scholarly journals Mutational Analysis of Patients With Colorectal Cancer in CALGB/SWOG 80405 Identifies New Roles of Microsatellite Instability and Tumor Mutational Burden for Patient Outcome

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (14) ◽  
pp. 1217-1227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Innocenti ◽  
Fang-Shu Ou ◽  
Xueping Qu ◽  
Tyler J. Zemla ◽  
Donna Niedzwiecki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Microsatellite Instability ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Mutational Analysis ◽  
Gene Mutations ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Mutational Burden ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden

PURPOSE CALGB/SWOG 80405 was a randomized phase III trial that found no statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) in patients with first-line metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy plus either bevacizumab or cetuximab. Primary tumor DNA from 843 patients has been used to discover genetic markers of OS. PATIENTS AND METHODS Gene mutations were determined by polymerase chain reaction. Microsatellite status was determined by genotyping of microsatellites. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was determined by next-generation sequencing. Cox proportional hazard models were used, with adjusting factors. Interaction of molecular alterations with either the bevacizumab or the cetuximab arms was tested. RESULTS Patients with high TMB in their tumors had longer OS than did patients with low TMB (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.95]; P = .02). In patients with microsatellite instability–high (MSI-H) tumors, longer OS was observed in the bevacizumab arm than in the cetuximab arm (HR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.06 to 0.30]; interaction P < .001 for interaction between microsatellite status and the two arms). Patients with BRAF mutant tumors had shorter OS than did patients with wild-type (WT) tumors (HR, 2.01 [95% CI, 1.49 to 2.71]; P < .001). Patients with extended RAS mutant tumors had shorter OS than did patients with WT tumors (HR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.26 to 1.84]; P < .001). Patients with triple-negative tumors (WT for NRAS/ KRAS/ BRAF) had a median OS of 35.9 months (95% CI, 33.0 to 38.8 months) versus 22.2 months (95% CI, 19.6 to 24.4 months ) in patients with at least one mutated gene in their tumors ( P < .001). CONCLUSION In patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated in first line, low TMB, and BRAF and RAS mutations are negative prognostic factors. Patients with MSI-H tumors benefited more from bevacizumab than from cetuximab, and studies to confirm this effect of MSI-H are warranted.

Phase III Trial of Cetuximab With Continuous or Intermittent Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin (Nordic FLOX) Versus FLOX Alone in First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The NORDIC-VII Study

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15) ◽  
pp. 1755-1762 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kjell Magne Tveit ◽  
Tormod Guren ◽  
Bengt Glimelius ◽  
Per Pfeiffer ◽  
Halfdan Sorbye ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Braf Mutations ◽  
Kras Mutations ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
First Line Treatment

Purpose The NORDIC-VII multicenter phase III trial investigated the efficacy of cetuximab when added to bolus fluorouracil/folinic acid and oxaliplatin (Nordic FLOX), administered continuously or intermittently, in previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The influence of KRAS mutation status on treatment outcome was also investigated. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to receive either standard Nordic FLOX (arm A), cetuximab and FLOX (arm B), or cetuximab combined with intermittent FLOX (arm C). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Overall survival (OS), response rate, R0 resection rate, and safety were secondary end points. Results Of the 571 patients randomly assigned, 566 were evaluable in intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses. KRAS and BRAF mutation analyses were obtained in 498 (88%) and 457 patients (81%), respectively. KRAS mutations were present in 39% of the tumors; 12% of tumors had BRAF mutations. The presence of BRAF mutations was a strong negative prognostic factor. In the ITT population, median PFS was 7.9, 8.3, and 7.3 months for the three arms, respectively (not significantly different). OS was almost identical for the three groups (20.4, 19.7, 20.3 months, respectively), and confirmed response rates were 41%, 49%, and 47%, respectively. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumors, cetuximab did not provide any additional benefit compared with FLOX alone. In patients with KRAS mutations, no significant difference was detected, although a trend toward improved PFS was observed in arm B. The regimens were well tolerated. Conclusion Cetuximab did not add significant benefit to the Nordic FLOX regimen in first-line treatment of mCRC.

26 ctDNA clearance and radiographic resolution of lymph node metastasis in a patient with metastatic microsatellite stable colorectal cancer on immunotherapy

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A25-A25
Author(s):  
Charles Schneider ◽  
Michael Krainock ◽  
Meenakshi Malhotra ◽  
Paul Billings ◽  
Alexey Aleshin
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Lymph Node ◽  
Lymph Node Metastasis ◽  
Microsatellite Instability ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Mismatch Repair ◽  
Node Metastasis ◽  
Mutational Burden ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden ◽  
Time Point

BackgroundHigh microsatellite instability (MSI-H) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is associated with a beneficial response to immunotherapy. Additionally, within MSI-H cancers, tumor mutational burden (TMB) is independently predictive of immunotherapy responsiveness.1 Durable responses to therapy have been demonstrated in patients with MSI-H mCRC treated with Nivolumab and Ipilimumab.2 However, less is known about treatment responsiveness in patients with high mutational burden mCRC that demonstrates microsatellite stability (MSI-L).MethodsWe report on a 55-year-old female with a PALB-2 germline mutation who presented with a right-sided colonic adenocarcinoma with the involvement of the omentum and liver. The patient received 6 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFOX, followed by an extended right hemicolectomy, omentectomy, and partial liver resection. The surgical specimen revealed a moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma in the cecum demonstrating a poor response to chemotherapy, 0/23 lymph nodes positive, one focus of adenocarcinoma in the liver with clear margins, and focal omental involvement with adenocarcinoma. The patient subsequently underwent 6 cycles of ‘adjuvant’ FOLFOX, with Oxaliplatin omitted after 3 cycles secondary to peripheral neuropathy. Soon after the patient experienced a recurrence that involved the anterior abdominal wall, between the peritoneum, and stomach, which was subsequently resected with negative margins. Molecular profiling of this metastatic focus revealed a TMB of 15.4 mutations per megabase, proficient Mismatch Repair (pMMR), a PDL1 CPS score of 26, and microsatellite stable (MSS) status. First, ctDNA analysis was performed at the time of recurrence and was found to be positive. Based on the TMB score of 15.4 and an elevated PDL1 score, the patient was initiated on Nivolumab and Ipilimumab. ctDNA measurements were obtained at the patient‘s request.ResultsDNA assessment performed after surgery and prior to initiation of immunotherapy revealed an approximate doubling of ctDNA levels, measured in mean tumor molecules (MTM) per mL of plasma, every month. During this period of time and correlating with the rise in ctDNA levels, the patient developed a new and enlarging FDG avid cardiophrenic lymph node. Following 2 cycles of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab, the FDG avid lymph node completely resolved and ctDNA clearance was observed (figure 1).Abstract 26 Figure 1ctDNA time-course demonstrating ctDNA kineticsTime-point A represents the initial ctDNA assay, performed at the time of resection of peritoneal metastasis. An additional time-point (B) drawn a month later reveals a further increase in ctDNA. Time-point C represents a peak in ctDNA levels, concomitant with the new emergence of a PET avid cardiophrenic lymph node. Combination Immunotherapy (IO) was begun shortly after time-point C. Time-point D represents ctDNA clearance and radiographic resolution of lymph node metastasis after two cycles of IO. MTM/mL - mean tumor molecules/milliliter of plasmaConclusionsHere we present a case of ctDNA clearance correlating with a radiographic resolution of metastatic disease in a patient with MSS mCRC. The data is provocative and suggests a possible contributory role of ctDNA-based testing as an additional monitoring parameter to measure disease-responsiveness to immunotherapy. Further investigation is warranted.Ethics ApprovalN/AConsentN/AReferencesSchrock AB, Ouyang C, Sandhu J, Sokol E, Jin D, Ross J8, Miller VA, Lim D, Amanam l, Chao J, Catenacci D, Cho M, Braiteh 7, Klempner SJ, Ali 8M, Fakih M. Tumor mutational burden is predictive of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in MSl-high metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol 2019;30(7):1096–1103Overman MJ, et al. Durable Clinical/Benefit With Nivolumab Plus lpilimumab in DNA Mismatch Repair-Deficient/Microsatellite Instability-High Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Clin Oncol 2018;36(8):773–779.

Cediranib With mFOLFOX6 Versus Bevacizumab With mFOLFOX6 As First-Line Treatment for Patients With Advanced Colorectal Cancer: A Double-Blind, Randomized Phase III Study (HORIZON III)

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (29) ◽  
pp. 3588-3595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Joachim Schmoll ◽  
David Cunningham ◽  
Alberto Sobrero ◽  
Christos S. Karapetis ◽  
Philippe Rougier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
First Line Treatment

Purpose To compare the efficacy of cediranib (a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor [VEGFR TKI]) with that of bevacizumab (anti–VEGF-A monoclonal antibody) in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients and Methods HORIZON III [Cediranib Plus FOLFOX6 Versus Bevacizumab Plus FOLFOX6 in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer] had an adaptive phase II/III design. Patients randomly assigned 1:1:1 received mFOLFOX6 [oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 and leucovorin 400 mg/m2 intravenously followed by fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and then continuous infusion of 2,400 mg/m2 over the next 46 hours every 2 weeks] with cediranib (20 or 30 mg per day) or bevacizumab (5 mg/kg every 14 days). An independent end-of-phase II analysis concluded that mFOLFOX6/cediranib 20 mg met predefined criteria for continuation; subsequent patients received mFOLFOX6/cediranib 20 mg or mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab (randomly assigned 1:1). The primary objective was to compare progression-free survival (PFS). Results In all, 1,422 patients received mFOLFOX6/cediranib 20 mg (n = 709) or mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab (n = 713). Primary analysis revealed no significant difference between arms for PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.10; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.25; P = .119), overall survival (OS; HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.10; P = .541), or overall response rate (46.3% v 47.3%). Median PFS and OS were 9.9 and 22.8 months for mFOLFOX6/cediranib and 10.3 and 21.3 months for mFOLFOX6/bevacizumab. The PFS upper 95% CI was outside the predefined noninferiority limit (HR < 1.2). Common adverse events with more than 5% incidence in the cediranib arm included diarrhea, neutropenia, and hypertension. Cediranib-treated patients completed fewer chemotherapy cycles than bevacizumab-treated patients (median 10 v 12 cycles). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were significantly less favorable in cediranib-treated versus bevacizumab-treated patients (P < .001). Conclusion Cediranib activity, in terms of PFS and OS, was comparable to that of bevacizumab when added to mFOLFOX6; however, the predefined boundary for PFS noninferiority was not met. The cediranib safety profile was consistent with previous studies but led to less favorable PROs compared with bevacizumab. Investigation of oral TKIs in CRC continues.

Efficacy and Toxicity of Addition of Bevacizumab to Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 718-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-Cong Ruan ◽  
Yue-Ping Che ◽  
Li Ding ◽  
Hai-Feng Li
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Adverse Event ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Clinical Prognosis ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Pre-treated patients with first-line treatment can be offered a second treatment with the aim of improving their poor clinical prognosis. The therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who did not respond to first-line therapy has limited treatment options. Recently, many studies have paid much attention to the efficacy of bevacizumab as an adjuvant treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy compared with bevacizumab-naive based chemotherapy as second-line treatment in people with metastatic CRC. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for eligible studies updated to March 2018. Randomized-controlled trials comparing addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy without bevacizumab in MCRC patients were included, of which, the main interesting results were the efficacy and safety profiles of the addition of bevacizumab in patients with MCRC as second-line therapy. Result: Five trials were eligible in the meta-analysis. Patients who received the combined bevacizumab and chemotherapy treatment in MCRC as second-line therapy showed a longer overall survival (OS) (OR=0.80,95%CI=0.72-0.89, P<0.0001) and progression-free survival (PFS) (OR=0.69,95%CI=0.61-0.77, P<0.00001). In addition, there was no significant difference in objective response rate (ORR) (RR=1.36,95%CI=0.82-2.24, P=0.23) or severe adverse event (SAE) (RR=1.02,95%CI=0.88-1.19, P=0.78) between bevacizumab-based chemotherapy and bevacizumabnaive based chemotherapy. Conclusion: Our results suggest that the addition of bevacizumab to the chemotherapy therapy could be an efficient and safe treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer as second-line therapy and without increasing the risk of an adverse event.

scholarly journals Comparison of irinotecan and oxaliplatin as the first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sadayuki Kawai ◽  
Nozomi Takeshima ◽  
Yu Hayasaka ◽  
Akifumi Notsu ◽  
Mutsumi Yamazaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
First Line ◽  
Anti Vegf ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
High Incidence

Abstract Background Irinotecan (IRI) and oxaliplatin (Ox) are standard therapeutic agents of the first-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Previous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that treatment with Ox-based compared with IRI-based regimens was associated with better overall survival (OS). However, these reports did not include trials of molecular targeting agents and did not take methods for the administration of concomitant drugs, such as bolus or continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil, into account. A systematic literature review was performed to compare the efficacy and toxicity profiles between IRI- and Ox-based regimens as the first-line treatments for mCRC. Methods This meta-analysis used data from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and SCOPUS. The primary endpoint was OS, and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). Results Nineteen trials involving 4571 patients were included in the analysis. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of OS, PFS, and ORR. There was no significant heterogeneity. Regarding ≥ grade 3 AEs, IRI-based regimens were associated with a high incidence of leukopenia, febrile neutropenia, and diarrhea. Moreover, there was a high incidence of thrombocytopenia and peripheral sensory neuropathy in patients who received Ox-based regimens. In a subgroup analysis, IRI combined with bevacizumab was correlated with a better PFS (HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.82–0.98, P = 0.02), but not with OS (pooled HR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.80–1.03, P = 0.15). Conclusion Although the safety profiles of IRI- and Ox-based regimens varied, their efficacy did not significantly differ. The combination of anti-VEGF antibody and IRI was associated with better PFS compared with anti-VEGF antibody and Ox. Both regimens could be used as the first-line treatments for mCRC with consideration of the patients’ condition or toxicity profiles.

scholarly journals Randomized phase III trial of S-1 versus capecitabine in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: SALTO study by the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 1288-1293 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.J.M. Kwakman ◽  
L.H.J. Simkens ◽  
J.M. van Rooijen ◽  
A.J. van de Wouw ◽  
A.J. ten Tije ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Cancer Group ◽  
First Line Treatment

scholarly journals Systemic therapy for colorectal cancer

2003 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 255-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Borut Stabuc
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Colon Cancer ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Adjuvant Treatment ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Oral Fluoropyrimidines ◽  
Significant Difference

Colorectal cancer alone accounts for around 200,000 deaths in Europe and represents a significant health problem. Although about fifty percent of patients are cured by surgery alone, the other half will eventually die due to metastatic disease, which includes approximately 25% of patients who have evidence of metastases at the time of diagnosis. Surgical resection of the primary tumor and regional lymph nodes is the only curative therapy for colorectal cancer. However, adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III for colon cancer following curative resection has been shown to reduce the risk of recurrence by 19-40% and of death by 16-33%. Today, 5-fluoroUracil and Leucovorin given for six months may represent the best adjuvant treatment available The contribution of levamisole to adjuvant treatment seems to be marginal, if any. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for the patients with Dukes B colon cancer is less clear. A meta-analysis of 1,381 patients with advanced colorectal cancer showed a significant increase in response rate with the bolus 5-fluoroUracil and Leucovorin versus 5-fluoroUracil alone but no significant difference in median survival. Continuous infusion allows higher doses of 5-FU than rapid bolus infusion and improves response rate survival and time to progression. Oral fluoropyrimidines (capecitabine and Uracil/Tegafur [UFT]) are as active as intravenous fluoropyrimidines. Compared to intravenous 5FU, oral fluoropyrimidines have safety advantages clinical benefits, and are more convenient for patients. Phase III randomized clinical trials in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer demonstrate the significant superiority of combining irinotecan with 5-fluoroUracil and Leucovorin or oxaliplatin with 5-fluoroUracil and Leucovorin over the same 5-fluoroUracil and Leucovorin alone. Several phase II studies have shown that the combination of the oral fluoropyrimidines plus irinotecan or oxaliplatin is very active in metastatic colorectal cancer. Trials with agents acting on novel targets in colorectal cancer are progressing rapidly, including doxifluridine, new inhibitors of thymidylate synthase (ZD9331), oral camptothecins (Rubitecan), multitarget antifolate antimetabolite (Premetrexet), inhibitors of epidermal growth factor receptor (Cetuximab), COX-2 inhibitors (celecoxib) and farnesyltransferaze inhibitors (Zarnestra). However, a few randomized trials failed to show a survival advantage compared with placebo in patients with advanced refractory colorectal cancer.

Phase III Multicenter Randomized Trial of Oxaliplatin Added to Chronomodulated Fluorouracil–Leucovorin as First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Giacchetti ◽  
B. Perpoint ◽  
R. Zidani ◽  
N. Le Bail ◽  
R. Faggiuolo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Sensory Neuropathy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
First Line ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

PURPOSE: To study how adding oxaliplatin (l-OHP) to chronomodulated fluorouracil (5-FU)–leucovorin (LV) affected the objective response rate, as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred patients from 15 institutions in four countries were randomly assigned to receive a 5-day course of chronomodulated 5-FU and LV (700 and 300 mg/m2/d, respectively; peak delivery rate at 0400 hours) with or without l-OHP on the first day of each course (125 mg/m2, as a 6-hour infusion). Each course was repeated every 21 days. Response was assessed by extramural review of computed tomography scans. RESULTS: Grade 3 to 4 toxicity from 5-FU–LV occurred in ≤ 5% of the patients (≤ 1% of the courses). Grade 3 to 4 diarrhea occurred in 43% of the patients given l-OHP (10% of the courses), and less than 2% of the patients had severe hematotoxicity. Thirteen percent of the patients had moderate functional impairment from peripheral sensory neuropathy. Sixteen percent of the patients receiving 5-FU–LV had an objective response (95% confidence interval [CI], 9% to 24%), compared with 53% of those receiving additional l-OHP (95% CI, 42% to 63%) (P < .001). The median progression-free survival time was 6.1 months with 5-FU–LV (range, 4.1 to 7.4 months) and 8.7 months (7.4 to 9.2 months) with l-OHP and 5-FU–LV (P = .048). Median survival times were 19.9 and 19.4 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: By chronomodulating 5-FU–LV, we were able to add l-OHP without compromising dose-intensities. l-OHP significantly improved the antitumor efficacy of this regimen.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document