Chemotherapy With or Without Anti-EGFR Agents in Left- and Right-Sided Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Update on Targeted Therapy and Immunotherapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Metastatic colorectal cancer remains a deadly malignancy and is the third leading cause of cancer-related death. The mainstay of treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer is chemotherapy, but unfortunately, even with recent progress, overall survival is still poor. Colorectal cancer is a heterogeneous disease, and the underlying genetic differences among tumors can define the behavior and prognosis of the disease. Given the limitations of cytotoxic chemotherapy, research has focused on developing targeted therapy based on molecular subtyping. Since the early 2000s, multiple targeted therapies have demonstrated efficacy in treating metastatic colorectal cancer and have received FDA approval. The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and DNA mismatch repair pathways have demonstrated promising results for targeted therapies. As new gene mutations and proteins involved in the oncogenesis of metastatic colorectal cancer are identified, new targets will continue to emerge. We herein provide a summary of the updated literature regarding targeted therapies for patients with mCRC.

Multi-omic analysis reveals metabolic pathways that characterize right-sided colon cancer liver metastasis

There are well demonstrated differences in tumor cell metabolism between right sided (RCC) and left sided (LCC) colon cancer, which could underlie the robust differences observed in their clinical behavior, particularly in metastatic disease. As such, we utilized liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry to perform an untargeted metabolomics analysis comparing frozen liver metastasis (LM) biobank samples derived from patients with RCC (N = 32) and LCC (N = 58) to further elucidate the unique biology of each. We also performed an untargeted RNA-seq and subsequent network analysis on samples derived from an overlapping subset of patients (RCC: N = 10; LCC: N = 18). Our biobank redemonstrates the inferior survival of patients with RCC-derived LM (P = 0.04), a well-established finding. Our metabolomic results demonstrate increased reactive oxygen species associated metabolites and bile acids in RCC. Conversely, carnitines, indicators of fatty acid oxidation, are relatively increased in LCC. The transcriptomic analysis implicates increased MEK-ERK, PI3K-AKT and Transcription Growth Factor Beta signaling in RCC LM. Our multi-omic analysis reveals several key differences in cellular physiology which taken together may be relevant to clinical differences in tumor behavior between RCC and LCC liver metastasis.

Transcriptional Profiling and Consensus Molecular Subtype Assignment to Understand Response and Resistance to Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Therapy in Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Activating mutations in KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF are known to cause resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy; however, only approximately 40% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) with RASWT tumors respond to anti-EGFR treatment. We sought to discover novel biomarkers to predict response to anti-EGFR antibody treatment in CRC and to understand mechanisms of resistance to anti-EGFR therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Transcriptomic profiles from three clinical and two preclinical cohorts treated with cetuximab were used to assign consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) to each sample and correlated with outcomes.

RESULTS

Restricting to RASWT patients, we observed that CMS2 tumors (canonical subtype) had significantly higher response rates relative to other CMS when treated with cetuximab combination with doublet chemotherapy (Okita et al cohort: 92% disease control rate (DCR) for CMS2, chi-square P = .04; CALGB/SWOG 80405 cohort: 90% objective response rate (ORR) for CMS2, chi-square P < .001) and with single-agent cetuximab (68%, chi-square P = .01). CMS2 tumors showed best response among right-sided (ORR = 80%) and left-sided (ORR = 92%) tumors in the CALGB/SWOG 80405 cohort. CMS2 cells lines were most likely to be sensitive to cetuximab (60%) and CMS2 patient-derived xenograft had the highest DCR (84%). We found Myc, E2F, and mammalian target of rapamycin pathways were consistently upregulated in resistant samples (enrichment score >1, false discovery rate <0.25). Inhibitors of these pathways in resistant cell lines exhibited additive effects with cetuximab.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that CRC transcriptional profiles, when used to assign CMS, provide additional ability to predict response to anti-EGFR therapy relative to using tumor sidedness alone. Notably both right-sided and left-sided CMS2 tumors had excellent response, suggesting that anti-EGFR therapy be included as a treatment option for right-sided CMS2 tumors.

Receipt of Targeted Therapy and Survival Outcomes in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Professional society guidelines recommend treating patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with targeted therapies, including epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors, depending on the presence or absence of certain mutations. Since most studies of first-line targeted therapies have been limited by sample size, there is a need for larger studies using data from routine clinical care.

OBJECTIVES

To identify factors associated with receipt of first-line targeted therapies among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer for whom RAS or BRAF mutation data in the tumor were available and investigate whether targeted therapy is associated with survival.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study used deidentified data from an electronic health record-derived database to include patients from 800 sites of patient care across the US who were diagnosed with de novo metastatic colorectal cancer between January 1, 2013, and March 31, 2020 (n = 9134).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Receipt of first-line targeted therapy, categorized as ever having received EGFR inhibitors, VEGF inhibitors, or neither. The secondary outcome was overall survival.

RESULTS

The study population included 9134 patients. The median age at diagnosis was 62 years (IQR, 53-71 years), 5019 (54.9%) were male, and 5692 (62.3%) were White. The median follow-up period was 15 months. Overall, 713 patients (7.8%) received EGFR inhibitors and 5081 patients (55.6%) received VEGF inhibitors as part of their first-line treatment. Among patients with RAS wild-type (RAS-WT) tumors, 625 patients (15.5%) received EGFR inhibitors and 2053 patients (50.9%) received VEGF inhibitors. In patients with RAS mutant (RAS-Mut) tumors, 50 patients (1.1%) received EGFR inhibitors and 2682 patients (59.7%) received VEGF inhibitors; among those with BRAF-mutant (BRAF-Mut) tumors, 38 patients (6.3%) received EGFR inhibitors and 346 patients (57.2%) received VEGF inhibitors. More than one-third of the patients (36.6%) received neither EGFR inhibitors nor VEGF inhibitors. Compared with patients younger than age 40 years, those aged 80 years or older had significantly lower odds to receive targeted therapies (EGFR or VEGF inhibitors in patients with RAS-WT tumors: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36-0.79; and VEGF inhibitors in patients with RAS-Mut tumors: aOR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.90). Improved survival was associated with EGFR inhibitor therapy in patients with RAS-WT tumors (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74-0.98). Unlike in clinical trials, however, no survival benefit was noted with use of VEGF inhibitors among patients with RAS-WT (aHR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.91-1.11) or RAS-Mut (aHR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93-1.10) tumors.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this study showed mixed results on survival benefits associated with targeted therapy. In addition, given that some of the results differed from those of randomized clinical trials, this study highlights the importance of using data originating from routine clinical care.

Genomic temporal heterogeneity of circulating tumour DNA in unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer under first-line treatment

OBJECTIVE

Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) sequencing is increasingly used in the clinical management of patients with colorectal cancer. However, the genomic heterogeneity in ctDNA during treatments and its impact on clinical outcomes remain largely unknown.

DESIGN

We conducted a prospective cohort study (NCT04228614) of 171 patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who underwent first-line treatment and prospectively collected blood samples with or without tumour samples from patients at baseline and sequentially until disease progression or last follow-up.

RESULTS

The RAS/BRAF alterations in paired baseline tissue and plasma samples from 63 patients displayed a favourable concordance (81.0%, 51/63). After a period of first-line treatment (median time between baseline and last liquid biopsy, 4.67 months), 42.6% (26/61) of RAS-mutant patients showed RAS clearance and 50.0% (5/10) of BRAF-mutant patients showed BRAF clearance, while 3.6% (3/84) and 0.7% (1/135) of patients showed new RAS or BRAF mutations in ctDNA. Patients with plasma RAS/BRAF clearance showed similar progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with patients who remained RAS/BRAF wild-type, while much better outcomes than those who remained RAS/BRAF mutant. Patients who gained new RAS/BRAF mutations showed similar prognosis as those who maintained RAS/BRAF mutations, and shorter PFS and OS than those who remained RAS/BRAF wild-type.

CONCLUSION

This prospective, serial and large-scale ctDNA profiling study reveals the temporal heterogeneity of mCRC-related somatic variants, which should be given special attention in clinical practice, as evidenced by the finding that the shift in plasma RAS/BRAF mutational status can yield a drastic change in survival outcomes.

The impact of DNA testing on management of patients with colorectal cancer

Knowledge of the genetic basis of colorectal cancer has evolved over the past decades, allowing for the pre-symptomatic identification of affected patients in those with familial syndromes and to the understanding of the multi-step progression to carcinogenesis in tumors. Knowledge of the genes and pathways involved in colorectal cancer has allowed for targeted therapies in patients in addition to standard chemotherapy for those with metastases. Next-generation sequencing technologies have now also allowed for the sensitive detection of circulating mutations derived from tumors, which can give insight into the presence of residual disease and has implications for changing the standard paradigms for treatment. This article will specifically review advances in targeted therapy in metastatic colon cancer and the progress being made in using circulating tumor DNA in patient management.

Cost-Effectiveness of First-Line Cetuximab in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line cetuximab in relation to primary tumor location and after resection from the perspective of the Saudi healthcare system over a lifetime horizon.

METHODS

Two standard partitioned survival models were developed in this study comprising 3 health states in each model. The first model was to simulate outcomes and costs of folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus cetuximab compared with FOLFIRI alone in 2 target groups-first, in RAS wild-type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and second, in patients administered with 4 cycles of FOLFIRI plus cetuximab, who underwent a resection of liver metastases. The second model compared FOLFIRI plus cetuximab with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in wild-type left-sided mCRC and after resection. All cost data and utilities were extracted from published data.

RESULTS

FOLFIRI plus cetuximab in RAS wild-type left-sided mCRC compared with FOLFIRI alone resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of Saudi Riyal (SAR) 180 880 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained ($102 019; cost-effective). After resection of liver metastases, it resulted in SAR140 442 ($79 211) per QALY gained (cost-effective). When comparing FOLFIRI plus cetuximab with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab, it resulted in SAR35 818 ($20 201) per QALY gained (highly cost-effective). After resection, it resulted in SAR109 612 ($61 822) per QALY gained (highly cost-effective). Thus, FOLFIRI plus cetuximab improved QALYs compared with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab at the minimized difference in costs in left-sided mCRC and patients with unresectable metastases.

CONCLUSION

FOLFIRI plus cetuximab is cost-effective compared with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab or FOLFIRI alone in RAS wild-type left-sided mCRC and patients who undergo resection.

Taiwan Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Consensus on mCRC Treatment

Therapeutic options for metastatic CRC (mCRC) have changed significantly in recent years, greatly increasing the complexity of therapeutic decision-making. Although oncology guidelines have helped improve the care process, guidelines may also limit the flexibility to individualize in-clinic decision-making. This consensus paper addresses specific gaps in the current international guidelines to assist Taiwanese colon and rectal experts make specific therapeutic choices. Over 3 years and three meetings with selected experts on "real-world" Taiwanese practice patterns for mCRC, consensus was achieved. The experts also discussed specific questions during in-depth one-on-one consultation. Outcomes of the discussion were then correlated with published evidence by an independent medical writer. The final consensus includes clinically implementable recommendations to provide guidance in treating Taiwanese mCRC patients. The consensus includes criteria for defining fit and unfit intensive treatment patients, treatment goals, treatment considerations of molecular profiles, treatment consideration, and optimal treatment choices between different patient archetypes, including optimal treatment options based on RAS, BRAF, and microsatellite instability (MSI) status. This consensus paper is the second in the Taiwan Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (TSCRS) Consensus series to address unmet gaps in guideline recommendations in lieu of Taiwanese mCRC management. Meticulous discussions with experts, the multidisciplinary nature of the working group, and the final drafting of the consensus by independent medical professionals have contributed to the strong scientific value of this consensus.

Molecular subtype-specific efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer is dependent on the chemotherapy backbone

BACKGROUND

Patient selection for addition of anti-EGFR therapy to chemotherapy for patients with RAS and BRAF wildtype metastatic colorectal cancer can still be optimised. Here we investigate the effect of anti-EGFR therapy on survival in different consensus molecular subtypes (CMSs) and stratified by primary tumour location.

METHODS

Retrospective analyses, using the immunohistochemistry-based CMS classifier, were performed in the COIN (first-line oxaliplatin backbone with or without cetuximab) and PICCOLO trial (second-line irinotecan with or without panitumumab). Tumour tissue was available for 323 patients (20%) and 349 (41%), respectively.

RESULTS

When using an irinotecan backbone, anti-EGFR therapy is effective in both CMS2/3 and CMS4 in left-sided primary tumours (progression-free survival (PFS): HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26-0.75, P = 0.003 and HR 0.12, 95% CI 0.04-0.36, P < 0.001, respectively) and in CMS4 right-sided tumours (PFS HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.71, P = 0.02). Efficacy using an oxaliplatin backbone was restricted to left-sided CMS2/3 tumours (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.96, P = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

The subtype-specific efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy is dependent on the chemotherapy backbone. This may provide the possibility of subtype-specific treatment strategies for a more optimal use of anti-EGFR therapy.

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.

Recent Advances in Our Knowledge of mCRC Tumor Biology and Genetics: A Focus on Targeted Therapy Development

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains a highly lethal malignancy although considerable progress has resulted from characterizing molecular alterations such as RAS mutation status and extent of microsatellite instability (MSI) to guide optimal use of available therapies. The availability of gene expression profiling, next generation sequencing technologies, proteomics analysis and other technologies provides high resolution information on individual tumors, including metastatic lesions to better define intra-tumor and inter-tumor heterogeneity. Recent literature applying this information to further customize personalized therapies is reviewed. Current biomarker-based stratification used to select optimal therapy that is personalized to the mutation profile of individual tumors is described. Recent literature using whole exome sequencing of metastatic lesions and primary CRC tumors and other advanced technologies to more fully elucidate the tumor biology specific to mCRC sub-types and to develop more precise therapies that improve outcomes is also reviewed.

Immunohistochemical analysis of ADAMTS-1, versican and pEGFR expressions in periapical granuloma and radicular cyst

Background

ADAMTS expression can be associated with several inflammatory processes, and has been correlated with tumorigenesis of some neoplasms, but its participation in the development of periapical lesions has not been investigated. Therefore, our objective was to verify the expression of ADAMTS-1, versican and pEGFR in Periapical Granuloma (PG) and in the Radicular Cyst (RC) since they are the most common lesions of the periapex.

Methods

25 samples of RC and 10 of PG were used. As a control, 10 samples of inflammatory fibrous hyperplasia (IFH) and 10 of dental follicle (DF) were used. The expression of these proteins was investigated using immunohistochemistry.

Results

In the epithelium of RC, IFH and DF, the expression of ADAMTS-1 was greater in DF than in RC (p < .001). Versicano showed greater expression in IFH than in RC, DF than in RC (p < .001). pEGFR showed greater expression in IFH and RC than in DF (p < .01 and p < .05, respectively). In connective tissue, ADAMTS-1 expression was greater in PG and RC than in IFH and DF (p < .001). Versicano showed greater expression in PG, RC and IFH compared to DF (p < .001). In pEGFR there was a higher expression in PG when compared to RC, IFH and DF (p < .001). Greater immunostaining occurred in the RC than in the DF (p < .001).

Conclusions

Our results suggest that the studied proteins may participate in the pathogenesis of PG and RC, through the interaction of these proteins, in the remodeling of the ECM (versican) by ADAMTS-1, producing bioactive fragments, which could activate EGFR, contributing to the formation, growth and maintenance of injuries.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Review

IMPORTANCE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cause of cancer mortality worldwide with more than 1.85 million cases and 850 000 deaths annually. Of new colorectal cancer diagnoses, 20% of patients have metastatic disease at presentation and another 25% who present with localized disease will later develop metastases.

OBSERVATIONS

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cause of cancer mortality for men and women in the United States, with 53 200 deaths projected in 2020. Among people diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer, approximately 70% to 75% of patients survive beyond 1 year, 30% to 35% beyond 3 years, and fewer than 20% beyond 5 years from diagnosis. The primary treatment for unresectable metastatic CRC is systemic therapy (cytotoxic chemotherapy, biologic therapy such as antibodies to cellular growth factors, immunotherapy, and their combinations.) Clinical trials completed in the past 5 years have demonstrated that tailoring treatment to the molecular and pathologic features of the tumor improves overall survival. Genomic profiling to detect somatic variants is important because it identifies the treatments that may be effective. For the 50% of patients with metastatic CRC with KRAS/NRAS/BRAF wild-type tumors, cetuximab and panitumumab (monoclonal antibodies to the epithelial growth factor receptor [EGFR]), in combination with chemotherapy, can extend median survival by 2 to 4 months compared with chemotherapy alone. However, for the 35% to 40% of patients with KRAS or NRAS sequence variations (formerly termed mutations), effective targeted therapies are not yet available. For the 5% to 10% with BRAF V600E sequence variations, targeted combination therapy with BRAF and EGFR inhibitors extended overall survival to 9.3 months, compared to 5.9 months for those receiving standard chemotherapy. For the 5% with microsatellite instability (the presence of numerous insertions or deletions at repetitive DNA units) or mismatch repair deficiency, immunotherapy may be used in the first or subsequent line and has improved treatment outcomes with a median overall survival of 31.4 months in previously treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Advances in molecular profiling of metastatic CRC facilitate the ability to direct treatments to the biologic features of the tumor for specific patient subsets. Although cures remain uncommon, more patients can anticipate extended survival. Genomic profiling allows treatment selection so that more patients derive benefit and fewer are exposed to toxicity from ineffective therapies.

Primary tumor location and survival in colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Primary tumor location is a prognostic factor for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Post hoc analyses of mCRC clinical trials, including FIRE-3, CALGB/SWOG 80405, suggest that primary tumor location is also predictive of survival benefit with cetuximab or bevacizumab in combination with 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy.

AIM

Evaluate prognostic/predictive roles of primary tumor location in real-world mCRC patients treated with cetuximab or bevacizumab plus 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study selected patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC who initiated first-line therapy with cetuximab or bevacizumab in combination with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan (FOLFIRI) or 5-fluorouracil/ leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) between January 2013 and April 2017 from the Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived database of de-identified patient-level data in the United States. Primary tumor location was abstracted from patients’ charts. Left-sided primary tumor location (LPTL) was defined as tumors that originated in the splenic flexure, descending colon, sigmoid colon, or rectum; right-sided primary tumor location (RPTL) was defined as tumors that originated from the appendix, cecum, ascending colon, hepatic flexure, or transverse colon. Propensity score matching was used to balance the baseline demographic and clinical characteristics between patients treated with cetuximab and patients treated with bevacizumab. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods were used for survival analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 1312 patients met the selection criteria. Of 248 cetuximab plus FOLFIRI or FOLFOX patients, 164 had LPTL and 84 had RPTL; of 1064 bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI or FOLFOX patients, 679 had LPTL and 385 had RPTL. Cetuximab LPTL and RPTL patients were more likely to receive FOLFIRI vs bevacizumab patients (LPTL: 64.0% vs 24.3%; RPTL: 76.2% vs 24.9%, P < 0.001). Stage at initial diagnosis was different between cetuximab RPTL vs bevacizumab RPTL patients (P < 0.001); cetuximab RPTL patients were more likely to have stage III disease (44.0% vs 22.6%), while bevacizumab RPTL patients were more likely to have stage IV disease (65.7% vs 48.8%). Cetuximab RPTL patients were more likely to have a documented history of adjuvant chemotherapy vs bevacizumab RPTL patients (47.6% vs 22.3%, P < 0.001). In the propensity score-matched sample, median overall survival (OS) was 29.7 mo (95%CI: 26.9-35.2) for LPTL patients vs 18.3 mo (95%CI: 15.8-21.3) for RPTL patients (P < 0.001). Median OS was 29.7 mo (95%CI: 27.4-NA) for cetuximab LPTL patients vs 29.1 mo (95%CI: 26.6-35.6) for bevacizumab LPTL patients (HR = 0.87; 95%CI: 0.63-1.19; P = 0.378) and 17.0 mo (95%CI: 12.0-32.6) for cetuximab RPTL patients vs 18.8 mo (95%CI: 15.8-22.3) for bevacizumab RPTL patients (HR = 1.00; 95%CI: 0.68-1.46; P = 0.996). The interaction of treatment and primary tumor location was not significant in the Cox regression.

CONCLUSION

In this real-world mCRC cohort, the prognostic role of primary tumor location was substantiated, but not the predictive role for treatment with cetuximab vs bevacizumab in combination with 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy.

Cetuximab versus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: a comparative effectiveness study

PURPOSE

Uncertainty exists regarding comparative effectiveness of cetuximab versus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a retrospective head-to-head multi-cohort study comparing clinical outcomes from both antibodies METHODS: Cohorts were defined by treatment line and subgroups by (K)RAS status and tumour sidedness. Among other outcomes, we estimated and compared response rates, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Between January 2010 and April 2018, 311 patients were included. Except for (K)RAS mutation status, baseline characteristics were balanced across treatment groups. In the full analysis of first and second-line cohorts, PFS (first-line: HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.13; P = 0.26; second-line: HR = 1.16; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.83; P = 0.51) and OS (first-line: HR = 0.83; 95% CI 0.61 to 1.15; P = 0.26; second-line: HR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.38; P = 0.58) were similar between bevacizumab and cetuximab arms. In subgroup analyses of first-line therapy, we found a survival difference favouring bevacizumab in right-sided tumours (PFS: HR = 0.52; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.93; P = 0.025; OS: HR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.12; P = 0.11), but not in left-sided (HR = 1.04; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.46; P = 0.81; OS: HR = 0.94; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.36; P = 0.74), or (K)RAS wild-type tumours (PFS: HR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.40; P = 0.67; OS: HR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.25; P = 0.31). Response rates were similar across treatment groups, except for the subgroup of patients bearing right-sided primaries, where bevacizumab performed substantially better.

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence suggesting bevacizumab and cetuximab lead to similar effectiveness outcomes in mCRC, except for right-sided tumours, where cetuximab seemed to show considerably poorer outcomes. Further research is needed to confirm these results.

Triggering of apoptosis and cell cycle arrest by fennel and clove oils in Caco-2 cells: the role of combination

Background: Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare) and clove (Syzygium aromaticum) oils are known for their various biological effects, including anticancer properties. Objective: To investigate the anticancer effect of combined fennel and clove oil treatment on Caco-2 cells and normal human lymphocytes (NHL). Methods: GC-MS, in vitro cytotoxicity, morphological, apoptosis-related marker, and flow cytometric cell cycle distribution analyses were conducted. Results: Seventeen volatile compounds were identified in fennel oil, including trans-anethole (68.3%) and (+)-fenchone (8.1%). In clove oil, 22 compounds, including eugenol (71.4%) and caryophyllene (8.7%), were identified. IC₅₀ of the fennel, clove, and oil mixture were 300 ± 5.0, 150 ± 4.0, and 73 ± 2.5 µg/mL, respectively with combination index (CI) < 1.0. Mechanistic anticancer properties were investigated using 30, 45, and 60 µg/mL oil mixture. Analysis of apoptotic morphology, flow cytometric cell cycle distribution, and apoptosis-related markers, such as Bcl-2 and Ki-67, confirmed cell cycle arrest and apoptosis induction in Caco-2 cells by the fennel and clove oil combination. Moreover, the oil mixture did not exert significant (p < 0.01) toxicity on NHL in vitro. Conclusion: The oil mixture exerted selective cytotoxicity towards Caco-2 cells through cell cycle arrest and apoptosis, which may occur through synergistic effects between fennel and clove oil active ingredients.