but not for ETS and ORR. Contrastingly, patients with left-sided CRCs had better HRs for ETS, DpR, and ORR. MR was not associated with outcomes in this study, even in cases where bevacizumab was used. In patients with liver metastasis, ETS, DpR, and ORR showed better HRs, but not in those with lung metastasis.

CONCLUSION

Early tumor shrinkage and DpR might be predictive markers only in left-sided CRCs with liver metastasis. Each imaging analysis has a different value based on the primary and metastatic sites.

Analysis of response-related endpoints in trials of first-line medical treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Tumor radiologic response after systemic chemotherapy has been used as endpoint of trials of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), which can report the best overall response rate (ORR) and the disease control rate (DCR) by RECIST criteria as well as the early tumor shrinkage (ETS). The present study perform a trial-level analysis to verify whether such response-related endpoints are predictive of overall survival (OS).

METHODS

After a systematic search, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were selected each time they evaluated the three response endpoints and progression-free survival (PFS). Two arms per trial were selected, and the correlation between the difference in each endpoint and the difference in OS was calculated. The analysis then evaluated the effects of treatment on ∆ORR, or ∆DCR, ∆ETS, ∆PFS, and on ∆OS, using separate linear regressions for each of them, and the proportion of variability explained (R²_trial) on OS for each of the four endpoints was calculated.

RESULTS

The systematic review of the literature led to the selection of 12 RCTs, 7 phase-3 and 5 phase-2. ETS reported a different performance in the entire sample compared to phase-3 trials (R²_trial = 0.172 vs. 0.842), differently from DCR (R²_trial = 0.541 vs. 0.816) and ORR (R²_trial = 0.349 vs. 0.740). Surprisingly, PFS predicted OS with a weak correlation, which was not significant in the subgroup of phase-3 studies (R²_trial = 0.455 vs. 0.466).

CONCLUSION

The results of the present trial-level analysis report a good performance of two response-related endpoints, DCR and ETS, and suggest that they could be differently used depending on the setting of disease and the type of medical treatment.

The Prognostic Value of Serum Semaphorin3A and VEGF Levels in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Despite new treatment options in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), new prognostic markers are still needed to determine optimal chemoregimen especially for anti-angiogenesis drugs. In this study, we evaluated the serum semaphorin and VEGF-A levels as prognostic factors in patients with mCRC.

METHODS

Patients with diagnosed mCRC who were treated with first-line bevacizumab plus chemotherapy were included in the study. Venous blood samples of 37 patients with metastatic colon cancer were taken, and serum semaphorin 3A and VEGF-A levels were studied in pre-treatment and the 1st and third months after the treatment was initiated.

RESULTS

Totally, 37 patients were enrolled in the study. The patients' mean age was 62 years. Twenty-eight (49%) of the patients were male, and 19 (51%) were female. Serum semaphorin3A (sema3A) levels of the patients were 5.4 ± 7.4 ng/ml before the treatment, 3.5 ± 3.3 ng/ml at the first month, and 3.5 ± 3.7 ng/ml at the third month. Serum VEGF-A levels were 27.7 ± 32.9 ng/l before the treatment, 23.1 ± 28.1 ng/l at the first month, and 28.9 ± 30.2 ng/l at the third month. There was no significant correlation between the survival and pre-treatment VEGF-A level (p = 0.064). Overall survival (OS) was statistically significantly higher in patients with pre-treatment semaphorin 3A levels below 5.4 ng/ml than higher than 5.4 ng/ml (10.5 months vs 4.5 months, respectively, HR 0.23, 95% CI 19.635-11,391, p = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

Pre-treatment semaphorin 3A level can be a prognostic marker for the mCRC patients who were treated with bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Optimizing sequential treatment with anti-EGFR and VEGF mAb in metastatic colorectal cancer: current results and controversies

Anti-EGFR mAb (cetuximab or panitumumab) and anti-VEGF mAb (bevacizumab) are the two main targeted agents available for RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treatment. Nonetheless, three head-to-head clinical trials evaluating anti-EGFR mAb vs -VEGF mAb in first-line treatment failed to conclude a uniform result. Recently, a few small clinical studies revealed that prior use of bevacizumab may impair the effect of cetuximab or panitumumab. Preclinical studies have also suggested that pretreatment with bevacizumab may lead to simultaneous resistance to anti-EGFR mAb. Therefore, we performed this review to summarize the available data regarding the optimal sequential treatment of anti-EGFR and -VEGF mAb for RAS or KRAS WT mCRC and discuss the potential mechanisms that may explain this phenomenon. Primary tumor location and early tumor shrinkage have emerged as new potential prognostic and predictive factors in mCRC. We also collected information to explore whether these factors affect the optimal sequencing of targeted therapy in mCRC. However, definite conclusions cannot be made, and we can only speculate on optimal treatment recommendations based on the contradictory results.

Clinical relevance of circulating tumor DNA assessed through deep sequencing in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Because circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) studies focusing on only one or a few genes to monitor the disease progress or treatment response are unlikely to find its clinical significance, the development of cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) panel covering hundreds of mutation hot spots is important for the establishment of clinically practical ctDNA detection system. We enrolled 101 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who received chemotherapy. Amplicon‐based genomic profiling of 14 genes, which are commonly mutated in CRC, in plasma by next‐generation sequencing (NGS) was carried out to evaluate the feasibility of this assay and was compared with their clinical parameters and RAS status in matched tissue samples. Somatic mutations of the 14 genes in plasma cfDNA were detected in 88 patients (87.1%) with mCRC. Mutations in TP53, KRAS, and APC genes were detected in 70 (69.3%), 39 (38.6%), and 24 (23.7%) patients, respectively. Mutant allele frequencies in plasma were significantly associated with metastasis (liver, P = 0.00004, lymph node, P = 0.008, number of metastatic organs, P = 0.0006), tumor markers (CEA, P = 0.000007, CA19‐9, P = 0.006, LDH, P = 0.00001), and tumor diameter (maximum, P = 0.00002, sum of diameter, P = 0.00009). The overall concordance rate of RAS status between ctDNA and matched tissue was 77.2% (78/101). Our data confirmed that mutant allele in cfDNA can be sensitively detected by amplicon‐based NGS system. These results suggest that ctDNA could be a novel diagnostic biomarker to monitor changes in mutational status and tumor burden in patients with mCRC.

Relevance of baseline carcinoembryonic antigen for first-line treatment against metastatic colorectal cancer with FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or bevacizumab (FIRE-3 trial)

PURPOSE

Increased baseline carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) serum level is associated with inferior overall survival (OS) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, limited data exist on its predictive relevance for targeted therapies. Therefore, we analysed its relevance in FIRE-3, a randomised phase III study.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

FIRE-3 evaluated first-line FOLFIRI plus cetuximab (FOLFIRI/Cet) versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (FOLFIRI/Bev) in mCRC patients with RAS-WT tumour (i.e. wild-type in KRAS and NRAS exons 2-4). Herein, the impact of CEA on patient outcome was investigated.

RESULTS

Of 400 patients, 356 (89.0%) were evaluable for CEA. High CEA (>10 ng/ml; N = 237) compared to low CEA (≤10 ng/ml; N = 119) was associated with shorter OS in the FOLFIRI/Bev arm (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.50; P = 0.036), while no significant OS difference was observed in the FOLFIRI/Cet arm (HR = 1.07; P = 0.74). In patients with high CEA, FOLFIRI/Cet compared to FOLFIRI/Bev showed a greater OS benefit (HR = 0.56; P < 0.001) than in patients with low CEA (HR = 0.78; P = 0.30). Furthermore, FOLFIRI/Cet exhibited significantly superior objective response rate in patients with high CEA (odds ratio = 2.21; P = 0.006) in contrast to patients with low CEA (odds ratio = 0.90; P = 0.85).

CONCLUSION

In patients with RAS-WT mCRC receiving first-line chemotherapy with FOLFIRI/Cet versus FOLFIRI/Bev, elevated CEA was associated with inferior survival in the bevacizumab arm, while this was not the case when cetuximab was applied. Comparison of OS and objective response rate according to treatment arms indicated that cetuximab was greatly superior to bevacizumab in patients with elevated CEA, while this effect was markedly lower and lost statistical significance in patients with low CEA.

Recent advances in understanding colorectal cancer

The achievements in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer during recent years are based on a better understanding of the disease and individualized regimen planning. In adjuvant treatment, the highly important IDEA (International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy) study has shown that treatment duration can safely be reduced in selected patient populations. In patients with pN1 and pT1-pT3 tumors, 3 months of treatment with 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin is comparable with respect to 3-year survival rate to 6 months of treatment. For patients with N2 tumors, 6 months of treatment should stay the standard of care. The limitation of the duration of the adjuvant treatment is significantly reducing the chemotherapy-induced morbidity. New studies will explore the use of immune-checkpoint inhibitors in the adjuvant setting in microsatellite-instable (MSI) tumors. In metastatic disease, next to the required molecular testing for RAS and BRAF mutations, MSI testing is recommended. In the rare group of patients with a MSI tumor, immune-checkpoint inhibition is changing the course of the disease dramatically. Therefore, it is important to identify those patients early. For the RAS-mutant cases, no new and targeted treatment options have been identified yet. An optimal treatment strategy for those patients is urgently needed. RAS wild-type patients with tumors derived from the left side of the colon (splenic flexure to rectum) should be treated in first line with epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies. This selection by a molecular and a clinical marker increased the benefit derived by EGFR antibodies dramatically and defined the most effective treatment option for those patients. New selection criteria based on gene expression, methylation, and other molecular changes are explored and will further influence our therapeutic strategies in the future.

A prospective Phase II study to examine the relationship between quality of life and adverse events of first-line chemotherapy plus cetuximab in patients with KRAS wild-type unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer: QUACK trial

A prospective trial has not been performed to investigate associations between quality of life (QOL), adverse events (AEs), and overall survival (OS) in the first-line treatment with cetuximab plus standard chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Associations between patient outcome and health-related QOL (HRQOL) together with skin toxicity-related QOL were prospectively evaluated using EORTC QLQ-C30 and DLQI questionnaires. One hundred and forty mCRC patients were analyzed in this study, and 87.8% received pre-emptive skin treatment. Skin toxicity had no clinical impact on HRQOL or skin-related QOL during the first 8 weeks and throughout the study period. An early skin reaction with a grade ≥2 at 8 weeks was significantly associated with a favorable OS compared with a grade of ≤1 (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.24-0.95; P = .035) and was confirmed to be an independent predictor of OS (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.21-0.97; P = .040). Patients symptomatic at baseline who responded to treatment had improved HRQOL compared to nonresponding patients. Severe mucositis/stomatitis had a statistically significant and clinically meaningful negative impact on HRQOL (mean changes from baseline throughout the study period in global health status were -12.64 for a grade of ≥2 vs -0.35 for a grade of 0 or 1 (P = .005)). In conclusion, severe early skin reactions predict favorable OS for patients treated with cetuximab plus chemotherapy without impairing QOL. In addition, mucositis/stomatitis was the most substantial AE compromising both QOL and treatment compliance.

Efficacy of bevacizumab versus epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors for wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Background

Results from several prospective clinical trials comparing anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy plus chemotherapy for wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have been inconsistent. This meta-analysis aims to investigate the optimal choice for these target agents.

Methods

We searched for clinical trials in both electronic databases from inception until January 2018 and recent conference abstracts to identify prospective clinical studies comparing the efficacy of a VEGF inhibitor (bevacizumab) versus EGFR inhibitors (cetuximab or panitumumab) on wild-type RAS (including its subset KRAS) mCRC. All analyses were conducted using RevMan 5.3 software.

Results

A total of 5 studies were included. EGFR inhibitors were associated with a significant benefit in terms of overall survival (OS) compared with VEGF inhibitors in wild-type KRAS or wild-type RAS populations, with hazard ratios (HRs) equal to 0.86 (95% CI: 0.78, 0.95; p=0.003) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.72, 0.95; p=0.007), respectively. This survival benefit was limited to the first-line setting. No difference was found for progression-free survival (PFS), whereas the objective response rate (ORR) was significantly increased in the wild-type RAS population (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.50, 0.82; p=0.0004). No difference in OS was noted between EGFR inhibitors versus a VEGF inhibitor plus the FOLFIRI regimen, whereas superior survival was noted for EGFR inhibitors plus the mFOLFOX6 regimen versus a VEGF inhibitor (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.57, 0.98; p=0.04). PFS was significantly prolonged (HR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.14, 1.92; p=0.003), whereas a trend favoring OS (HR: 1.23; 95% CI: 0.93, 1.63; p=0.14) was noted for a VEGF inhibitor in patients with right-sided tumors, with no difference in the ORR (OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.52, 1.38; p=0.51). However, left-sided tumors exhibited superior OS (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.59, 0.85; p=0.0002), PFS (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.98; p=0.03), and ORR (OR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.48, 0.92; p=0.01) for EGFR inhibitors.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggests the superiority of anti-EGFR therapy compared with anti-VEGF therapy for mCRC with wild-type RAS. Primary tumor location should be taken into account in target drug selection. Further research is still needed to confirm which inhibitor may be a better choice when combined with different chemotherapy regimens.

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

Background

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

Materials and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Trial registration (Clinicaltrials.gov)

PRIME (NCT00364013), PEAK (NCT00819780).

Optimising the use of cetuximab in the continuum of care for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

The anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy is a standard of care in the first-line treatment of RAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and has demonstrated efficacy in later lines. Progressive disease (PD) occurs when tumours develop resistance to a therapy, although controversy remains about whether PD on a combination of chemotherapy and targeted agents implies resistance to both components. Here, we propose that some patients may gain additional clinical benefit from the reuse of cetuximab after having PD on regimens including cetuximab in an earlier treatment line. We conducted a non-systematic literature search in PubMed and reviewed published and ongoing clinical trials, focusing on later-line cetuximab reuse in patients with mCRC. Evidence from multiple studies suggests that cetuximab can be an efficacious and tolerable treatment when continued or when fit patients with mCRC are retreated with it after a break from anti-EGFR therapy. Furthermore, on the basis of available preclinical and clinical evidence, we propose that longitudinal monitoring of RAS status may identify patients suitable for such a strategy. Patients who experience progression on cetuximab plus chemotherapy but have maintained RAS wt tumour status may benefit from continuation of cetuximab with a chemotherapy backbone switch because they have probably developed resistance to the chemotherapeutic agents rather than the biologic component of the regimen. Conversely, patients whose disease progresses on cetuximab-based therapy due to drug-selected clonal expansion of RAS-mutant tumour cells may regain sensitivity to cetuximab following a defined break from anti-EGFR therapy. Looking to the future, we propose that RAS status determination at disease progression by liquid, needle or excisional biopsy may identify patients eligible for cetuximab continuation and rechallenge. With this approach, treatment benefit can be extended, adding to established continuum-of-care strategies in patients with mCRC.

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.

Chemotherapy plus Panitumumab Versus Chemotherapy plus Bevacizumab in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis

Panitumumab and bevacizumab have been widely used in combination with chemotherapy for patients with wild type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Whether panitumumab or bevacizumab was the optimal option remained controversial. Thus, we conducted a meta-anaylsis to evaluate chemotherapy plus panitumumab (C + P) versus chemotherapy plus bevacizumab (C + B) in wild type RAS mCRC. Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, were searched. This meta-analysis estimated the progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs). Three randomized controlled trials with a total number of 577 patients were included. In wild type RAS population, PFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.76 to 1.15] and OS (HR = 0.90; 95% CI, 0.54 to 1.27) and ORR [relative ratio (RR) = 2.06; 95% CI, 0.86 to 4.90] appeared similar between the two treatments, the incidence of AEs slightly increased (RR = 1.16; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.26). In conclusion, there was insufficient evidence to precisely conclude that combination treatment of C + P had an improved efficacy compared with C + B. Further large-scale and better-designed clinical trials are still needed to evaluate the combination treatment of C + P in patients with wild type RAS mCRC.

Targeting the PI3K Signalling as a Therapeutic Strategy in Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains one of the leading causes of cancer mortality worldwide. Regarded as a heterogeneous disease, a number of biomarkers have been proposed to help in the stratification of CRC patients and to enable the selection of the best therapy for each patient towards personalized therapy. However, although the molecular mechanisms underlying the development of CRC have been elucidated, the therapeutic strategies available for these patients are still quite limited. Thus, over the last few years, a multitude of novel targets and therapeutic strategies have emerged focusing on deregulated molecules and pathways that are implicated in cell growth and survival. Particularly relevant in CRC are the activating mutations in the oncogene PIK3CA that frequently occur in concomitancy with KRAS and BRAF mutations and that lead to deregulation of the major signalling pathways PI3K and MAPK, downstream of EGFR. This review focus on the importance of the PI3K signalling in CRC development, on the current knowledge of PI3K inhibition as a therapeutic approach in CRC and on the implications PI3K signalling molecules may have as potential biomarkers and as new targets for directed therapies in CRC patients.

Protein biomarkers predictive for response to anti-EGFR treatment in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with mutant KRAS or NRAS are ineligible for anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) therapy, as RAS mutations activate downstream pathways independently of EGFR and induce primary resistance. However, even among RAS wild-type (WT) patients, only a fraction responds to anti-EGFR therapy, suggesting that other mechanisms of resistance exist. We hypothesise that different (epi)genetic alterations can lead to primary anti-EGFR resistance and that the crucial end point is the activation of protein signalling pathways.

METHODS

We analysed the expression and activation of proteins involved in cell signalling, using reverse phase protein arrays, on a multicentre French cohort of RAS WT mCRC treated with anti-EGFR treatment.

RESULTS

We identify activated EGFR and HER3 as protein biomarkers predictive for better overall survival. Active EGFR signalling and downstream PI3K, but not MAPK, pathway activation are associated with response to anti-EGFR treatment. Left-sided mCRC displays active ErbB2/3 and Wnt pathways and a better response to anti-EGFR therapy compared to right-sided mCRC.

CONCLUSIONS

We identify active EGFR and PI3K signalling as a key factor for response to anti-EGFR treatment in mCRC and highlight the importance of developing these biomarkers in clinical practice for the selection of RAS WT mCRC patients that would benefit from anti-EGFR treatment.

Exploratory analyses assessing the impact of early tumour shrinkage and depth of response on survival outcomes in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer receiving treatment in three randomised panitumumab trials

Purpose

To report exploratory analyses of early tumour shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) in patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), receiving the first-line treatment in three randomised panitumumab trials.

Methods

Data from the PRIME (NCT00364013), PEAK (NCT00819780) and PLANET (NCT00885885) studies were included. Median DpR, the proportion of patients achieving ETS ≥ 20% or ≥ 30% at week 8, and the impact of ETS and DpR (including by category) on outcome were analysed. Factors associated with ETS and DpR and the optimal ETS/DpR cut-off values for predicting improved overall survival (OS) were assessed.

Results

Overall, 505, 170 and 53 patients had RAS WT mCRC in PRIME, PEAK and PLANET, respectively. Patients receiving panitumumab had higher ETS rates (≥ 30%: PRIME 59% vs. 38%; PEAK 64% vs. 45%) and greater DpR (PRIME: 54% vs. 46%; PEAK: 65% vs. 46%) than those receiving treatment without panitumumab. In multiple regression analyses, panitumumab treatment, liver-only metastases and WT BRAF status were consistently associated with improved ETS and DpR outcomes. Irrespective of treatment, ETS and DpR were associated with improved progression-free survival, overall survival and resection rates; most resections occurred in patients in the two highest DpR categories. In PRIME and PEAK, respectively, the optimal cut-offs for predicting improved OS were 32 and 34% for ETS, and 59 and 70% for DpR.

Conclusions

These exploratory analyses suggest that panitumumab is associated ETS and DpR benefits in patients with RAS WT mCRC and that achieving these endpoints during first-line treatment is linked with favourable outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00432-017-2534-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cardiovascular Adverse Events in Patients With Cancer Treated With Bevacizumab: A Meta-Analysis of More Than 20 000 Patients

Background

The monoclonal antibody bevacizumab effectively inhibits angiogenesis in several types of cancers by blocking vascular endothelial growth factor. However, life‐threatening cardiovascular adverse effects could limit its use and may warrant specific follow‐up strategies.

Methods and Results

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials published until November 2016 that assessed patients with cancer treated with or without bevacizumab in addition to standard chemotherapy. A total of 20 050 patients with a broad range of cancer types from 22 studies were included in this analysis (10 394 in the bevacizumab group and 9656 in the control group). The risks of arterial and venous adverse events were higher in the bevacizumab groups (relative risk [RR], 1.37; 95% CI, 1.10–1.70 [P=0.004] and RR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12–1.47 [P<0.001], respectively), and more arterial adverse events occurred in patients taking high‐dose bevacizumab regimens. Bevacizumab treatment was associated with the highest risk of cardiac and cerebral ischemia in the high‐dose bevacizumab groups (RR, 4.4; 95% CI, 1.59–12.70 [P=0.004] and RR, 6.67; 95% CI, 2.17–20.66 [P=0.001], respectively). In addition, the risk of bleeding and arterial hypertension were higher in the bevacizumab groups (RR, 2.74; 95% CI, 2.38–3.15 [P<0.001] and RR, 4.73; 95% CI, 4.15–5.39 [P<0.00001], respectively), with higher values for patiens taking high‐dose regimens.

Conclusions

Treatment with bevacizumab increases the risk of arterial adverse events, particularly cardiac and cerebral ischemia, venous adverse events, bleeding, and arterial hypertension. This risk is additionally increased with high doses of bevacizumab. Further studies should determine the appropriate options for cardio‐oncology management.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk. Unique identifier: PROSPERO(CRD42016054305).

Final analysis of the randomised PEAK trial: overall survival and tumour responses during first-line treatment with mFOLFOX6 plus either panitumumab or bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma

PURPOSE

To report planned final overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) analyses from the phase II PEAK trial (NCT00819780).

METHODS

Patients with previously untreated, KRAS exon 2 wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) were randomised to mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab or bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints included OS, objective response rate, duration of response (DoR), time to response, resection and safety. Treatment effect by tumour RAS status was a prespecified objective. Exploratory analyses included early tumour shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR).

RESULTS

One hundred seventy patients had RAS WT and 156 had RAS WT/BRAF WT mCRC. Median PFS was longer for panitumumab versus bevacizumab in the RAS WT (12.8 vs 10.1 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 [95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.48-0.96]; p = 0.029) and RAS WT/BRAF WT (13.1 vs 10.1 months; HR = 0.61 [95% CI = 0.42-0.88]; p = 0.0075) populations. Median OS (68% OS events) for panitumumab versus bevacizumab was 36.9 versus 28.9 months (HR = 0.76 [95% CI = 0.53-1.11]; p = 0.15) and 41.3 versus 28.9 months (HR = 0.70 [95% CI = 0.48-1.04]; p = 0.08), in the RAS WT and RAS WT/BRAF WT populations, respectively. Median DoR (11.4 vs 9.0 months; HR = 0.59 [95% CI = 0.39-0.88]; p = 0.011) and DpR (65.0 vs 46.3%; p = 0.0018) were improved in the panitumumab group. More panitumumab patients experienced ≥30% ETS at week 8 (64 vs 45%; p = 0.052); ETS was associated with improved PFS/OS. No new safety signals occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

First-line panitumumab + mFOLFOX6 increases PFS versus bevacizumab + mFOLFOX6 in patients with RAS WT mCRC.

Epidermal growth factor inhibitors in first-line for metastatic colorectal cancer with ras wild-type: a perspective based on pharmacological costs

INTRODUCTION

In light of the relevant expenses of pharmacological interventions it might be interesting to make a balance between the cost of the new drugs administered, such as EGFRIs (cetuximab and panitunumab) and the added value represented by the improvement of the clinical parameters of interest such as progression free survival (PFS). Areas covered: The analysis was conducted to assess the effect of front-line chemotherapy on the PFS, separately, on each arm of the evaluated trials. Only phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were considered. We calculated the pharmacological costs necessary to get the benefit in PFS, for each trial. We have subsequently applied the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) to the above phase III RCTs. Our analysis evaluated 9 phase III RCTs, including 7199 patients. ESMO-MCBS reached high scores (grade 4) for the CRYSTAL and PRIME trials. The combination of FOLFOX and panitunumab is associated with low difference per month-PFS gained (15 821.9 €) instead of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab (21 854.6 €) in KRAS wild-type patients. Expert commentary: Our data demonstrate a huge difference in cost per month of PFS gained in modern front-line treatments in mCRC with RAS wild-type.

Panitumumab interaction with TAS-102 leads to combinational anticancer effects via blocking of EGFR-mediated tumor response to trifluridine

Panitumumab is a monoclonal antibody developed against the human epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). TAS-102 is a novel chemotherapeutic agent containing trifluridine (FTD) as the active cytotoxic component. Both panitumumab and TAS-102 have been approved for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. In this study, we revealed the mechanism underlying the anticancer effects of panitumumab/TAS-102 combination using preclinical models. Panitumumab/FTD cotreatment showed additive antiproliferative effects in LIM1215 and synergistic antiproliferative effects in SW48 colon cancer cells. Consistent with the in vitro effects, panitumumab/TAS-102 combination caused tumor regression in LIM1215 and COL-01-JCK colon cancer patient-derived xenograft models. In LIM1215 cells, FTD induced extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK)/protein kinase B (AKT)/signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) phosphorylation and subsequent serine/threonine phosphorylation of EGFR, while it had no effects on EGFR tyrosine phosphorylation. Panitumumab and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib reduced the basal level of EGFR tyrosine phosphorylation and reversed FTD-induced ERK/AKT/STAT3 and EGFR serine/threonine phosphorylation. These results suggested that FTD in combination with the basal activity of EGFR tyrosine kinase induced downstream prosurvival signaling through ERK/AKT/STAT3 phosphorylation. Collectively, we propose that panitumumab interacts with FTD by targeting EGFR-mediated adaptive responses, thereby exerting anticancer effects when used in combination with TAS-102. These preclinical findings provide a compelling rationale for evaluating the combination of anti-EGFR antibodies with TAS-102 against metastatic colorectal cancer.

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.