Evaluation of Second-line Anti-VEGF after First-line Anti-EGFR Based Therapy in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Multicenter "SLAVE" Study

Aflibercept-Based and Bevacizumab-Based Second Line Regimens in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Propensity Score Weighted-Analysis from a Multicenter Cohort

BACKGROUND

Both aflibercept and bevacizumab-based regimens are available II-line treatment options for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, no head-to-head trials established the optimal anti-angiogenic strategy for this setting.

METHODS

We launched a multicenter, retrospective, observational study to assess and compare clinical efficacy of II-line treatments for patients with mCRC. Patients with KRAS/NRAS/BRAF-wild type and KRAS/NRAS mutant tumors were also analyzed separately.

FINDINGS

348 patients were included, of whom 153 and 195 were treated with bevacizumab- and aflibercept-based regimens, respectively. Patients treated with aflibercept showed an increased risk of death (corrected [co]-HR 1.92, 95 %CI: 1.37-2.68), of disease progression/death (co-HR 1.43, 95 %CI: 1.12-1.82) and a decreased objective response rate (ORR) (21.5 % vs 34.7 %, p=0.007) in comparison to bevacizumab. Patients treated with II-line bevacizumab were more frequently treated in the third line setting after disease progression (91.1 % vs 68.5 %, p<0.0001). In the KRAS/NRAS mutant cohort, treatment with bevacizumab was associated with longer overall survival (OS) (18.0 months vs 12.5 months, p=0.0069), but similar progression free survival (PFS) (p=0.32) and ORR (p=0.57). In the KRAS/NRAS, BRAF wild type cohort, patients treated with bevacizumab achieved longer OS (20.2 months vs 10.6 months, p=0.013), PFS (8.4 months vs 3.7 months, p=0.0002), and higher ORR (48.6 % vs 15.0 %, p=0.0016), compared to those treated with aflibercept. The results were independently confirmed with inverse probability of treatment weighting and with fixed multivariable Cox-regressions.

CONCLUSION

These findings support the use of bevacizumab-based over aflibercept-based regimens as II-line treatment in mCRC, especially in KRAS/NRAS and BRAF wild type tumors.

A perspective on emerging therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer: Focusing on molecular medicine and drug resistance

The majority of cancer cases are colorectal cancer, which is also the second largest cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Metastasis is the leading cause of death for patients with colorectal cancer. Metastatic colorectal cancer incidence are on the rise due to a tiny percentage of tumors developing resistant to medicines despite advances in treatment tactics. Cutting-edge targeted medications are now the go-to option for customized and all-encompassing CRC care. Specifically, multitarget kinase inhibitors, antivascular endothelial growth factors, and epidermal growth factor receptors are widely used in clinical practice for CRC-targeted treatments. Rare targets in metastatic colorectal cancer are becoming more well-known due to developments in precision diagnostics and the extensive use of second-generation sequencing technology. These targets include the KRAS mutation, the BRAF V600E mutation, the HER2 overexpression/amplification, and the MSI-H/dMMR. Incorporating certain medications into clinical trials has significantly increased patient survival rates, opening new avenues and bringing fresh viewpoints for treating metastatic colorectal cancer. These focused therapies change how cancer is treated, giving patients new hope and better results. These markers can significantly transform and individualize therapy regimens. They could open the door to precisely customized and more effective medicines, improving patient outcomes and quality of life. The fast-growing body of knowledge regarding the molecular biology of colorectal cancer and the latest developments in gene sequencing and molecular diagnostics are directly responsible for this advancement.

Real-World Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in Spain: The RWD-ACROSS Study

The retrospective, observational RWD-ACROSS study analyzed disease characteristics, systemic treatment, and survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Spain. In total, 2002 patients were enrolled (mean age 65.3 years; 62.7% male). Overall median overall survival (OS) was 26.72 months, and was longer in patients with left-sided tumors (28.85 vs. 21.04 months (right-sided tumors); p < 0.0001) and in patients receiving first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) treatment (31.21 vs. 26.75 (anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment) and 24.45 months (chemotherapy); p = 0.002). Overall median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.72 months and was longer in patients with left-sided tumors (11.24 vs. 9.31 months (right-sided tumors); p < 0.0001), and in patients receiving either first-line anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF (12.13 and 12.00 vs. 8.98 months (chemotherapy); p < 0.001). PFS was longer with anti-VEGF treatment in patients with right-sided tumors and wild-type RAS (11.24 vs. 8.78 (anti-EGFR) and 7.83 months (chemotherapy); p = 0.025). Both anti-EGFR and anti-VEGF produced longer PFS in patients with left-sided tumors and wild-type RAS than chemotherapy alone (12.39 and 13.14 vs. 9.83 months; p = 0.011). In patients with left-sided tumors and mutant RAS, anti-VEGF produced a longer PFS than chemotherapy alone (12.36 vs. 9.34 months; p = 0.001). In Spain, wild-type RAS or left-sided mCRC tumors are predictive of longer survival times.

Current Status of Angiogenesis Inhibitors as Second-Line Treatment for Unresectable Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer is the third most common disease and the second most common cause of death around the world. The drug for second-line treatment depends on the drugs used in first-line treatment and the biomarker status. As biomarkers, the RAS gene, BRAF gene, and dMMR/MSI-H, TMB-H, and HER2 statuses have been established in clinical practice, and the corresponding molecularly targeted therapeutic agents are selected based on the biomarker status. Given the frequency of biomarkers, it is assumed that when patients move on to second-line treatment, an angiogenesis inhibitor is selected in many cases. For second-line treatment, three angiogenesis inhibitors, bevacizumab (BEV), ramucirumab (RAM), and aflibercept (AFL), are available, and one of them is combined with cytotoxic agents. These three angiogenesis inhibitors are known to inhibit angiogenesis through different mechanisms of action. Although no useful biomarkers have been established for the selection of angiogenesis inhibitors, previous biomarker studies have suggested that angiogenesis-related factors such as VEGF-A and VEGF-D might be predictors of the therapeutic efficacy of angiogenesis inhibitors. These biomarkers are measured as protein levels in plasma and are considered to be promising biomarkers. We consider that the rationale for selecting among these three angiogenesis inhibitors should be clarified to benefit patients.

Primary versus secondary antiemetic prophylaxis with NK1 receptor antagonists in patients affected by gastrointestinal malignancies and treated with a doublet or triplet combination regimen including oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan plus fluoropyrimidines: A propensity score matched analysis

Aim

The aim of the current study is to investigate the impact of primary compared to secondary chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis with NK1 receptor antagonists (NK1-RA) in patients affected by gastrointestinal malignancies and treated with oxaliplatin- and/or irinotecan-based doublet or triplet regimens.

Study design and methods

Clinical data of patients affected by gastrointestinal malignancies, treated with an oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan-based doublet or triplet regimen as neo/adjuvant or advanced-line treatment, and who received NK1-RA as primary (from the first cycle of treatment) or secondary (after the onset of CINV with a previous regimen with 5HT3-RA and dexamethasone) prophylaxis for CINV, were retrospectively collected in an observational study involving 16 Italian centers. A propensity score matching was performed by taking into account the following stratification factors: sex (male vs. female), age (< vs. ≥70 years old), overweight (body mass index, BMI < vs. ≥25), underweight (BMI < vs. ≥19), disease spread (early vs. advanced/metastatic), tumor type (esophagogastric cancer vs. the rest, hepatobiliary tumor vs. the rest, colorectal cancer vs. the rest), type of NK1-RA used as primary/secondary prophylaxis (netupitant-palonosetron vs. fosaprepitant/aprepitant), concomitant use of opioids (yes vs. no), concomitant use of antidepressant/antipsychotic drugs (yes vs. no), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status at the start of NK1-RA treatment (0 vs. 1–2), and intensity of chemotherapy regimen (doublet vs. triplet).

Results

Among 409 patients included from January 2015 to January 2022 and eligible for analysis, 284 (69%) and 125 (31%) were treated with NK1-RA as primary and secondary antiemetic prophylaxis, respectively. After matching, primary NK1-RA use was not associated with higher rates of protection from emesis regardless the emesis phase (acute phase, p = 0.34; delayed phase, p = 0.14; overall phase, p = 0.80). On the other hand, a lower rate of relevant nausea (p = 0.02) and need for rescue antiemetic therapy (p = 0.000007) in the overall phase was found in primary NK1-RA users. Furthermore, a higher rate of both complete antiemetic response (p = 0.00001) and complete antiemetic protection (p = 0.00007) in the overall phase was more frequently observed in primary NK1-RA users. Finally, chemotherapy delays (p = 0.000009) and chemotherapy dose reductions (p = 0.0000006) were less frequently observed in primary NK1-RA users.

Conclusion

In patients affected by gastrointestinal malignancies, a primary CINV prophylaxis with NK1-RA, 5HT3-RA, and dexamethasone might be appropriate, particularly in those situations at higher risk of emesis and in which it is important to avoid dose delays and/or dose reductions, keeping a proper dose intensity of chemotherapy drugs.

Real-World Evaluation of Quality of Life, Effectiveness, and Safety of Aflibercept Plus FOLFIRI in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Prospective QoLiTrap Study

Aflibercept plus FOLFIRI prolongs overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer after the failure of oxaliplatin-containing therapy. QoLiTrap prospectively evaluated the quality of life (QoL) and effectiveness of this regimen in daily clinical practice, according to RAS status, sex, and prior targeted therapy, especially epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFR-I). The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients whose EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS) improved or reduced by <5% from baseline during the first 12 weeks of therapy. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. One thousand two hundred and seventy-seven patients were treated with aflibercept plus FOLFIRI and 872 were evaluable for QoL. GHS improved or decreased by <5% in 40.3% of cases. The ORR was 20.8%, the median PFS was 7.8 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 7.3−8.3), and the median OS was 14.4 months (95% CI, 13.1−18.1). After prior EGFR-I, the ORR was 23.7%, median PFS was 9.4 months (95% CI, 6.5−12.9), and median OS was 17.4 months (95% CI, 10.5−33.7). The safety profile was consistent with previously reported data. Aflibercept plus FOLFIRI given in daily practice maintained QoL in mCRC patients, was associated with a high objective tumor response, and retained its activity regardless of sex, RAS status, and prior EGFR-I therapy.

Real-World Data Analysis of Second-Line Antiangiogenic Targeted Treatments Following Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibodies and First-Line FOLFOX for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Introduction

Evidence is lacking on second-line and later treatments for patients with RAS wild-type colorectal cancer (CRC) who receive first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody therapy. In this study, we explored the real-world treatment sequences, treatment duration, and factors associated with treatment sequences and durations in Japanese patients with CRC.

Methods

This retrospective observational cohort study used a Japanese administrative claims database (April 2008 to July 2021). Patients with confirmed CRC (presumed RAS wild-type) who received first-line FOLFOX (leucovorin + 5-fluorouracil + oxaliplatin) plus anti-EGFR therapy in or after May 2016, followed by second-line irinotecan-based chemotherapy plus an antiangiogenic drug, were included. Treatment durations were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method. Cox regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with treatment duration.

Results

Analysis populations consisted of 1163 (first-line and second-line) and 645 (third-line) patients. At the start of first-line therapy, 67.8% of patients were male, the mean age was 64 years, 83.4% had left-sided CRC, and 84.3% were prescribed FOLFOX plus panitumumab. For second-line therapy, patients were prescribed bevacizumab (63%), ramucirumab (27%), or aflibercept beta (10%). Median (95% CI) treatment durations from the start of second-line therapy to the end of antitumor drug therapies were similar for bevacizumab (12.5 months [11.2, 14.0]), ramucirumab (12.5 months [11.2, 14.8]), and aflibercept beta (14.0 months [10.4, 17.0]). Treatment duration from second-line was positively associated with first-line treatment duration of 6 months or more, CRC surgery before starting first-line therapy, and liver surgery during first-line therapy, and was negatively associated with use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs before second-line therapy.

Conclusion

Real-world data revealed that all three antiangiogenic drugs were used as second-line therapy after first-line anti-EGFR antibodies and showed similar treatment durations.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-022-02122-4.

Concurrent RAS and RAS/BRAF V600E Variants in Colorectal Cancer: More Frequent Than Expected? A Case Report

The assessment of RAS and BRAF mutational status is one of the main steps in the diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Multiple mutations in the BRAF and RAS pathway are described as a rare event, with concurrent variants in KRAS and BRAF genes observed in approximately 0.05% of mCRC cases. Here, we report data from a case series affected by high-risk stage III and stage IV CRC and tested for RAS and BRAF mutation, treated at our Medical Oncology Unit. The analysis of KRAS, NRAS (codons 12, 13, 59, 61, 117, 146), and BRAF (codon 600) hotspot variants was performed in 161 CRC tumors from August 2018 to September 2021 and revealed three (1.8%) patients showing mutations in both KRAS and BRAF (V600E), including two cases with earlier CRC and one with metastatic disease. We also identified one patient (0.6%) with a mutation in both KRAS and NRAS genes and another one (0.6%) with a double KRAS mutation. Notably, the latter was characterized by aggressive behavior and poor clinical outcome. The mutational status, pathological features, and clinical history of these five CRC cases are described. Overall, this study case series adds evidence to the limited available literature concerning both the epidemiological and clinical aspects of CRC cases characterized by the presence of concurrent RAS/BRAF variants. Future multicentric studies will be required to increase the sample size and provide additional value to results observed so far in order to improve clinical management of this subgroup of CRC patients.

Efficacy and safety of aflibercept plus chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review and PRISMA-Compliant single-arm Meta-Analysis of noncomparative clinical studies and randomized controlled trials

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Aflibercept, a recombinant protein designed to suppress the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signalling pathway, has been used in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted the first meta-analysis to systematically review the efficacy and safety of aflibercept in mCRC.

METHODS

PubMed Central/Medline, Embase and cochrane library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials and single-arm clinical trials on aflibercept plus chemotherapy for the treatment of mCRC through 9 September 2021.

RESULTS

Ten studies comprising 2049 patients met the inclusion criteria. The pooled estimate rates were 16.0% for 12mPFS, 64.4% for 12mOS, 32.5% for ORR, 83.5% for DCR, while the rates of III/IV AEs rate were 80.2% respectively. The pooled estimate rates were 16.8% for III/IV diarrhoea, 22.3% for III/IV hypertension, 29.5% for III/IV neutropenia, 7.3% for III/IV proteinuria and 8.6% for III/IV oral mucositis.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of data from randomized controlled trials(RCT) and single-arm clinical trials confirmed the good efficacy of aflibercept plus chemotherapy in mCRC, while the safety of the treatment is concerning.

Network Pharmacology Analysis to Explore the Pharmacological Mechanism of Effective Chinese Medicines in Treating Metastatic Colorectal Cancer using Meta-Analysis Approach

The role of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) on treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains controversial, and its active components and potential targets are still unclear. This study mainly aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of TCM in mCRC treatment through meta-analysis and explore the effective components and potential targets based on the network pharmacology method. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, CBM, WanFang, and CNKI database for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the treatment of mCRC patients with and without TCM. A meta-analysis using RevMan 5.4 was conducted. In total, 25 clinical trials were analyzed, and the result demonstrated that TCM was closely correlated with the improved OS (HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.52-0.76; [Formula: see text] < 0.00001) and PFS (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.61-0.88; [Formula: see text] = 0.0010). Then, high-frequency Chinese herbs from the prescriptions extracted from the trails included in the OS meta-analysis were counted to construct a core-effective prescription. The TCMSP database was used to retrieve the active chemical components and predict herb targets. The Genecards, OMIM, Disgenet, DrugBank, and TTD database were searched for colorectal cancer targets. R-package was used to construct the Component-Target (C-T) network based on the intersection genes. Further, we extracted hub genes from C-T network and performed functional enrichment and pathway analysis. Finally, the C-T network showed 120 herb and disease co-target genes, and the most important top 10 active components were: Quercetin, Luteolin, Wogonin, Kaempferol, Nobiletin, Baicalein, Licochalcone A, Naringenin, Isorhamnetin, and Acacetin. The first 20 hub genes were extracted: CDKN1A, CDK1, CDK2, E2F1, CDK4, PCNA, RB1, CCNA2, MAPK3, CCND1, CCNB1, JUN, MAPK1, RELA, FOS, MAPK8, STAT3, MAPK14, NR3C1, and MYC. Thus, effective Chinese herb components may inhibit the mCRC by targeting multiple biological processes of the above hub genes.

Post-Induction Management in Patients With Left-Sided RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated With First-Line Anti-EGFR-Based Doublet Regimens: A Multicentre Study

Background

Few data regarding post-induction management following first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-based doublet regimens in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are available.

Methods

This multicenter, retrospective study aimed at evaluating clinicians’ attitude, and the safety and effectiveness of post-induction strategies in consecutive patients affected by left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR as first-line regimen, who did not experience disease progression within 6 months from induction initiation, at 21 Italian and 1 Spanish Institutions. The measured clinical outcomes were: progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events, and objective response rate (ORR).

Results

At the data cutoff, among 686 consecutive patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with doublet plus anti-EGFR as first-line regimen from March 2012 to October 2020, 355 eligible patients have been included in the present analysis. Among these, 118 (33.2%), 66 (18.6%), and 11 (3.1%) received a maintenance with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5FU/LV)+anti-EGFR, anti-EGFR, and 5FU/LV, respectively, while 160 (45.1%) patients continued induction treatment (non-maintenance) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient decision, or completion of planned treatment. The median period of follow-up for the overall population was 33.7 months (95%CI = 28.9–35.6). The median PFS values of the 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR, anti-EGFR, 5FU/LV, and non-maintenance cohorts were 16.0 (95%CI = 14.3–17.7, 86 events), 13.0 (95%CI = 11.4–14.5, 56 events), 14.0 (95%CI = 8.1–20.0, 8 events), and 10.1 months (95%CI = 9.0–11.2, 136 events), respectively (p < 0.001). The median OS values were 39.6 (95%CI = 31.5–47.7, 43 events), 36.1 (95%CI = 31.6–40.7, 36 events), 39.5 (95%CI = 28.2–50.8, 4 events), and 25.1 months (95%CI = 22.6–27.6, 99 events), respectively (p < 0.001). After adjusting for key covariates, a statistically significant improvement in PFS in favor of 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR (HR = 0.59, 95%CI = 0.44–0.77, p < 0.001) and anti-EGFR (HR = 0.71, 95%CI = 0.51–0.98, p = 0.039) compared to the non-maintenance cohort was found. Compared to the non-maintenance cohort, OS was improved by 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR (HR = 0.55, 95%CI = 0.38–0.81, p = 0.002) and, with marginal significance, by anti-EGFR (HR = 0.67, 95%CI = 0.51–0.98, p = 0.051). No difference was found in ORR. Any grade non-hematological and hematological events were generally higher in the non-maintenance compared to the maintenance cohorts.

Conclusion

Among the treatment strategies following an anti-EGFR-based doublet first-line induction regimen in patients affected by left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated in a “real-life” setting, 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR resulted the most adopted, effective, and relatively safe regimen.

A multicenter study of skin toxicity management in patients with left-sided, RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with first-line anti-EGFR-based doublet regimen: is there room for improvement?

BACKGROUND

Skin toxicity in patients affected by metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors is well known. However, ad hoc ESMO guidelines have only recently been published.

AIM AND METHODS

To describe the management (pre-emptive or reactive) of anti-EGFR-related cutaneous adverse events (AEs), in a real-life clinical context, in a selected population of patients with left-sided, metastatic RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody (i.e., panitumumab or cetuximab) as first-line regimen at 22 Institutions. The measured clinical outcomes were treatment-related adverse events, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Of 515 patients included in the analysis, 173 (33.6%) received a pre-emptive and 342 (66.4%) a reactive treatment. The median follow-up period for the overall population was 30.0 months. A significantly lower incidence of any grade acneiform rash was found in the pre-emptive compared to the reactive cohort both in the overall population (78.6% vs 94.4%, p < 0.001) and in patients treated with panitumumab (76.1% vs 93.7%, p < 0.001) or cetuximab (83.3% vs 95.4%, p = 0.004), respectively. A lower incidence of any grade (41.6% vs 50.9%, p = 0.047) but a higher incidence of G3-G4 (9.2% vs 4.7%, p = 0.042) paronychia/nail disorders were found in the pre-emptive compared to the reactive cohort. Nevertheless, a lower rate of patients within the reactive compared to the pre-emptive cohort was referred to dermatological counseling (21.4% vs 15.3%, respectively, p = 0.001). A higher rate of anti-EGFR therapy modification was needed in the pre-emptive compared to the reactive cohort (35.9% vs 41.6%, respectively, p < 0.001). The pre-emptive approach did not reduce the efficacy of antineoplastic therapy compared to the reactive in terms of ORR (69.2% vs 72.8%), median PFS (12.3 vs 13.0 months), and median OS (28.8 vs 33.5 months).

CONCLUSION

Although recommended by international guidelines, the pre-emptive approach of anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity in mCRC patients still appears less adopted in daily clinical practice, compared to the reactive one. A wider reception and application of this indication is desirable to improve patients' quality of life without compromising the continuity and efficacy of antineoplastic therapy.

Clinicians' Attitude to Doublet Plus Anti-EGFR Versus Triplet Plus Bevacizumab as First-line Treatment in Left-Sided RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Multicenter, "Real-Life", Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

Doublets plus antiepidermal growth factor receptors monoclonal antibodies (EGFRi) are widely considered the preferable first-line regimen in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), resulting superior in terms of activity and efficacy compared to doublets plus bevacizumab. However, data comparing doublet plus EGFRi and triplet plus bevacizumab are lacking, and the relative benefit of an intensive regimen plus an antiangiogenic backbone in this population is debated.

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective study aimed at evaluating clinicians' attitude to triplet-bevacizumab and doublet-EGFRi as first-line regimen in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated in clinical practice at 22 Oncology Units from March 2012 to October 2020. A random case-control matching was performed to compare activity (ORR), and effectiveness (PFS, OS, secondary resection rate of metastases with curative intent) between triplet-bevacizumab and doublet-EGFRi, on the basis of ECOG-PS, age, gender, and burden of disease.

RESULTS

A total of 718 patients were consecutively treated with doublet-EGFRi (686, 95.5%) or triplet-bevacizumab (32, 4.5%). After case-control matching, median PFS was 13.6 (95% CI, 8.9-31.7) and 16.1 (95% CI, 12.1-36.8) months (P= .621), while median OS was 30.2 (95% CI, 14.4-69.5) and 38.1 (95% CI, 33.1-101.1) months (P= .0283) in the doublet-EGFRi and the triplet-bevacizumab cohort, respectively. The ORR was 65.6% and 90.6% (P= .016), while the secondary resection rate was 18.8% and 46.9% (P= .016), in the doublet-EGFRi and the triplet-bevacizumab cohort, respectively. Triplet-bevacizumab was associated with a higher incidence of G3/G4 neutropenia (25.0% vs. 12.5%, P= .041).

CONCLUSION

Although a doublet-EGFRi remains the recommended upfront regimen in patients with left-sided RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC, our real life data suggest a triplet-bevacizumab might be at least equally active and effective in properly selected cases.

Are All Anti-Angiogenic Drugs the Same in the Treatment of Second-Line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer? Expert Opinion on Clinical Practice

Targeting tumor-driven angiogenesis is an effective strategy in the management of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC); however, the choice of second-line therapy is complicated by the availability of several drugs, the occurrence of resistance and the lack of validated prognostic and predictive biomarkers. This review examines the use of angiogenesis-targeted therapies for the second-line management of mCRC patients. Mechanisms of resistance and anti-placental growth factor agents are discussed, and the role of aflibercept, a recombinant fusion protein consisting of portions of human vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-1 and VEGFR-2, is highlighted. The novel mechanism of action of aflibercept makes it a useful second-line agent in mCRC patients progressing after oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, as well as in those with resistance after bevacizumab.

Foxq1 promotes metastasis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma by inducing vasculogenic mimicry via the EGFR signaling pathway

In nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), the treatment of tumor metastasis and recurrence is challenging and is associated with poor clinical efficacy. Vasculogenic mimicry (VM) is a new blood-supply model of malignant tumor that is closely related to tumors’ distant metastasis. Our previous study demonstrated that miR-124 could target Foxq1 to inhibit NPC metastasis. Whether Foxq1 affects metastasis through vasculogenic mimicry is worth consideration. In this study, we show that VM formation positively correlates with the expression of Foxq1, and EGFR, and the TNM stage in 114 NPC patient samples. Meanwhile, we show that VM-positive NPC patients have a poor prognosis. Furthermore, using in vitro and vivo approaches, we confirm that Foxq1 has a significant effect on NPC metastasis through promoting VM formation, which could be effectively inhibited by EGFR inhibitors (Nimotuzumab or Erlotinib). Also a synergistic efficacy of anti-EGFR and anti-VEGF drugs has been found in NPC inhibition. Mechanistically, the luciferase reporter gene and CHIP assays show that Foxq1 directly binds to the EGFR promoter region and regulates EGFR transcription. In conclusion, our results show that Foxq1 is regulated by miR-124 and that it promotes NPC metastasis by inducing VM via the EGFR signaling pathway. Overall, these results provide a new theoretical support and a novel target selection for anti-VM therapy in the treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

What Is Known about Theragnostic Strategies in Colorectal Cancer

Despite the paradigmatic shift occurred in recent years for defined molecular subtypes in the metastatic setting treatment, colorectal cancer (CRC) still remains an incurable disease in most of the cases. Therefore, there is an urgent need for new tools and biomarkers for both early tumor diagnosis and to improve personalized treatment. Thus, liquid biopsy has emerged as a minimally invasive tool that is capable of detecting genomic alterations from primary or metastatic tumors, allowing the prognostic stratification of patients, the detection of the minimal residual disease after surgical or systemic treatments, the monitoring of therapeutic response, and the development of resistance, establishing an opportunity for early intervention before imaging detection or worsening of clinical symptoms. On the other hand, preclinical and clinical evidence demonstrated the role of gut microbiota dysbiosis in promoting inflammatory responses and cancer initiation. Altered gut microbiota is associated with resistance to chemo drugs and immune checkpoint inhibitors, whereas the use of microbe-targeted therapies including antibiotics, pre-probiotics, and fecal microbiota transplantation can restore response to anticancer drugs, promote immune response, and therefore support current treatment strategies in CRC. In this review, we aim to summarize preclinical and clinical evidence for the utilization of liquid biopsy and gut microbiota in CRC.

Multimodality Treatment in Metastatic Gastric Cancer: From Past to Next Future

Gastric cancer (GC) still remains an incurable disease in almost two-thirds of the cases. However, a deeper knowledge of its biology in the last few years has revealed potential biomarkers suitable for tailored treatment with targeted agents. This aspect, together with the improvement in early supportive care and a wiser use of the available cytotoxic drugs across multiple lines of treatment, has resulted in incremental and progressive survival benefits. Furthermore, slowly but surely, targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors are revising the therapeutic scenario even in metastatic GC and especially in particular subgroups. Moreover, important study results regarding the possible role of an integrated approach combining systemic, surgical, and locoregional treatment in carefully selected oligometastatic GC patients are awaited. This review summarizes the state-of-the-art and the major ongoing trials involving a multimodal treatment of metastatic GC.