TP53 Gain-of-Function and Non–Gain-of-Function Mutations Are Differentially Associated With Sidedness-Dependent Prognosis in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minggui Pan ◽  
Chen Jiang ◽  
Pam Tse ◽  
Ninah Achacoso ◽  
Stacey Alexeeff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Gain Of Function ◽  
Pik3ca Mutations ◽  
Prognostic Stratification ◽  
Comorbidity Index ◽  
Generation Sequencing

PURPOSE To examine the association of gain-of-function (GOF) and non–gain-of-function (non-GOF) TP53 mutations with prognosis of metastatic right-sided (RCC) versus left-sided colorectal cancer (LCC). METHODS This cohort study included patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) who had next-generation sequencing performed from November 2017 to January 2021. We defined R175H, R248W, R248Q, R249S, R273H, R273L, and R282W as GOF and all other mutp53 as non-GOF. We used Cox regression modeling to examine the association between GOF and non-GOF mutp53 and overall survival (OS), adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, performance status, Charlson comorbidity index and receipt of chemotherapy. RESULTS Of total 1,043 patients, 735 had tumors with mutp53 and 308 had wild-type p53 (wtp53). GOF was associated with worse OS than non-GOF mutp53 only in LCC (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.66 [95% CI, 1.20 to 2.29]), but not in RCC (HR = 0.79 [95% CI, 0.49 to 1.26]). Importantly, RCC was associated with worse OS than LCC only in the subset of patients whose CRC carried non-GOF (HR = 1.76 [95% CI, 1.30 to 2.39]), but not GOF mutp53 (HR = 0.92 [95% CI, 0.55 to 1.53]) or wtp53 (HR = 0.88 [95% CI, 0.60 to 1.28]). These associations were largely unchanged after also adjusting for RAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA mutations, and microsatellite instability-high. CONCLUSION Poorer survival of patients with metastatic RCC versus LCC appeared to be restricted to the subset with non-GOF mutp53, whereas GOF versus non-GOF mutp53 was associated with poorer survival only among patients with LCC. This approach of collectively classifying mutp53 into GOF and non-GOF provides new insight for prognostic stratification and for understanding the mechanism of sidedness-dependent prognosis. If confirmed, future CRC clinical trials may benefit from incorporating this approach.

Tumor bulk as a prognostic biomarker and predictor of benefit from anti-EGFR therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Analysis of 476 patients from the ARCAD Clinical Trials Program.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 108-108
Author(s):  
Benjamin Adam Weinberg ◽  
Manel Rakez ◽  
Benoist Chibaudel ◽  
Tim Maughan ◽  
Richard Adams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Lung Metastases ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Predictive Biomarker ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Cox Models ◽  
Study Results

108 Background: Primary tumor sidedness has emerged as a prognostic and predictive biomarker for patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Tumor bulk has also been postulated to predict response to anti-EGFR therapy. We sought to evaluate the role of tumor bulk as a predictive biomarker to anti-EGFR therapy in pts with left- (LS) and right-sided (RS) mCRC. Methods: Data from 476 pts with mCRC enrolled across 2 first-line trials of anti-EGFR plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy were pooled. Pts were included if there was available information on tumor sidedness and tumor bulk. All were KRAS wild-type and BRAF wild-type or unknown BRAF status. The right colon was defined as the cecum through the transverse colon, and the left colon as the splenic flexure through the rectum. Tumor bulk was the mean tumor size of target lesions at baseline, bulky defined as > 3.5 cm. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox models adjusting for performance status (PS), platelet count, primary tumor (PT) resection, number of metastatic sites, and stratified by study. Results: Pts with bulky tumors (211, 44%) had higher PS, white blood cell and platelet counts, higher CEA, fewer sites of metastatic disease, more liver than lung metastases, and fewer had PT resection. OS and PFS medians in months (mos) are presented in the table with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs). Bulky tumors had inferior median OS compared with non-bulky (mOS, 17.9 vs. 21.3 mos, HRadj 1.33, 95% CI 1.05-1.69, P = 0.016) although median PFS was similar (mPFS, 8.6 vs. 8.7 mos, HRadj 1.15, 95% CI 0.92-1.42, P = 0.21). Conclusions: Tumor bulk is an independent prognostic factor for OS in KRAS wild-type and BRAF wild-type or unknown BRAF status pts. Pts with non-bulky RS tumors have survival outcomes similar to pts with bulky LS tumors. Although the mPFS for pts with RS tumors treated with anti-EGFR therapy was the lowest across subgroups, this finding was not statistically significant. Further research is warranted into whether pts with bulky RS tumors benefit from anti-EGFR therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT00182715, NCT00640081. [Table: see text]

PARADIGM study: A multicenter, randomized, phase III study of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) plus panitumumab or bevacizumab as first-line treatment in patients with RAS (KRAS/NRAS) wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS776-TPS776 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takayuki Yoshino ◽  
Hiroyuki Uetake ◽  
Katsuya Tsuchihara ◽  
Kohei Shitara ◽  
Kentaro Yamazaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Type I ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
First Line Treatment

TPS776 Background: Optimal combination of monoclonal antibody (anti-VEGF vs. anti-EGFR antibody) with standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment in patients (pts) with RAS (KRAS/NRAS) wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains controversial. FIRE-3 study demonstrated a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) with anti-EGFR over bevacizumab in pts with KRAS exon 2 wild type mCRC, while CALGB 80405 study did not. PARADIGM study is designed to compare panitumumab vs. bevacizumab combined with mFOLFOX6 in pts with RAS wild-type chemotherapy-naive mCRC. Methods: Eligible pts are aged 20-79 years with ECOG performance status (PS) 0-1 and histologically/cytologically confirmed RAS wild-type mCRC. 800 pts will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab or bevacizumab, and stratified according to institution, age (20-64 vs. 65-79 years), and liver metastases (present vs. absent). Each treatment regimen includes oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, l-leucovorin 200 mg/m2, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) iv 400 mg/m2 at day 1, 5-FU civ 2400 mg/m2 at day 1-3, and either panitumumab 6 mg/kg or bevacizumab 5 mg/kg at day 1 every two weeks. The primary endpoint is the OS; the study was designed to detect the OS hazard ratio of 0.76, with a one-sided type I error of 0.025 and 80% power. Secondary efficacy endpoints include progression-free survival, response rate, duration of response, and curative resection rate. One interim analysis is planned for the OS when approximately 70% of the targeted 570 events has been observed. Exploratory endpoint is to investigate possible biomarkers including oncogenic mutations using tumor tissue and circulating tumor DNA (Study ID: NCT02394834). As of August 2015, 21 pts have been randomized and recruitment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02394795.

A phase 3 open-label, randomized, multicenter study of Imprime PGG in combination with cetuximab in patients with KRAS wild type metastatic colorectal cancer.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS787-TPS787
Author(s):  
Richard Dale Huhn ◽  
Jamie Lowe ◽  
Michele Grady ◽  
Corina Candiani Taitt ◽  
Michele Anne Gargano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
The United States ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Phase 3

TPS787 Background: Imprime PGG (Imprime) is a novel immune modulator (complex carbohydrate biologic), which harnesses innate immune cells to enhance killing of antibody-targeted tumor cells. In a phase 2 single-arm clinical trial in mCRC, the combination of Imprime with cetuximab resulted in 24% ORR, 62% disease control rate (DCR), and median time to progression (TTP) of 12 wks (Tamayo ME, Ann Onc 2010), representing approximate 100% increases vs historical control (Cunningham, NEJM 2004). ORR was 45%, DCR, 82% and TTP, 24 wks in pts with KRAS WT tumors (post hoc analysis). Single-agent cetuximab has been shown to improve objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expressing, KRAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who failed oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based therapy or are intolerant to irinotecan. The mechanism of action of cetuximab is thought to rely on competitive blockade of endogenous ligand binding and downstream signaling, internalization and down regulation of EGFR, as well as antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) (Erbitux SmPC). The current trial, sponsored by Biothera (registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01309126) is to confirm these findings in phase 3. Methods: Eligible pts will have had prior oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based therapy or be intolerant to irinotecan, and will meet key inclusion criteria including measurable disease and ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. In a 2:1 randomization, stratified by geographic region, prior chemotherapy and site, approximately 795 pts will receive weekly open-label Imprime plus cetuximab or cetuximab alone. The primary endpoint of the study is OS and primary analysis will occur when ~709 deaths have occurred. Secondary endpoints include PFS, ORR (based on RECIST 1.1), quality of life, safety and pharmacokinetics. Exploratory endpoints include biomarker analyses. Pt screening and enrollment is underway in the United States and Europe. Clinical trial information: NCT01309126.

First line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: Are clinical trial results reproducible in real-life practice?

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 836-836
Author(s):  
Ron Lewin ◽  
Omer Gal ◽  
Aaron Sulkes ◽  
Noa Gordon ◽  
Irit Ben-Aharon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Group Analysis ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Primary Tumor Site ◽  
Ras Status

836 Background: Treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has greatly advanced over the past decade, based on data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This raises the question whether results of RCTs, performed on selected patients (pts), do reflect outcomes in real-life practice. The aim of this study was to summarize our experience in the treatment of mCRC and compare it to data reported in RCTs. Methods: A retrospective single-institution study on consecutive mCRC pts treated with first-line bevacizumab-containing regimens in our institute between 2006 and 2014. Results: The study included 300 pts, of whom 54% were males. Median age was 67 years (range 28-90), 26% aged ≥ 75 years. ECOG performance status was ≤1 in 93%. The primary tumor site was right colon in 37%, left colon in 40%, rectal in 23% and 1% of pts had synchronous tumors. RAS status was available in 60%, of whom 55% had wild-type alleles. 46% of pts had a single metastatic site, including 27% with liver-limited disease, and 54% had multiple metastatic sites. Irinotecan-based chemotherapy was used in 66%, oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in 29% and flouropyrimidine monotherapy in 5%. Curative metastasectomy during 1st line treatment was performed in 29%. Grade ≥3 hematological and non-hematological toxicities were reported in 24% and 38% of pts, respectively. Second and third line treatments were administered to 75% and 66% of pts, respectively; 73% of pts received both irinotecan and oxaliplatin through their treatment course and 76% of those with wild-type RAS were treated with anti-EGFR therapy. Overall response rate and disease control rate were 69% and 89%, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 17 and 28 months, respectively. In a sub-group analysis on "RCT-like population", excluding pts ≥ 75 years, ECOG PS ≥ 3 and/or mutated/unknown RAS status, median PFS and OS were 15 and 29 months, respectively. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that, if adhered to international clinical guidelines, outcomes reported in RCTs are indeed reproducible in routine clinical practice in unselected real-life pts. Additional data, with more pts and longer follow-up, will be presented.

Use of circulating endothelial cells to predict response to FOLFOX4 plus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 427-427
Author(s):  
S. Matsusaka ◽  
N. Mizunuma ◽  
M. Suenaga ◽  
K. Chin ◽  
E. Shinozaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Circulating Endothelial Cells ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Cox Regression Analysis ◽  
The Government

427 Background: The purpose of this study was to identify CEC threshold proposal for determining response to FOLFOX4 plus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods: All patients were enrolled using institutional review board-approved protocols at the Cancer Institute Hospital and provided informed consent. From July 2007 to June 2008, 33 patients treated with FOLFOX4 plus bevacizumab were enrolled in a prospective study. From January 2007 to June 2007, before bevacizumab was approved by the government in Japan, 31 patients treated with FOLFOX4 as a control were enrolled. The study population consisted of patients aged 18 years or older with histologically proven mCRC. Other inclusion criteria were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, adequate organ function. CECs of whole blood at the baseline, day 4, 2 weeks after initiation of chemotherapy were isolated and counted using immunomagnetics. Results: There was no correlation between CEC levels and the outcome in the FOLFOX4. In the FOLFOX4 plus bevacizumab, CEC levels at the baseline were significantly associated with the outcome. Patients with 65 or more CECs at the baseline had shorter median PFS (9.2 months), than the median PFS of fewer than 65 CECs at the baseline (18.9 months) in the FOLFOX4 plus bevacizumab (p = 0.003). Patients with 65 or more CECs at the baseline had shorter median OS (23.3 months), than the median OS of fewer than 65 CEC s at the baseline in the FOLFOX4 plus bevacizumab (p = 0.027). In the univariate analysis, lung metastasis, lymph node metastasis, and CEC levels at the baseline predicted PFS. In the univariate Cox regression analyses, peritoneal metastasis, CEC levels at the baseline were associated with OS. In order to evaluate the independent predictive effect of FOLFOX4 plus bevacizumab, multivariate Cox regression analysis was carried out. CEC levels at the baseline were the strongest predictor. Conclusions: A threshold of lower than 65 CEC/4mL at the baseline was a significant predictor of the outcome for colorectal cancer patients treated with FOLFOX4 plus bevacizumab. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Second-Line Anti-VEGF after First-Line Anti-EGFR Based Therapy in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Multicenter “SLAVE” Study

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 1259
Author(s):  
Alessandro Parisi ◽  
Alessio Cortellini ◽  
Katia Cannita ◽  
Olga Venditti ◽  
Floriana Camarda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Treated Group ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
First Line ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: The optimal anti-angiogenic strategy as second-line treatment in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with anti-EGFR (Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor) based first-line treatment is still debated. Methods: This multicenter, real-world, retrospective study is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of second-line Bevacizumab- and Aflibercept-based treatments after an anti-EGFR based first-line regimen. Clinical outcomes measured were: objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs) profiles. Results: From February 2011 to October 2019, 277 consecutive mCRC patients received Bevacizumab-based (228, 82.3%) or Aflibercept-based (49, 17.7%) regimen. No significant difference was found regarding ORR. The median follow-up was 27.7 months (95%CI: 24.7–34.4). Aflibercept-treated group had a significantly shorter PFS compared to Bevacizumab-treated group (5.6 vs. 7.1 months, respectively) (HR = 1.34 (95%CI: 0.95–1.89); p = 0.0932). The median OS of the Bevacizumab-treated group and Aflibercept-treated group was 16.2 (95%CI: 15.3–18.1) and 12.7 (95%CI: 8.8–17.5) months, respectively (HR= 1.31 (95%CI: 0.89–1.93) p = 0.16). After adjusting for the key covariates (age, gender, performance status, number of metastatic sites and primary tumor side) Bevacizumab-based regimens revealed to be significantly related with a prolonged PFS (HR = 1.44 (95%CI: 1.02–2.03); p = 0.0399) compared to Aflibercept-based regimens, but not with a prolonged OS (HR = 1.47 (95%CI: 0.99–2.17); p = 0.0503). The incidence of G3/G4 VEGF inhibitors class-specific AEs was 7.5% and 26.5% in the Bevacizumab-treated group and the Aflibercept-treated group, respectively (p = 0.0001). Conclusion: Our analysis seems to reveal that Bevacizumab-based regimens have a slightly better PFS and class-specific AEs profile compared to Aflibercept-based regimen as second-line treatment of RAS wild-type mCRC patients previously treated with anti-EGFR based treatments. These results have to be taken with caution and no conclusive considerations are allowed.

Comorbidity and other predictors of survival in veterans with colorectal cancer (CRC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14125-e14125
Author(s):  
Fengming Zhong ◽  
Trent P Wang ◽  
Tanganyika Barnes ◽  
Melanie L. Gonzalez ◽  
Victor T Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
History Of ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Comorbidity Index ◽  
Ecog Ps

e14125 Background: The role of comorbidity as a prognostic marker is an area of great interest. This study aimed to determine whether comorbidity indices predict survival in Veterans with CRC. Methods: In an IRB-approved protocol, we reviewed the records of pts diagnosed with CRC at a VA Medical Center from 1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007. Demographics, stage, grade, ECOG performance status (PS), CEA, hemoglobin (HGB), Albumin (ALB) at diagnosis, history of surgical resection (SR) were abstracted. Comorbidity was assessed with the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), the Kaplan-Feinstein Index (KFI), the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS), and VA Comorbidity Scale (VACS). We developed a survival model with stage, ECOG PS, HGB, ALB, SR, and ECOG PS. Comorbidity indices were tested by determining if they were independent predictors of survival after inclusion in this model. Cox regression analyses were performed with SAS V9.2. Results: There were 175 pts with colorectal ca with 111 colon (C) and 64 rectal ca (R) pts. The median (M) age at diagnosis was 71 (45-90). 54% of study population was deceased at the time of data collection. Median survival was 1157 days (5-3256). Results of multivariate analyses with comorbidity indices are summarized in the table. Conclusions: Charlson, CIRS 16 and CIRS 19 comorbidity indices were significant predictors for veterans with colorectal cancer and appear to be important for the subset of veterans with colon cancer. Confirmatory studies should be done in larger populatins. These indices may be used in the design of future clinical trials. This was supported by the New Jersey Commission for Cancer Research 09-1133-CCR-EO. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals The Prime Study: Survival Outcomes for Patients with RAS/BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer, by Baseline ECOG Performance Status

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. ii87
Author(s):  
Peeters Marc ◽  
Siena Salvatore ◽  
Tabernero Josep ◽  
Douillard Jean-Yves ◽  
Koukakis Reija ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Ecog Performance Status

scholarly journals Novel Somatic Genetic Variants as Predictors of Resistance to EGFR-Targeted Therapies in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 2245
Author(s):  
Pau Riera ◽  
Benjamín Rodríguez-Santiago ◽  
Adriana Lasa ◽  
Lidia Gonzalez-Quereda ◽  
Berta Martín ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Genetic Variants ◽  
Chart Review ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Targeted Next Generation Sequencing ◽  
Poor Outcomes ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Patients ◽  
Next Generation Sequencing Ngs ◽  
Generation Sequencing

Background: About 40% of RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients undergoing anti-EGFR-based therapy have poor outcomes. Treatment failure is not only associated with poorer prognosis but higher healthcare costs. Our aim was to identify novel somatic genetic variants in the primary tumor and assess their effect on anti-EGFR response. Patients and Methods: Tumor (somatic) and blood (germline) DNA samples were obtained from two well-defined cohorts of mCRC patients, those sensitive and those resistant to EGFR blockade. Genetic variant screening of 43 EGFR-related genes was performed using targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS). Relevant clinical data were collected through chart review to assess genetic results. Results: Among 61 patients, 38 were sensitive and 23 were resistant to treatment. We identified eight somatic variants that predicted non-response. Three were located in insulin-related genes (I668N and E1218K in IGF1R, T1156M in IRS2) and three in genes belonging to the LRIG family (T152T in LRIG1, S697L in LRIG2 and V812M in LRIG3). The remaining two variants were found in NRAS (G115Efs*46) and PDGFRA (T301T). We did not identify any somatic variants related to good response. Conclusions: This study provides evidence that novel somatic genetic variants along the EGFR-triggered pathway could modulate the response to anti-EGFR drugs in mCRC patients. It also highlights the influence of insulin-related genes and LRIG genes on anti-EGFR efficacy. Our findings could help characterize patients who are resistant to anti-EGFR blockade despite harboring RAS/BRAF wild-type tumors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document