A randomized phase IIIB trial of chemotherapy, bevacizumab, and panitumumab compared with chemotherapy and bevacizumab alone for metastatic colorectal cancer

Prognostic value of liver metastases in colorectal cancer treated by systemic therapy: An ARCAD pooled analysis

BACKGROUND

The liver is the most frequent site of metastases in colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to assess the response rate and survival outcomes in metastatic CRC patients with non-liver metastases (NLM) compared to those with liver metastases (LM) across different lines of treatment.

METHODS

A total of 17,924 mCRC patients included in 26 trials from the ARCAD CRC database were analyzed. The analysis was conducted based on the presence or absence of LM across different treatment groups: chemotherapy (CT) alone, CT + anti-VEGF, CT + anti-EGFR in KRAS wild-type tumors, within the first-line (1 L) and second-line (2 L), and patients enrolled in third-line (≥3 L) trials treated with trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib or placebo. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

Out of the 17,924 patients, 14,066 had LM (30.6 % with only liver involvement and 69.4 % with liver and other metastatic sites), while 3858 patients had NLM. In the CT alone and CT + anti-VEGF subgroups, NLM patients showed better OS and PFS in the 1 L and 2 L settings. However, in the CT + anti-EGFR 1 L and 2 L subgroups, there was no significant difference in OS and PFS between NLM and LM patients. In the ≥ 3 L subgroups, better OS and PFS were observed in NLM patients. ORRs were higher in LM patients than in NLM patients across all cohorts treated in the 1 L and only in the anti-EGFR cohort in the 2 L.

CONCLUSION

LM is a poor prognostic factor for mCRC increasing from 1 L to ≥ 3 L except for patients in 1 L and 2 L receiving CT+anti-EGFR. These data justify using LM as a stratification factor in future trials for patients with unresectable mCRC.

Immunotherapy-induced colitis in metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Colorectal cancer (CRC) presents significant mortality risks, underscoring the urgency of timely diagnosis and intervention. Advanced stages of CRC are managed through chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery. Immunotherapy, while effective in bolstering the immune system against cancer cells, often carries toxic side effects, including colitis. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of colitis in patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) undergoing various immunotherapy treatments. Through a systematic search of Google Scholar and PubMed databases from inception until November 2023, nine relevant studies were identified. Subgroup analyses revealed a higher incidence of colitis, particularly in patients treated with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated molecule-4 (anti-CTLA-4) and combination therapies compared to monotherapy with programmed cell death receptor-1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death ligand receptor-1 (PDL-1) inhibitors. Notably, naive-treated metastatic CRC patients exhibited elevated colitis incidences compared to those previously treated. In conclusion, anti-CTLA-4 and combination therapies, such as nivolumab plus ipilimumab, were associated with increased colitis occurrences in metastatic CRC patients, highlighting the need for vigilant monitoring and management strategies, especially in immunotherapy-naive individuals.

Perioperative Chemotherapy Including Bevacizumab in Potentially Curable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Long-Term Follow-Up of the ASSO-LM1 Trial

In 2007, the ASSO-LM1 trial, a multicenter prospective study, was initiated to investigate the resectability (R0) rate following preoperative combination therapy with XELOX and bevacizumab in patients with potentially resectable colorectal liver metastases. Six cycles of systemic therapy were administered preoperatively, although the sixth cycle did not include bevacizumab, resulting in 5 weeks between the last bevacizumab dose and surgery. Treatment with bevacizumab plus XELOX was restarted for another six cycles postoperatively. In total, 43 patients were enrolled in the ASSO-LM1 trial. Eight patients were ineligible for resection due to protocol violation and progression in two patients. The resectability of operated patients was 97% with 34 R0 resections and one R1 resection. Postoperative morbidity occurred in 22% of patients, of which three operative revisions were related to the primary tumor resection. Efficacy results for response in 38 eligible patients confirmed an ORR of 66%, 31% SD and 3% PD according to RECIST. Preoperative grade 3/4 adverse events were 17% diarrhea, 5% HFS and 5% thromboembolic events. Overall survival significantly differed depending upon the fulfillment of adjuvant treatment in curative resected patients (59.1 mo vs. 30.8 mo). In conclusion, the ASSO-LM1 trial is a hypothesis-generating study confirming the prognostic benefits of perioperative therapy with XELOX and bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer confined to the liver.

Efficacy and quality of life for FOLFOX/bevacizumab +/- irinotecan in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer-final results of the AIO CHARTA trial

BACKGROUND

FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab has demonstrated benefits for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. However, challenges arise in its clinical implementation due to expected side effects and a lack of stratification criteria.

METHODS

The AIO "CHARTA" trial randomised mCRC patients into clinical Group 1 (potentially resectable), 2 (unresectable/risk of rapid progression), or 3 (asymptomatic). They received FOLFOX/bevacizumab +/- irinotecan. The primary endpoint was the 9-month progression-free survival rate (PFSR@9). Secondary endpoints included efficacy in stratified groups, QoL, PFS, OS, ORR, secondary resection rate, and toxicity.

RESULTS

The addition of irinotecan to FOLFOX/bevacizumab increased PFSR@9 from 56 to 67%, meeting the primary endpoint. The objective response rate was 61% vs. 69% (P = 0.21) and median PFS was 10.3 vs. 12 months (HR 0.83; P = 0.17). The PFS was (11.4 vs. 12.9 months; HR 0.83; P = 0.46) in potentially resectable patients, with a secondary resection rate of 37% vs. 51%. Moreover, Group 3 (asymptomatic) patients had a PFS of 11.1 vs. 16.1 months (HR 0.6; P = 0.14). The addition of irinotecan did not diminish QoL.

CONCLUSION

The CHARTA trial, along with other studies, confirms the efficacy and tolerability of FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab as a first-line treatment for mCRC. Importantly, clinical stratification may lead to its implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered as NCT01321957.

Cetuximab as a Key Partner in Personalized Targeted Therapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Cetuximab, a chimeric IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), has revolutionized personalized treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. This review highlights the mechanism of action, characteristics, and optimal indications for cetuximab in mCRC. Cetuximab has emerged as a pivotal partner for novel therapies in specific molecular subgroups, including BRAF V600E, KRAS G12C, and HER2-altered mCRC. Combining cetuximab with immunotherapy and other targeted agents further expands the therapeutic landscape, offering renewed hope for mCRC patients who face the development of resistance to conventional therapies. Ongoing clinical trials have continued to uncover innovative cetuximab-based treatment strategies, promising a brighter future for mCRC patients. This review provides a comprehensive overview of cetuximab's role and its evolving importance in personalized targeted therapy of mCRC patients, offering valuable insights into the evolving landscape of colorectal cancer treatment.

Selecting Optimal First-Line Treatment for Microsatellite Stable and Non-Mutated RAS/BRAF Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Standard frontline treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) is cytotoxic chemotherapy plus a biologic agent such as an anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody (cetuximab or panitumumab) or anti-VEGF antibody (bevacizumab). Predictive biomarkers include mismatch repair (MMR) status, and RAS and BRAF mutation status; and important factors in treatment selection include primary tumor location, intent of therapy, and potential toxicity, as well as patient age, comorbidities, and patient preference. To date, single-, double-, or triple-agent cytotoxic chemotherapy all have important roles in appropriately selected patients, with the addition of anti-VEGF or anti-EGFR antibody therapy based on the relevant predictive biomarker. Data indicate that patients with proficient MMR, RAS/BRAF wt mCRC are candidates for an anti-EGFR antibody plus doublet chemotherapy if they have a left-sided primary tumor, or for anti-VEGF (bevacizumab) plus doublet or triplet chemotherapy if they have a right-sided primary tumor. Future studies may provide more predictive biomarkers to further personalize therapy for this heterogeneous disease.

Oncologic relevance of genetic alterations in sporadic synchronous and solitary colorectal cancer: a retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Oncologic impact of genetic alteration across synchronous colorectal cancer (CRC) still remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the oncologic relevance according to genetic alteration between synchronous and solitary CRC with performing systematic review.

METHODS

Multicenter retrospective analysis was performed for CRC patients with curative resection. Genetic profiling was consisted of microsatellite instability (MSI) testing, RAS (K-ras, and N-ras), and BRAF (v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1) V600E mutation. Multivariate analyses were conducted using logistic regression for synchronicity, and Cox proportional hazard model with stage-adjusting for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

It was identified synchronous (n = 36) and solitary (n = 579) CRC with similar base line characteristics. RAS mutation was associated to synchronous CRC with no relations of MSI and BRAF. During median follow up of 77.8 month, Kaplan-meier curves showed significant differences according to MSI-high for OS, and in RAS, and BRAF mutation for DFS, respectively. In multivariable analyses, RAS and BRAF mutation were independent factors (RAS, HR = 1.808, 95% CI = 1.18-2.77, p = 0.007; BRAF, HR = 2.417, 95% CI = 1.32-4.41, p = 0.004). Old age was independent factor for OS (HR = 3.626, 95% CI = 1.09-12.00, p = 0.035).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that oncologic outcomes might differ according to mutation burden characterized by RAS, BRAF, and MSI between synchronous CRC and solitary CRC. In addition, our systematic review highlighted a lack of data and much heterogeneity in genetic characteristics and survival outcomes of synchronous CRC relative to that of solitary CRC.

Molecular and genetic targets within metastatic colorectal cancer and associated novel treatment advancements

Colorectal cancer results in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of patients worldwide each year, with incidence expected to rise over the next two decades. In the metastatic setting, cytotoxic therapy options remain limited, which is reflected in the meager improvement of patient survival rates. Therefore, focus has turned to the identification of the mutational composition inherent to colorectal cancers and development of therapeutic targeted agents. Herein, we review the most up to date systemic treatment strategies for metastatic colorectal cancer based on the actionable molecular alterations and genetic profiles of colorectal malignancies.

Long-term Survival Update and Extended RAS Mutational Analysis of the CAIRO2 Trial: Addition of Cetuximab to CAPOX/Bevacizumab in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Here we present updated survival of the CAIRO2 trial and assessed whether the addition of anti-EGFR to anti-VEGF therapy could still be an effective treatment option for patients with extended RAS/BRAF wildtype and left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective updated survival and extended RAS and BRAF V600E mutational analysis were performed in the CAIRO2 trial, a multicenter, randomized phase III trial on the effect of adding cetuximab to a combination of capecitabine, oxaliplatin (CAPOX), and bevacizumab in mCRC.

RESULTS

Updated survival analysis confirmed that the addition of cetuximab did not provide a benefit on either progression free (PFS) or overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. With the extended mutational analyses 31 KRAS, 31 NRAS and 12 BRAF V600E additional mutations were found. No benefit of the addition of cetuximab was observed within the extended wildtype group, even when selecting only left-sided tumors (PFS HR 0.96, p = 0.7775). However, compared to the original trial an increase of 6.5 months was seen for patients with both extended wildtype and left-sided tumors (median OS 28.6 months).

CONCLUSION

Adding cetuximab to CAPOX and bevacizumab does not provide clinical benefit in patients with mCRC, even in the extended wildtype group with left-sided tumors. However, in the extended wildtype group we did observe clinically relevant higher survival compared to the initial trial report, indicating that it is important to analyze a broader panel of RAS and BRAF variants using more recent sequencing techniques when assessing survival benefit after anti-EGFR therapy.

SNRMPACDC: computational model focused on Siamese network and random matrix projection for anticancer synergistic drug combination prediction

Synergistic drug combinations can improve the therapeutic effect and reduce the drug dosage to avoid toxicity. In previous years, an in vitro approach was utilized to screen synergistic drug combinations. However, the in vitro method is time-consuming and expensive. With the rapid growth of high-throughput data, computational methods are becoming efficient tools to predict potential synergistic drug combinations. Considering the limitations of the previous computational methods, we developed a new model named Siamese Network and Random Matrix Projection for AntiCancer Drug Combination prediction (SNRMPACDC). Firstly, the Siamese convolutional network and random matrix projection were used to process the features of the two drugs into drug combination features. Then, the features of the cancer cell line were processed through the convolutional network. Finally, the processed features were integrated and input into the multi-layer perceptron network to get the predicted score. Compared with the traditional method of splicing drug features into drug combination features, SNRMPACDC improved the interpretability of drug combination features to a certain extent. In addition, the introduction of convolutional networks can better extract the potential information in the features. SNRMPACDC achieved the root mean-squared error of 15.01 and the Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.75 in 5-fold cross-validation of regression prediction for response data. In addition, SNRMPACDC achieved the AUC of 0.91 ± 0.03 and the AUPR of 0.62 ± 0.05 in 5-fold cross-validation of classification prediction of synergistic or not. These results are almost better than all the previous models. SNRMPACDC would be an effective approach to infer potential anticancer synergistic drug combinations.

A Randomized Phase III Study of Anlotinib Versus Bevacizumab in Combination With CAPEOX as First-Line Therapy for RAS/BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Clinical Trial Protocol

Background: Chemotherapy combined with antivascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies is the most promising approach to prolong survival and improve the quality of life of patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Anlotinib is an oral antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets VEGF receptors 1/2/3, fibroblast growth factor receptors 1-4, and platelet-derived growth factor receptors a/β. Since anlotinib combined with oxaliplatin and capecitabine (CAPEOX) as a first-line treatment was previously shown to be effective and safe for patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type (WT) mCRC, we designed this randomized, open-label, parallel-group, non-inferiority, phase III study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anlotinib plus CAPEOX versus bevacizumab plus CAPEOX in patients with RAS/BRAF WT mCRC. Methods/design: The primary inclusion criteria are Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1, confirmed RAS/BRAF WT colorectal adenocarcinoma, and unresectable metastases assessed by a multidisciplinary team. The main exclusion criteria are as follows: high microsatellite instability or deficient mismatch repair status, resectable or potentially resectable metastases, and previous systemic therapy for mCRC. A total of 698 patients will be randomized into the anlotinib and bevacizumab groups in a 1:1 ratio. Patients will receive 4 to 8 cycles of induction therapy (CAPEOX plus anlotinib or bevacizumab), followed by maintenance treatment (capecitabine plus anlotinib or bevacizumab) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent review committee is the primary endpoint, whereas investigator-assessed PFS, overall survival, objective response rate, disease control rate, duration of response, resection rate of liver metastases, quality of life, and safety are the secondary endpoints. Enrollment commenced in May 2021. Discussion: A prospective, randomized, phase III trial will provide a meaningful comparison of the efficacy and safety of anlotinib plus CAPEOX with standard treatment for patients with unresectable RAS/BRAF WT mCRC.

Phase IIIb study of the bevacizumab biosimilar candidate BI 695502 plus mFOLFOX6 in metastatic colorectal cancer

Aim: This study assessed the safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of the bevacizumab biosimilar candidate BI 695502 plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Materials & methods: Patients with untreated mCRC received BI 695502 and chemotherapy (oxaliplatin, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil). Primary end point: proportion of patients with prespecified adverse events (AEs). Results: Of 123 patients enrolled and treated, 58.5% experienced prespecified AEs. Median progression-free survival was 10.5 months, median overall survival was 19.4 months, and objective response rate was 61.0%. There were no antidrug antibody or neutralizing antidrug antibody-positive samples post-baseline. Trough BI 695502 plasma concentrations increased until cycle 9 and stabilized thereafter. Conclusion: BI 695502 has an acceptable safety and efficacy profile in the treatment of mCRC.

Trial Registration Number: NCT02776683 ( ClinicalTrials.gov ), 2015-003718-25 (EudraCT, European Clinical Trials Database https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?query=2015-003718-25 )

Study name: Study 1302.3

The Validity of Surrogate Endpoints in Sub Groups of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Defined by Treatment Class and KRAS Status

Background and Aim: Findings from the literature suggest that the validity of surrogate endpoints in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) may depend on a treatments' mechanism of action. We explore this and the impact of Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) status on surrogacy patterns in mCRC. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for pharmacological therapies in mCRC. Bayesian meta-analytic methods for surrogate endpoint evaluation were used to evaluate surrogate relationships across all RCTs, by KRAS status and treatment class. Surrogate endpoints explored were progression free survival (PFS) as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS), and tumour response (TR) as a surrogate for PFS and OS. Results: 66 RCTs were identified from the systematic review. PFS showed a strong surrogate relationship with OS across all data and in subgroups by KRAS status. The relationship appeared stronger within individual treatment classes compared to the overall analysis. The TR-PFS and TR-OS relationships were found to be weak overall but stronger within the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor + Chemotherapy (EGFR + Chemo) treatment class; both overall and in the wild type (WT) patients for TR-PFS, but not in patients with the mutant (MT) KRAS status where data were limited. Conclusions: PFS appeared to be a good surrogate endpoint for OS. TR showed a moderate surrogate relationship with PFS and OS for the EGFR + Chemo treatment class. There was some evidence of impact of the mechanism of action on the strength of the surrogacy patterns in mCRC, but little evidence of the impact of KRAS status on the validity of surrogate endpoints.

Current and emerging anti-angiogenic therapies in gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary cancers

Gastrointestinal tumours are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms that arise in the gastrointestinal tract and hepatobiliary system. Their incidence is rising globally and they currently represent the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Anti-angiogenic agents have been incorporated into the treatment armamentarium of most of these malignancies and have improved survival outcomes, most notably in colorectal cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma. New treatment combinations with immunotherapies and other agents have led to unprecedented benefits and are revolutionising patient care. In this review, we detail the mechanisms of action of anti-angiogenic agents and the preclinical rationale underlying their combinations with immunotherapies. We review the clinical evidence supporting their use across all gastrointestinal tumours, with a particular emphasis on colorectal cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma. We discuss available biomarkers of response to these therapies and their utility in routine clinical practice. Finally, we summarise ongoing clinical trials in distinct settings and highlight the preclinical rationale supporting novel combinations.

Efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown promise in microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) immunotherapy, and many clinical trials have been conducted.

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in advanced CRC.

Method

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies up to September 2021. A retrospective cross-sectional data analysis was performed and Stata 16 software was used for analyses.

Results

Sixteen studies including 1503 patients were analyzed. The objective response rate (ORR) of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 was 23% (95% CI 0.14, 0.31); the overall 1-year survival rate (OSR) was 57% (95% CI 0.42, 0.73). The ORR of MSI-H/dMMR advanced CRC was 37% (95% CI 0.25, 0.48) and that of microsatellite stable/mismatch repair proficient (MSS/pMMR) disease was 11% (95% CI 0.06, 0.16). The ORR was 42% in the BRAF mutant subgroup and 19% in the RAS mutant group. The ORR was 14% in the PD-L1 ( +) subgroup and 32% in the PD-L1(-) subgroup. The rate of adverse effects was 85% (95% CI 0.80, 0.91).

Conclusion

Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in MSI-H/dMMR advanced CRC was associated with improved survival. Anti PD-1/PD-L1 combined with antiangiogenic drugs, targeted agents, or chemotherapy might be effective in MSS mCRC. Immunotherapy was effective for the BRAF mutant and KRAS/NRAS(RAS) mutant CRC. Low expression of PD-L1 was a potential predictive marker for positive response and outcome. The high incidence of adverse events at 85% was worthy of further investigation. Further analysis with a higher number of high-quality studies is needed to verify the conclusions.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12876-022-02511-7.

Exploring immunotherapy in colorectal cancer

Chemotherapy combined with or without targeted therapy is the fundamental treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Due to the adverse effects of chemotherapeutic drugs and the biological characteristics of the tumor cells, it is difficult to make breakthroughs in traditional strategies. The immune checkpoint blockades (ICB) therapy has made significant progress in the treatment of advanced malignant tumors, and patients who benefit from this therapy may obtain a long-lasting response. Unfortunately, immunotherapy is only effective in a limited number of patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H), and segment initial responders can subsequently develop acquired resistance. From September 4, 2014, the first anti-PD-1/PD-L1 drug Pembrolizumab was approved by the FDA for the second-line treatment of advanced malignant melanoma. Subsequently, it was approved for mCRC second-line treatment in 2017. Immunotherapy has rapidly developed in the past 7 years. The in-depth research of the ICB treatment indicated that the mechanism of colorectal cancer immune-resistance has become gradually clear, and new predictive biomarkers are constantly emerging. Clinical trials examining the effect of immune checkpoints are actively carried out, in order to produce long-lasting effects for mCRC patients. This review summarizes the treatment strategies for mCRC patients, discusses the mechanism and application of ICB in mCRC treatment, outlines the potential markers of the ICB efficacy, lists the key results of the clinical trials, and collects the recent basic research results, in order to provide a theoretical basis and practical direction for immunotherapy strategies.

Plasma Protein Biomarkers in Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Receiving Chemotherapy With Bevacizumab or Cetuximab: Results from CALGB 80405 (Alliance)

PURPOSE

CALGB 80405 compared the combination of first-line chemotherapy with cetuximab or bevacizumab in the treatment of advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Although similar clinical outcomes were observed in the cetuximab-chemotherapy group and the bevacizumab-chemotherapy group, biomarkers could identify patients deriving more benefit from either biologic agent.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this exploratory analysis, the Angiome, a panel of 24 soluble protein biomarkers were measured in baseline plasma samples in CALGB 80405. Prognostic biomarkers were determined using univariate Cox proportional hazards models. Predictive biomarkers were identified using multivariable Cox regression models including interaction between biomarker level and treatment.

RESULTS

In the total population, high plasma levels of Ang-2, CD73, HGF, ICAM-1, IL6, OPN, TIMP-1, TSP-2, VCAM-1, and VEGF-R3 were identified as prognostic of worse progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). PlGF was identified as predictive of lack of PFS benefit from bevacizumab [bevacizumab HR, 1.51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.10-2.06; cetuximab HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.71-1.25; Pinteraction = 0.0298] in the combined FOLFIRI/FOLFOX regimens. High levels of VEGF-D were predictive of lack of PFS benefit from bevacizumab in patients receiving FOLFOX regimen only (FOLFOX/bevacizumab HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.19-2.42; FOLFOX/cetuximab HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.68-1.24; Pinteraction = 0.0097).

CONCLUSIONS

In this exploratory, hypothesis-generating analysis, the Angiome identified multiple prognostic biomarkers and two potential predictive biomarkers for patients with mCRC enrolled in CALGB 80405. PlGF and VEGF-D predicted lack of benefit from bevacizumab in a chemo-dependent manner. See related commentaries by Mishkin and Kohn, p. 2722 and George and Bertagnolli, p. 2725.

Estimation of a Suitable Number of Patients for Selective Safety Data Collection (ICH E19 Draft Guideline): When is the Safety Profile of a Drug Well Characterized?

PURPOSE

We propose methods to estimate a suitable number of patients for implementing selective safety data collection (SSDC) in clinical investigations based on a confidence interval of the incidence rate or risk difference using Monte Carlo simulation.

METHODS

The incidence rates and risk differences of adverse events (AEs) were based on the safety outcome measures. A suitable number of patients for implementing SSDC was estimated based on the probability that the half-width of the two-sided 95% confidence interval of incidence rate or risk difference was equal to or less than a pre-specified cut-off value (0.5-3.0%). Monte Carlo simulation was used to estimate the suitable number of patients at probabilities of 70%, 80%, and 90%. The applicability of our proposed method for estimating a suitable number of patients for SSDC implementation was confirmed based on the incidence rates or risk differences from actual clinical trial data for panitumumab.

RESULTS

We demonstrated the performance of our proposed method in estimating a suitable number of patients to implement SSDC in several situations. Furthermore, according to the safety datasets of three phase III clinical trials, the number of suitable patients for implementing SSDC using incidence rates or risk differences of common AEs with panitumumab could confirm the applicability of our proposed method.

CONCLUSION

A suitable number of patients estimated based on our proposed method may be one of the foundations for implementing SSDC, as additional data accrual may not impact the precision of the estimates of the frequency of common AEs.

The HER family as therapeutic targets in colorectal cancer

The human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER, ErbB) family has four members, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), HER2, HER3, and HER4. Although distinct in ligands and functions, all of the HER family members are receptor tyrosine kinases playing important roles in the pathogenesis of cancers. In the era of precision medicine, the HER family is one of the most important and successful cancer therapeutic targets, hallmarked by the approval of anti-EGFR therapies for the treatment of colorectal cancer and non-small cell lung cancer, and anti-HER2 therapies for the treatment of breast cancer and gastric cancer. This review briefly discusses how HER family members were discovered, their functions and roles in cancer, and most importantly, the developmental history and recent updates of therapies targeting HER family members, with colorectal cancer as a focus. We also discussed the patient selection and drug resistance to anti-EGFR therapies in the treatment of colorectal cancer.

Cetuximab and Irinotecan With or Without Bevacizumab in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: BOND-3, an ACCRU Network Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

Combination irinotecan and cetuximab is approved for irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). It is unknown if adding bevacizumab improves outcomes.

Patients and Methods

In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial, patients with irinotecan-refractory RAS-wildtype mCRC and no prior anti-EGFR therapy were randomized to cetuximab 500 mg/m², bevacizumab 5 mg/kg, and irinotecan 180 mg/m² (or previously tolerated dose) (CBI) versus cetuximab, irinotecan, and placebo (CI) every 2 weeks until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs).

Results

The study closed early after the accrual of 36 out of a planned 120 patients due to changes in funding. Nineteen patients were randomized to CBI and 17 to CI. Baseline characteristics were similar between arms. Median PFS was 9.7 versus 5.5 months for CBI and CI, respectively (1-sided log-rank P = .38; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-1.66). Median OS was 19.7 versus 10.2 months for CBI and CI (1-sided log-rank P = .02; adjusted HR = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.15-1.09). ORR was 36.8% for CBI versus 11.8% for CI (P = .13). Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 47% of patients receiving CBI versus 35% for CI (P = .46).

Conclusion

In this prematurely discontinued trial, there was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of PFS between CBI and CI. There was a statistically significant improvement in OS in favor of CBI compared with CI. Further investigation of CBI for the treatment of irinotecan-refractory mCRC is warranted.

Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02292758

Chinese consensus on prevention of colorectal neoplasia (2021, Shanghai)

Most patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) were diagnosed in advanced stage and the prognosis is poor. Therefore, early detection and prevention of CRC are very important. As with other cancers, there is also the tertiary prevention for CRC. The primary prevention is etiological prevention, which is mainly the treatment of adenoma or inflammation for preventing the development into cancer. The secondary prevention is the early diagnosis and early treatment for avoiding progressing to advanced cancer. The tertiary prevention belongs to the broad category of prevention, mainly for advanced CRC, through surgical treatment and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy for preventing tumor recurrence or metastasis. This consensus is based on the recent domestic and international consensus guidelines and the latest progress of international researches in the past five years. This consensus opinion seminar was hosted by the Chinese Society of Gastroenterology and Cancer Collaboration Group of Chinese Society of Gastroenterology, and was organized by the Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology & Shanghai Institute of Digestive Disease, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The consensus opinion contains 60 statement clauses, the standard and basis of the evidence-based medicine grade and voting grade of the statement strictly complied with the relevant international regulations and practice.

Serious Adverse Events Reporting in Phase III Randomized Clinical Trials of Colorectal Cancer Treatments: A Systematic Analysis

Objective: The occurrence, development, and prognosis of serious adverse events (SAEs) associated with anticancer drugs in clinical trials have important guiding significance for real-world clinical applications. However, to date, there have been no studies investigating SAEs reporting in randomized clinical trials of colorectal cancer treatments. This article systematically reviewed the SAEs reporting of phase III randomized clinical trials of colorectal cancer treatments and analyzed the influencing factors. Methods: We reviewed all articles about phase III randomized clinical trials of colorectal cancer treatments published in the PubMed, Embase, Medline, and New England Journal of Medicine databases from January 1, 1993, to December 31, 2018, and searched the registration information of clinical trials via the internet sites such as "clinicaltrials.gov". We analyzed the correlation between the reported proportion (RP) of SAEs in the literature and nine elements, including the clinical trial sponsor and the publication time. Chi-square tests and binary logistic regression were used to identify the factors associated with improved SAEs reports. This study was registered on PROSPERO. Results: Of 1560 articles identified, 160 were eligible, with an RP of SAEs of 25.5% (41/160). In forty-one publications reporting SAEs, only 14.6% (6/41) described the pattern of SAEs in detail. In clinical trials sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, the RP of SAEs was significantly higher than that in those sponsored by investigators (57.6 versus 20.7%, p < 0.001). From 1993 to 2018, the RP of SAEs gradually increased (none (0/6) before 2000, 17.1% (12/70) from 2000 to 2009, and 34.5% (29/84) after 2009). The average RP of SAEs published in the New England Journal of Medicine (N Engl J Med), the Lancet, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the Lancet Oncology (Lancet Oncol), and the Journal of Clinical Oncology (J Clin Oncol) was significantly higher than that published in other journals (31.9 versus 16.7%, p = 0.030). In the clinical trials referenced by clinical guidelines, the RP of SAEs was higher than that in non-referenced clinical trials (32.0 versus 15.9%, p = 0.023). Binary logistic regression analysis showed that pharmaceutical company sponsorship, new drug research, and sample size greater than 1000 were positive influencing factors for SAEs reporting. Conclusion: Although the RP of SAEs increased over time, SAEs reporting in clinical trials needs to be further improved. The performance, outcomes and prognosis of SAEs should be reported in detail to guide clinical practice in the real world.

APC and TP53 Mutations Predict Cetuximab Sensitivity across Consensus Molecular Subtypes

Simple Summary

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of cancer deaths. Cetuximab is an FDA-approved, underutilized therapeutic targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in metastatic CRC. To date, despite selection of patients with wild-type RAS, it is still difficult to identify patients who may benefit from EGFR inhibitor (e.g., cetuximab) therapy. Our aim is to molecularly classify CRC patients to better identify subpopulations sensitive to EGFR targeted therapy. APC and TP53 are two major tumor suppressor genes in CRC whose mutations contribute to tumor initiation and progression and may identify cetuximab-sensitive tumors. Recently, it has been suggested that the consensus molecular subtype (CMS) classification may be used to help identify cetuximab-sensitive patients. Here, we report an analysis of multiple CRC tumor/PDX/cell line datasets using combined APC and TP53 mutations to refine the CMS classification to better predict responses to cetuximab to improve patient outcomes.

Abstract

Recently, it was suggested that consensus molecular subtyping (CMS) may aide in predicting response to EGFR inhibitor (cetuximab) therapies. We recently identified that APC and TP53 as two tumor suppressor genes, when mutated, may enhance cetuximab sensitivity and may represent easily measured biomarkers in tumors or blood. Our study aimed to use APC and TP53 mutations (AP) to refine the CMS classification to better predict responses to cetuximab. In total, 433 CRC tumors were classified into CMS1-4 subtypes. The cetuximab sensitivity (CTX-S) signature scores of AP vs. non-AP tumors were determined across each of the CMS classes. Tumors harboring combined AP mutations were predominantly enriched in the CMS2 class, and to a lesser degree, in the CMS4 class. On the other hand, AP mutated CRCs had significantly higher CTX-S scores compared to non-AP CRCs across all CMS classes. Similar results were also obtained in independent TCGA tumor collections (n = 531) and in PDMR PDX/PDO/PDC models (n = 477). In addition, the in vitro cetuximab growth inhibition was preferentially associated with the CMS2 cell lines harboring A/P genotypes. In conclusion, the AP mutation signature represents a convenient biomarker that refines the CMS classification to identify CRC subpopulations predicted to be sensitive to EGFR targeted therapies.

Improving Biologics' Effectiveness in Clinical Oncology: From the Combination of Two Monoclonal Antibodies to Oligoclonal Antibody Mixtures

Simple Summary

The approval of the two antibody combinations trastuzumab/pertuzumab and ipilimumab/nivolumab in oncology has paved the way for novel antibody combinations or oligoclonal antibody mixtures to improve their efficacy in cancer. The underlying biological mechanisms and challenges of these strategies will be discussed using data from clinical trials listed in databases. These therapeutic combinations also lead to questions on how to optimize their formulation and delivery to induce a therapeutic polyclonal response in patients with cancer.

Abstract

Monoclonal antibodies have revolutionized the treatment of many diseases, but their clinical efficacy remains limited in some other cases. Pre-clinical and clinical trials have shown that combinations of antibodies that bind to the same target (homo-combinations) or to different targets (hetero-combinations) to mimic the polyclonal humoral immune response improve their therapeutic effects in cancer. The approval of the trastuzumab/pertuzumab combination for breast cancer and then of the ipilimumab/nivolumab combination for melanoma opened the way to novel antibody combinations or oligoclonal antibody mixtures as more effective biologics for cancer management. We found more than 300 phase II/III clinical trials on antibody combinations, with/without chemotherapy, radiotherapy, small molecules or vaccines, in the ClinicalTrials.gov database. Such combinations enhance the biological responses and bypass the resistance mechanisms observed with antibody monotherapy. Usually, such antibody combinations are administered sequentially as separate formulations. Combined formulations have also been developed in which separately produced antibodies are mixed before administration or are produced simultaneously in a single cell line or a single batch of different cell lines as a polyclonal master cell bank. The regulation, toxicity and injection sequence of these oligoclonal antibody mixtures still need to be addressed in order to optimize their delivery and their therapeutic effects.

The Budget Impact of Monoclonal Antibodies Used to Treat Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in Minas Gerais, Brazil

INTRODUCTION

Biological medicines have increased the cost of cancer treatments, which also raises concerns about sustainability. In Brazil, three monoclonal antibodies (mAbs)-bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab-are indicated for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) but not currently funded by the Unified Health System (SUS). However, successful litigation has led to funding in some cases.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate the budgetary impact of including the mAbs bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab in standard chemotherapy for the treatment of mCRC within the SUS of Minas Gerais (MG), Brazil.

METHOD

A budget impact analysis of incorporating mAbs as first-line treatment of mCRC in MG was explored. The perspective taken was that of the Brazilian SUS, and a 5-year time horizon was applied. Data were collected from lawsuits undertaken between January 2009 and December 2016, and the model was populated with data from national databases and published sources. Costs are expressed in $US.

RESULTS

In total, 351 lawsuits resulted in funding for first-line treatment with mAbs for mCRC. The three alternative scenarios analyzed resulted in cost increases of 348-395% compared with the reference scenario. The use of panitumumab had a budgetary impact of $US103,360,980 compared with the reference scenario over a 5-year time horizon, and bevacizumab and cetuximab had budgetary impacts of $US111,334,890 and 113,772,870, respectively. The use of the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mAbs (cetuximab and panitumumab) is restricted to the approximately 41% of patients with KRAS mutations, so the best cost alternative for incorporation would be the combination of panitumumab and bevacizumab, with a cost of approximately $US106 million.

CONCLUSION

These results highlight the appreciable costs for incorporating bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab into the SUS. Appreciable discounts are likely to be necessary before incorporation of these mAbs is approved.

Impact of geography on prognostic outcomes of 21,509 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer enrolled in clinical trials: an ARCAD database analysis

BACKGROUND

Benchmarking international cancer survival differences is necessary to evaluate and improve healthcare systems. Our aim was to assess the potential regional differences in outcomes among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) participating in international randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

DESIGN

Countries were grouped into 11 regions according to the World Health Organization and the EUROCARE model. Meta-analyses based on individual patient data were used to synthesize data across studies and regions and to conduct comparisons for outcomes in a two-stage random-effects model after adjusting for age, sex, performance status, and time period. We used mCRC patients enrolled in the first-line RCTs from the ARCAD database, which provided enrolling country information. There were 21,509 patients in 27 RCTs included across the 11 regions.

RESULTS

Main outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Compared with other regions, patients from the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland were proportionaly over-represented, older, with higher performance status, more frequently male, and more commonly not treated with biological therapies. Cohorts from central Europe and the United States (USA) had significantly longer OS compared with those from UK and Ireland (p = 0.0034 and p < 0.001, respectively), with median difference of 3-4 months. The survival deficits in the UK and Ireland cohorts were, at most, 15% at 1 year. No evidence of a regional disparity was observed for PFS. Among those treated without biological therapies, patients from the UK and Ireland had shorter OS than central Europe patients (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant international disparities in the OS of cohorts of mCRC patients enrolled in RCTs were found. Survival of mCRC patients included in RCTs was consistently lower in the UK and Ireland regions than in central Europe, southern Europe, and the USA, potentially attributed to greater overall population representation, delayed diagnosis, and reduced availability of therapies.

Interventions and Outcomes for Neoadjuvant Treatment of T4 Colon Cancer: A Scoping Review

While adjuvant treatment of colon cancers that penetrate the serosa (T4) have been well-established, neoadjuvant strategies have yet to be formally evaluated. Our objective was to perform a scoping review of eligibility criteria, treatment regimens, and primary outcomes for neoadjuvant approaches to T4 colon cancer. A librarian-led, systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL up to 11 February 2020 was performed. Primary research evaluating neoadjuvant treatment in T4 colon cancer were included. Screening and data abstraction were performed in duplicate; analyses were descriptive or thematic. A total of twenty studies were included, most of which were single-arm, single-center, and retrospective. The primary objectives of the literature to date has been to evaluate treatment feasibility, tumor response, disease-free survival, and overall survival in healthy patients. Conventional XELOX and FOLFOX chemotherapy were the most commonly administered interventions. Rationale for selecting a specific regimen and for treatment eligibility criteria were poorly documented across studies. The current literature on neoadjuvant strategies for T4 colon cancer is overrepresented by single-center, retrospective studies that evaluate treatment feasibility and efficacy in healthy patients. Future studies should prioritize evaluating clear selection criteria and rationale for specific neoadjuvant strategies. Validation of outcomes in multi-center, randomized trials for XELOX and FOLFOX have the most to contribute to the growing evidence for this poorly managed disease.

Combination of Anti-EGFR and Anti-VEGF Drugs for the Treatment of Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Case Report and Literature Review

The standard third-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) includes the small-molecule anti-vascular drugs (Regofenib and Fruquintinib) and the chemotherapy drug trifluridine and tipiracil hydrochloride (TAS-102). There is no standard treatment for mCRC if the third-line treatment failed. Therefore, it is a pressing need to develop new therapeutic approaches to improve the survival of patients who developed drug resistance to the third-line treatment. In this study, we report a case of mCRC with RAS/BRAF wild-type, who was successfully treated using cetuximab in combination with fruquintinib after resistance to chemotherapy, bevacizumab, cetuximab and regorafenib. This patient responded to this combination regimen. Then, we discuss the mechanisms of action of this combination. Furthermore, we introduce the clinical trials on the combination regimens of anti-EGFR with anti-vascular monoclonal antibodies. Finally, we discuss the clinical explorations of using combination of anti-EGFR with small-molecule anti-VEGF drugs and their potential benefits. The clinical effects of small-molecule anti-vascular drugs in combination with anti-EGFR in the treatment of CRC warrant further explored.

Threshold Change in CEA as a Predictor of Non-Progression to First-Line Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients With Elevated CEA

BACKGROUND

Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels are used in conjunction with imaging to monitor response to systemic therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We sought to identify a threshold for CEA change from baseline to predict progressive disease (PD) in mCRC patients receiving first-line therapy.

METHODS

Patients from trials collected in the ARCAD database were included if baseline CEA was at least 10 ng/mL and repeat CEA was available within 14 days of first restaging scan. Optimal cutoffs for CEA change were identified by receiver operating characteristic analysis. Prediction performance of cutoffs was evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value. Analyses were conducted by treatment class: chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody, and chemotherapy with anti-EGFR antibody.

RESULTS

A total of 2643 mCRC patients treated with systemic therapy were included. Median percent change of CEA from baseline to first restaging for patients with complete response, partial response, or stable disease (non-PD) and PD was -53.1% and +23.6% for chemotherapy alone (n = 957) and -71.7% and -45.3% for chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody (n = 1355). The optimal area under the curve cutoff for differentiating PD from non-PD on first restaging was -7.5% for chemotherapy alone and -62.0% for chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody; chemotherapy alone, adjusted odds ratio = 6.51 (95% CI = 3.31 to 12.83, P < .001), chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody, adjusted odds ratio = 3.45 (95% CI = 1.93 to 6.18, P < .001). A 99% negative predictive value clinical cutoff for prediction of non-PD would avoid CT scan at first restaging in 21.0% of chemotherapy alone and 16.2% of chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody-treated patients. Among patients with stable disease on first restaging, those with decreased CEA from baseline had statistically significantly improved progression-free and overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Change in CEA from baseline to first restaging can accurately predict non-progression and correlates with long-term outcomes in patients receiving systemic chemotherapy.

Predictive and prognostic biomarkers with therapeutic targets in colorectal cancer: A 2021 update on current development, evidence, and recommendation

Although therapeutically actionable molecular alterations are widely distributed across many cancer types, only a handful of them show evidence of clinical utility and are recommended for routine clinical practice in the management of cancers of colon and rectum (CRC). This 2021 update aims to provide a succinct summary on the use of prognostic and/or predictive biomarkers (expanded RAS, BRAF, microsatellite-high [MSI-H] or deficient mismatch repair [dMMR], neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase [NTRK] fusion genes, and human epidermal growth factor receptor type II [HER2] gene amplification) associated with CRC. Therapeutic implications of each relevant predictive or prognostic biomarker for patients with CRC are described, along with discussion on new developments on (1) biomarker-driven therapies such as testing of BRAF, MLH1 promoter methylation and MMR germline genes in differentiating sporadic CRC or hereditary conditions such as Lynch syndrome; (2) first-line use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic CRC; (3) risk stratification and therapy selection based on primary tumor location (left-sided vs. right-sided colon cancer); (3) atypical BRAF mutations; (4) use of EGFR directed therapy in the perioperative oligometastatic disease setting; (5) re-challenge of EGFR directed therapy and (6) personalizing therapy of fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan based on new evidence in pharmacogenomic testing. Data are collected and analyzed from available systematic reviews and meta-analyses of treatments with known therapeutic targets in CRC, which may be associated with predictive and/or prognostic biomarkers. Discussions are presented in an application-based format, with goal to empower pharmacists or other clinicians to gain awareness and understanding in biomarker-driven cancer therapy issues.

Colon Cancer, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colon Cancer focuses on systemic therapy options for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), because important updates have recently been made to this section. These updates include recommendations for first-line use of checkpoint inhibitors for mCRC, that is deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high, recommendations related to the use of biosimilars, and expanded recommendations for biomarker testing. The systemic therapy recommendations now include targeted therapy options for patients with mCRC that is HER2-amplified, or BRAF V600E mutation-positive. Treatment and management of nonmetastatic or resectable/ablatable metastatic disease are discussed in the complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer available at NCCN.org. Additional topics covered in the complete version include risk assessment, staging, pathology, posttreatment surveillance, and survivorship.

Angiogenesis Inhibitors for Colorectal Cancer. A Review of the Clinical Data

Since the late 1990s, therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has changed considerably, and the combination of doublet or triplet chemotherapy and a targeted agent are now routinely used. The targeting of angiogenesis, the development of new blood vessels, represents a key element in the overall treatment strategy. Since the approval in 2004 of the first anti-angiogenetic drug, multiple agents have been approved and others are currently under investigation. We present an overview of the recent literature on approved systemic treatment of mCRC, with a focus on anti-angiogenic drugs, and current treatment approaches, and elaborate on the future role of angiogenesis in colorectal cancer as seen from a clinical perspective. The treatment of mCRC, in general, has changed from "one strategy fits all" to a more personalized approach. This is, however, not entirely the case for anti-angiogenetic treatments, partly due to a lack of validated biomarkers. The anti-angiogenetic standard treatment at the present primarily includes monoclonal antibodies. The therapeutic field of angiogenesis, however, has received increased interest after the introduction of newer combinations. These approaches will likely change the current treatment strategy, once again, to the overall benefit of patients.

Mechanisms of Pharmaceutical Therapy and Drug Resistance in Esophageal Cancer

Pharmaceutical therapies are essential for esophageal cancer (EC). For the advanced EC, the neoadjuvant therapy regimen, including chemotherapy plus radiotherapy and/or immunotherapy, is effective to achieve clinical benefit, even pathological complete response. For the unresectable, recurrent, and metastatic EC, the pharmaceutical therapy is the limited effective regimen to alleviate the disease and prolong the progression-free survival and overall survival. In this review, we focus on the pharmaceutical applications in EC treatment including cytotoxic agents, molecular targeted antibodies, and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The chemotherapy regimen is based on cytotoxic agents such as platinum-based complexes, fluorinated pyrimidines and taxenes. Although the cytotoxic agents have been developed in past decades, the standard chemotherapy regimen is still the cisplatin and 5-FU or paclitaxel because the derived drugs have no significant advantages of overcoming the shortcomings of side effects and drug resistance. The targeted molecular therapy is an essential supplement for chemotherapy; however, there are only a few targeted therapies available in clinical practice. Trastuzumab and ramucirumab are the only two molecular therapy drugs which are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat advanced and/or metastatic EC. Although the targeted therapy usually achieves effective benefits in the early stage therapy of EC, the patients will always develop drug resistance during treatment. ICIs have had a significant impact on routine clinical practice in cancer treatment. The anti-programmed cell death-1 monoclonal antibodies pembrolizumab and nivolumab, as the ICIs, are recommended for advanced EC by several clinical trials. However, the significant issues of pharmaceutical treatment are still the dose-limiting side effects and primary or secondary drug resistance. These defects of pharmaceutical therapy restrain the clinical application and diminish the effectiveness of treatment.

Trial Watch: Tumor-targeting monoclonal antibodies in cancer therapy

In 1997, for the first time in history, a monoclonal antibody (mAb), i.e., the chimeric anti-CD20 molecule rituximab, was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in cancer patients. Since then, the panel of mAbs that are approved by international regulatory agencies for the treatment of hematopoietic and solid malignancies has not stopped to expand, nowadays encompassing a stunning amount of 15 distinct molecules. This therapeutic armamentarium includes mAbs that target tumor-associated antigens, as well as molecules that interfere with tumor-stroma interactions or exert direct immunostimulatory effects. These three classes of mAbs exert antineoplastic activity via distinct mechanisms, which may or may not involve immune effectors other than the mAbs themselves. In previous issues of OncoImmunology, we provided a brief scientific background to the use of mAbs, all types confounded, in cancer therapy, and discussed the results of recent clinical trials investigating the safety and efficacy of this approach. Here, we focus on mAbs that primarily target malignant cells or their interactions with stromal components, as opposed to mAbs that mediate antineoplastic effects by activating the immune system. In particular, we discuss relevant clinical findings that have been published during the last 13 months as well as clinical trials that have been launched in the same period to investigate the therapeutic profile of hitherto investigational tumor-targeting mAbs.

Molecular Genetics and the Role of Molecularly Targeted Agents in Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity in the world. It is the third most common malignancy and fourth leading cancer-related deaths worldwide. In the USA, CRC is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in both men and women. It is caused by genetic components and potential environmental factors such as consumption of processed meat, red meat, animal fats, low fiber intake, and obesity. Despite the utilization of effective screening modalities and guidelines in the USA, a significant number of patients are diagnosed with advanced, metastatic disease at the time of presentation to the physician. Recent advances in the understanding of molecular medicine with subsequent development and incorporation of newer therapeutic agents into current chemotherapeutic regimens have improved outcomes; however, the management of metastatic CRC remains challenging, particularly for the treating oncologists.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search on CRC mainly related to molecular genetics, targeted biologic agents, and published clinical trials. We also searched and reviewed ongoing clinical trials from Clinicaltrials.gov.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Alterations in several oncogenes are associated with CRC, among those RAS, BRAF, and HER2 are of current clinical importance. Chemotherapy drugs, along with vascular endothelial growth factor or epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies, are proven to be efficient with manageable toxicity profiles in metastatic CRC. Additional researches on Her-2-directed therapy, BRAF-targeted agents, immunotherapeutic, and newer molecularly targeted agents are needed for further improvement in outcome.

An appraisal of emerging second line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Despite a significant improvement in overall survival over the last 15 years, colorectal cancer remains a major public health problem worldwide. Much effort has been made to develop an optimal choice of first-line treatments, but after progression the therapeutic possibilities and the criteria for choice are different.

AREAS COVERED

The purpose of this literature review is to discuss the different possibilities of second-line treatment and to specify the criteria for choice. Biological subgroups requiring specific therapeutic decisions will be described. We conducted a systematic review for randomized controlled trials published since 1995. A non-exhaustive review of published phase II studies, cohort studies, and international guidelines was also given and future leads were discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Some choices of second-line treatments are a direct result of the option chosen in the first line. Others are necessary because of the biological specificity of the tumor: immunotherapy for tumors with microsatellite instability, or the combination encorafenib cetuximab for mutated BRAF-V600E tumors. In many other circumstances, there are several options that require extensive involvement of multidisciplinary boards and the patient in the final therapeutic decision.

Trends in Phase II Trials for Cancer Therapies

Background: Drug combinations are the standard of care in cancer treatment. Identifying effective cancer drug combinations has become more challenging because of the increasing number of drugs. However, a substantial number of cancer drugs stumble at Phase III clinical trials despite exhibiting favourable efficacy in the earlier Phase. Methods: We analysed recent Phase II cancer trials comprising 2165 response rates to uncover trends in cancer therapies and used a null model of non-interacting agents to infer synergistic and antagonistic drug combinations. We compared our latest efficacy dataset with a previous dataset to assess the progress of cancer therapy. Results: Targeted therapies reach higher response rates when used in combination with cytotoxic drugs. We identify four synergistic and 10 antagonistic combinations based on the observed and expected response rates. We demonstrate that recent targeted agents have not significantly increased the response rates. Conclusions: We conclude that either we are not making progress or response rate measured by tumour shrinkage is not a reliable surrogate endpoint for the targeted agents.

Overcoming Resistance to Targeted Therapies in Gastrointestinal Cancers: Progress to Date and Progress to Come

Targeted therapies have transformed the treatment paradigm in diseases such as non-small cell lung cancer and melanoma but have shown relatively modest clinical benefit in gastrointestinal malignancies. Anti-EGFR therapy in RAS wild-type colorectal cancer, anti-HER2 therapy in HER2- amplified esophagogastric cancer, and FGFR and isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) inhibitors in FGFR2 fusion-positive and IDH1-mutant biliary tract cancers offer antitumor efficacy, but the clinical benefit and durability of response in each case are typically limited. We review targeted therapies in each of these therapeutic areas and discuss their clinical efficacy, mechanisms of primary and acquired resistance, and strategies to overcome this resistance. We discuss lessons learned that we hope will lead to an expanded role for molecularly targeted therapy options for patients with gastrointestinal cancers.

Single Cell Systems Analysis: Decision Geometry In Outliers

MOTIVATION

Anti-cancer therapeutics of the highest calibre currently focus on combinatorial targeting of specific oncoproteins and tumour suppressors. Clinical relapse depends upon intratumoral heterogeneity which serves as substrate variation during evolution of resistance to therapeutic regimens.

RESULTS

The present review advocates single cell systems biology as the optimal level of analysis for remediation of clinical relapse. Graph theory approaches to understanding decision-making in single cells may be abstracted one level further, to the geometry of decision-making in outlier cells, in order to define evolution-resistant cancer biomarkers. Systems biologists currently working with omics data are invited to consider phase portrait analysis as a mediator between graph theory and deep learning approaches. Perhaps counter-intuitively, the tangible clinical needs of cancer patients may depend upon the adoption of higher level mathematical abstractions of cancer biology.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

supplementary data available at Bioinformatics online.

Mechanisms of Immunosuppression in Colorectal Cancer

Simple Summary

More emerging studies are exploring immunotherapy for solid cancers, including colorectal cancer. Besides, checkpoint blockade immunotherapy and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) -based immune cell therapy have being examined in clinical trials for colorectal cancer patients. However, immunosuppression that leads to the blockage of normal immunosurveillance often leads to cancer development and relapse. In this study, we systematically reviewed the mechanism of immunosuppression, specifically in colorectal cancer, from different perspectives, including the natural or induced immunosuppressive cells, cell surface protein, cytokines/chemokines, transcriptional factors, metabolic alteration, phosphatase, and tissue hypoxia in the tumor microenvironment. We also discussed the progress of immunotherapies in clinical trials/studies for colorectal cancer and highlighted how different strategies for cancer therapy targeted the immunosuppression reviewed above. Our review provides some timely implications for restoring immunosurveillance to improve treatment efficacy in colorectal cancer (CRC).

Abstract

CRC is the third most diagnosed cancer in the US with the second-highest mortality rate. A multi-modality approach with surgery/chemotherapy is used in patients with early stages of colon cancer. Radiation therapy is added to the armamentarium in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. While some patients with metastatic CRC are cured, the majority remain incurable and receive palliative chemotherapy as the standard of care. Recently, immune checkpoint blockade has emerged as a promising treatment for many solid tumors, including CRC with microsatellite instability. However, it has not been effective for microsatellite stable CRC. Here, main mechanisms of immunosuppression in CRC will be discussed, aiming to provide some insights for restoring immunosurveillance to improve treatment efficacy in CRC.

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. First Line Therapy for Unresectable Disease

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a commonly diagnosed malignancy. The prognosis of patients with unresectable, metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is dismal and medical treatment is mainly palliative in nature. Although chemotherapy remains the backbone of treatment, the landscape is changing with the understanding of its heterogeneity and molecular biology. First-line therapy relies on a combination of chemotherapy and targeted therapies, according to clinical patient characteristics and tumor molecular profile. Here we review current evidence from randomized clinical trials for using chemotherapy doublets or triplets, and for the addition of bevacizumab or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agents. Novel therapies developed for small, selected populations are also discussed.

Association of Coffee Intake With Survival in Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Importance

Several compounds found in coffee possess antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and insulin-sensitizing effects, which may contribute to anticancer activity. Epidemiological studies have identified associations between increased coffee consumption and decreased recurrence and mortality of colorectal cancer. The association between coffee consumption and survival in patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer is unknown.

Objective

To evaluate the association of coffee consumption with disease progression and death in patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This prospective observational cohort study included 1171 patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer who were enrolled in Cancer and Leukemia Group B (Alliance)/SWOG 80405, a completed phase 3 clinical trial comparing the addition of cetuximab and/or bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy. Patients reported dietary intake using a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire at the time of enrollment. Data were collected from October 27, 2005, to January 18, 2018, and analyzed from May 1 to August 31, 2018.

Exposures

Consumption of total, decaffeinated, and caffeinated coffee measured in cups per day.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

Among the 1171 patients included in the analysis (694 men [59%]; median age, 59 [interquartile range, 51-67] years). The median follow-up time among living patients was 5.4 years (10th percentile, 1.3 years; IQR, 3.2-6.3 years). A total of 1092 patients (93%) had died or had disease progression. Increased consumption of coffee was associated with decreased risk of cancer progression (hazard ratio [HR] for 1-cup/d increment, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91-1.00; P = .04 for trend) and death (HR for 1-cup/d increment, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.89-0.98; P = .004 for trend). Participants who consumed 2 to 3 cups of coffee per day had a multivariable HR for OS of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.67-1.00) and for PFS of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.68-0.99), compared with those who did not drink coffee. Participants who consumed at least 4 cups of coffee per day had a multivariable HR for OS of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.46-0.87) and for PFS of 0.78 (95% CI, 0.59-1.05). Significant associations were noted for both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee.

Conclusions and Relevance

Coffee consumption may be associated with reduced risk of disease progression and death in patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer. Further research is warranted to elucidate underlying biological mechanisms.

Colorectal liver metastases: Current management and future perspectives

The liver is the commonest site of metastatic disease for patients with colorectal cancer, with at least 25% developing colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) during the course of their illness. The management of CRLM has evolved into a complex field requiring input from experienced members of a multi-disciplinary team involving radiology (cross sectional, nuclear medicine and interventional), Oncology, Liver surgery, Colorectal surgery, and Histopathology. Patient management is based on assessment of sophisticated clinical, radiological and biomarker information. Despite incomplete evidence in this very heterogeneous patient group, maximising resection of CRLM using all available techniques remains a key objective and provides the best chance of long-term survival and cure. To this end, liver resection is maximised by the use of downsizing chemotherapy, optimisation of liver remnant by portal vein embolization, associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy, and combining resection with ablation, in the context of improvements in the functional assessment of the future remnant liver. Liver resection may safely be carried out laparoscopically or open, and synchronously with, or before, colorectal surgery in selected patients. For unresectable patients, treatment options including systemic chemotherapy, targeted biological agents, intra-arterial infusion or bead delivered chemotherapy, tumour ablation, stereotactic radiotherapy, and selective internal radiotherapy contribute to improve survival and may convert initially unresectable patients to operability. Currently evolving areas include biomarker characterisation of tumours, the development of novel systemic agents targeting specific oncogenic pathways, and the potential re-emergence of radical surgical options such as liver transplantation.

Cetuximab-Mediated Protection from Hypoxia- Induced Cell Death: Implications for Therapy Sequence in Colorectal Cancer

Simple Summary

Therapeutic antibodies are an integral part of treatment regimens for metastasized colorectal cancer. In KRAS wildtype tumors both bevacizumab and cetuximab are active. While bevacizumab has previously been shown to induce tumor hypoxia, we here report that EGFR inhibition by cetuximab protects colon cancer cells from hypoxia-induced cell death. This effect appears to be responsible for the inferior efficacy of a treatment sequence of bevacizumab followed by cetuximab versus an inverse sequence that we observed in a colorectal cancer mouse model. It also offers a mechanistic explanation for effects observed in clinical trials such as underadditive or even detrimental effects when combining bevacizumab and cetuximab (CAIRO2 trial) and the superior efficacy of first line cetuximab (FIRE-3 trial) under chemotherapy backbones in colorectal cancer.

Abstract

Monoclonal antibodies like cetuximab, targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), and bevacizumab, targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), are an integral part of treatment regimens for metastasized colorectal cancer. However, inhibition of the EGFR has been shown to protect human glioma cells from cell death under hypoxic conditions. In colon carcinoma cells, the consequences of EGFR blockade in hypoxia (e.g., induced by bevacizumab) have not been evaluated yet. LIM1215 and SW948 colon carcinoma and LNT-229 glioblastoma cells were treated with cetuximab, PD153035, and erlotinib and analyzed for cell density and viability. The sequential administration of either cetuximab followed by bevacizumab (CET->BEV) or bevacizumab followed by cetuximab (BEV->CET) was investigated in a LIM1215 (KRAS wildtype) and SW948 (KRAS mutant) xenograft mouse model. In vitro, cetuximab protected from hypoxia. In the LIM1215 model, a survival benefit with cetuximab and bevacizumab monotherapy was observed, but only the sequence CET->BEV showed an additional benefit. This effect was confirmed in the SW948 model. Our observations support the hypothesis that bevacizumab modulates the tumor microenvironment (e.g., by inducing hypoxia) where cetuximab could trigger protective effects when administered later on. The sequence CET->BEV therefore seems to be superior as possible mutual adverse effects are bypassed.

Bibliometric analysis of randomized controlled trials of colorectal cancer over the last decade

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers globally. In China, its prevalence ranks fourth and fifth among females and males, respectively. Presently, treatment of rectal cancer follows a multidisciplinary comprehensive treatment approach involving surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy. With deepening theoretical and molecular research on colorectal cancer, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on colorectal cancer have made significant progress. However, many RCTs have shortfalls.

AIM

To investigate the RCTs of global colorectal cancer spanning from 2008 to 2018. To provide suggestions for conducting Chinese RCTs of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched to obtain RCTs of colorectal cancer carried out between January 1, 2008, and January 1, 2018. The bibliometric method was used for statistical analysis of the publication years, countries/regions, authors, institutions, source journals, quoted times, key words, and authors.

RESULTS

Colorectal cancer RCTs showed an upward trend between 2008 to 2018; the top 10 research institutions in the included literature were from the United States, the United Kingdom, and other countries with a high incidence of colorectal cancer. Most of the related research journals are sponsored by European and American countries. The 15 most cited studies involved international multicenter clinical research, having few participants from Chinese research institutions. Network visualization using key words showed that RCTs on colorectal cancer focus on screening, disease-free survival, drug treatment, surgical methods, clinical trials, quality of life, and prognosis. The result of the coauthorship network analysis showed that Chinese researchers are less involved in international exchanges compared to those from leading publication countries.

CONCLUSION

High-quality RCTs are increasingly favored by leading international journals. However, there is still a large gap in clinical research between China and leading countries. Researchers should implement standardized and accurate clinical trials, strengthen international multicenter cooperation, and emphasize quality control.

Effectiveness of bevacizumab in first- and second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: ITACa randomized trial

Background:

Cancer trials involving multiple treatment lines substantially increase our understanding of therapeutic strategies. However, even when the primary end-point of these studies is progression-free survival (PFS), their statistical analysis usually focuses on each line separately, or does not consider repeated events, thus missing potentially relevant information. Consequently, the evaluation of the effectiveness of treatment strategies is highly impaired.

Methods:

We evaluated the potentially different effect of bevacizumab (B) administered for the first- or second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the ITACa (Italian Trial in Advanced Colorectal Cancer) randomized trial. The ITACa trial consisted of two arms: first-line chemotherapy (CT)+B followed by second-line CT alone versus first-line CT alone followed by second-line CT+B or CT+B+cetuximab according to KRAS status. Cox models for repeated disease progression were performed, and potential selection bias was adjusted using the inverse probability of censoring weighting method. Hazard ratios (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] for PFS (primary endpoint) were reported.

Results:

The overall effect of B across the two lines resulted in a HR = 0.80 (95% CI 0.68–0.95, p = 0.008). Evaluating the differential effect of B in first- and second-line, the addition of B to first-line chemotherapy (CT) produced a 10% risk reduction (HR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.72–1.12, p = 0.340) versus CT alone; B added to second-line CT produced a 36% risk reduction (HR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.49–0.84, p = 0.0011) versus CT alone.

Conclusion:

Our results seem to suggest that B confers a PFS advantage when administered in combination with second-line chemotherapy, which could help to improve current international guidelines on optimal sequential treatment strategies.

Quality of adverse event reporting in phase III randomized controlled trials of breast and colorectal cancer: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Clinical trial reports often emphasize efficacy over harms, leading to misinterpretation of the risk-to-benefit ratio of new therapies. Clear and sufficiently detailed reporting of methods and results is especially important in the abstracts of trial reports, as readers often base their assessment of a trial on such information. In this study, we evaluated the quality of adverse event (AE) reporting and abstract quality in phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic therapies in breast and colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of RCTs, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from November 2005 to September 2018. Phase III RCTs evaluating systemic therapies in breast or colorectal cancer were included. Each article was independently reviewed by two investigators using a standardized data extraction form based on guidelines developed by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) group. Descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and multivariable linear regression were used to analyze data. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Of 166 RCTs identified, 99.4% reported harms in the manuscript body, and 59.6% reported harms in the abstract. Reporting was restricted to severe harms in 15.6% of RCTs. Statistical comparison of AE rates went unreported in 59.0% of studies. Information regarding AEs leading to dose reductions, treatment discontinuations, or study withdrawals went unreported in 59.3%, 18.7%, and 86.8% of studies, respectively. Recently published RCTs (P = .009) and those sponsored at least partially by for-profit companies (P = .003) had higher abstract quality scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast and colorectal cancer phase III RCTs inadequately report CONSORT-compliant AE data. Improved guideline adherence and abstract reporting is required to properly weigh benefits and harms of new oncologic therapies.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019140673.

Meta-analysis on the risk of fatal adverse events by bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab in 31 randomized trials including 25,000 patients with colorectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Targeted drugs including bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab have been widely used during the management of patients diagnosed with colorectal carcinoma, especially as palliative treatment. The present meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the fatal adverse events (FAEs) of targeted drugs including bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab in patients with colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Studies of prospective, randomized, and controlled feature from EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library, which reported FAEs potentially associated with bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab were adopted. Clinical characteristics and FAEs were collected from the enrolled literatures, with the quality of which been evaluated. Pooled analysis of FAEs, caused by each agent as first line, second/further line, and adjuvant treatment were performed with relative risks (RRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in software RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies including 25,939 patients were brought into the final analysis. The RR and its 95% CI of the FAEs among all the agents including bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.89-1.29; P = .50). The RRs and their 95% CIs of the FAEs as first line, second or further line, and adjuvant treatment related to bevacizumab were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.62-1.32; P = .61), 1.14 (95% CI, 0.57-2.28; P = .71), and 1.10 (95% CI, 0.67-1.79; P = .72). The RRs and their 95% CIs of the FAEs as first line, second or further line, and adjuvant treatment related to cetuximab were 1.02 (95% CI, 0.60-1.76; P = .93), 2.51 (95% CI, 0.49-12.88; P = .27), and 2.40 (95% CI, 1.00-5.77; P = .05). The RRs and their 95% CIs of the FAEs as first line, second or further line treatment related to panitumumab were 1.40 (95% CI, 0.89-2.18; P = .14) and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.43-1.09; P = .11), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis did not show any significantly increased RR of FAEs belonging to bevacizumab, cetuximab, or panitumumab, whether as first line, second/further line, or adjuvant treatment among patients with colorectal carcinoma comparing to placebo or blank treatment.

Machine learning approaches to drug response prediction: challenges and recent progress

Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide. Identifying the best treatment using computational models to personalize drug response prediction holds great promise to improve patient's chances of successful recovery. Unfortunately, the computational task of predicting drug response is very challenging, partially due to the limitations of the available data and partially due to algorithmic shortcomings. The recent advances in deep learning may open a new chapter in the search for computational drug response prediction models and ultimately result in more accurate tools for therapy response. This review provides an overview of the computational challenges and advances in drug response prediction, and focuses on comparing the machine learning techniques to be of utmost practical use for clinicians and machine learning non-experts. The incorporation of new data modalities such as single-cell profiling, along with techniques that rapidly find effective drug combinations will likely be instrumental in improving cancer care.