scholarly journals Clinicopathological Significance of BRAF V600E Mutation in Egyptian Colorectal Cancer Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 88 (6) ◽  
pp. 991-997
Author(s):  
MONA A. KORA, M.Sc.; NANSY Y. ASAAD, M.D. ◽  
HALA S. EL-REBEY, M.D.; RANIA A. HASSANIN, M.D. ◽  
ALSHIMAA M. ALHANAFY, M.D.
BMC Cancer ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Chen ◽  
Fang Guo ◽  
Xin Shi ◽  
Lihua Zhang ◽  
Aifeng Zhang ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 175883591882029 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seiichiro Mitani ◽  
Hiroya Taniguchi ◽  
Keiji Sugiyama ◽  
Toshiki Masuishi ◽  
Kazunori Honda ◽  
...  

Background: BRAF (v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1) V600E mutant colorectal cancer is associated with short survival. Recently, clinical trials have been conducted to improve outcomes of second or later lines of chemotherapy. However, there is a paucity of reference data pertaining to outcomes of second-line chemotherapy and prognostic factors that are relevant only to BRAF mutant patients. Patients and methods: We retrospectively reviewed metastatic colorectal cancer patients with BRAF V600E mutation who underwent second-line chemotherapy between January 2007 and March 2017. We evaluated treatment outcomes and performed prognostic analyses. Results: A total of 52 patients were included. The median progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were 2.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.91–4.11] and 6.5 (95% CI = 4.30–9.63) months, respectively. Overall response and disease control rates were 7% and 48%, respectively. All the regimens which elicited a partial response included BRAF inhibitors in combination with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies. Therefore, the overall response was 0% after exclusion of patients treated with study drugs. Multivariate analysis for OS revealed that the Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS), elevated lactate dehydrogenase, and poor performance status were independent prognostic factors. In particular, survival curves according to the GPS stratified the patients into distinct risk groups. The median OSs in patients with GPS of 0, 1, and 2 were 9.9, 5.0, and 1.9 months, respectively. Conclusions: Outcomes of second-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer patients with BRAF V600E mutation were extremely poor. GPS may be useful in future clinical trials.


2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 819-825 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fakhraddin Naghibalhossaini ◽  
Hamideh Mahmoodzadeh Hosseini ◽  
Pooneh Mokarram ◽  
Mozhdeh Zamani

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4058-4058
Author(s):  
A. Ruzzo ◽  
C. Cremolini ◽  
F. Loupakis ◽  
L. Fornaro ◽  
D. Santini ◽  
...  

4058 Background: KRAS and BRAF mutations are associated with resistance to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. EGFR Intron-1 (CA)n genotype has been suggested to influence the activity of cetuximab. Methods: We retrospectively assessed KRAS and BRAF mutational status and EGFR Intron-1 (CA)n genotypes in 117 irinotecan-refractory EGFR-positive mCRC patients treated with cetuximab plus irinotecan. We defined short (S) and long (L) allelic variants those presenting < and ≥17 CA repeats respectively. Among KRAS wild-type patients, we investigated the association between BRAF mutational status and EGFR Intron-1 genotype and treatment outcome in terms of RR and PFS. Results: Among 66 (56%) KRAS wild-type patients, BRAF V600E mutation was detected in 9 (14%) patients. BRAF wild-type patients reported improved RR (0/9, 0% vs 19/57, 33%, p = 0.04) and PFS (3.3 vs 5.1 months, p = 0.076; HR = 0.54 [95%CI: 0.18–1.09]) in comparison with BRAF-mutated. EGFR Intron-1 L/L genotype was detected in 13 (20%) KRAS wild-type patients. Objective responses were reported in 1/13 (8%) EGFR Intron-1 L/L patients and in 18/53 (34%) S/L or S/S patients (p = 0.061). Significantly longer PFS was observed among EGFR Intron-1 S/L or S/S patients (5.3 vs 3.3 months, p = 0.0062; HR = 0.45 [95%CI: 0.14–0.72]). Among 57 KRAS and BRAF wild-type patients, 1/11 (9%) EGFR Intron-1 L/L patients and 18/46 (39%) S/L - S/S patients responded to treatment (p = 0.058), achieving median PFS of 3.7 and 5.4 months, respectively (p = 0.022; HR = 0.48 [95%CI: 0.15–0.87]). Conclusions: In KRAS wild-type patients, BRAF mutations are confirmed to predict resistance to cetuximab treatment. EGFR Intron-1 allelic variants are promising markers of benefit in patients with both KRAS and BRAF wild-type and may help to better select mCRC patients candidate to receive cetuximab-containing treatment. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4113-4113
Author(s):  
L. H. Jensen ◽  
L. Dysager ◽  
J. Lindebjerg ◽  
S. Kølvraa ◽  
L. Byriel ◽  
...  

4113 Background: The single most common cause of hereditary colorectal cancer is the Lynch syndrome, which is associated with deficiency of the mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, or MSH6. Most MLH1 negative tumors are sporadic in origin, and they can be identified if harbouring a BRAF V600E mutation or hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter. If Lynch syndrome is detected in a patient and its family, screening can prevent death from new colorectal cancer. A family history should always be obtained, but in small families or patients with de-novo mutations and mutations with late or low penetrance, this is not sufficient. The aim of this study was to validate our previously suggested clinically applicable strategy based on molecular characteristics for identifying which patients to refer for genetic counselling. Methods: The strategy was validated in an unselected cohort of 287 colorectal cancer patients. All tumors was tested for MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6 with immunohistochemistry. DNA from MLH1 negative tumors was sequenced for BRAF mutations. If wild-type, MLH1 promoter was analyzed with methylation specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA). MLH1 negative tumors were considered sporadic if BRAF V600E mutation or MLH1 promoter hypermethylation was found. A follow up was done on patients with MSH2 or MSH6 negative tumors and MLH1 negative cases not shown to be sporadic. Results: Most tumors, 251 (88%), stained positive for all three proteins. Six (2%) had negative MSH2 and one (<1%) isolated loss of MSH6. MLH1 was negative in 29 cases (10%). DNA quality allowed BRAF analysis in 27 of these with 14 mutations and 13 wild-type. DNA quality allowed MLPA in four of the 13 BRAF wild-type, and all four were methylated. Subsequently, Lynch syndrome could not be ruled out in 18 patients. A follow-up at 8–10 years revealed four definite Lynch syndrome and four highly suspicious. Conclusions: An easy and clinically applicable step-wise approach with immunohistochemistry (100%), BRAF sequencing (10%), and methylation analysis (5%) identified several patients with hereditary cancer. The family history should be supplemented with a molecular screening for whom to send for genetic counselling. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document