scholarly journals A Simplified Genomic Profiling Approach Predicts Outcome in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Cancers ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Capalbo ◽  
Francesca Belardinilli ◽  
Domenico Raimondo ◽  
Edoardo Milanetti ◽  
Umberto Malapelle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Gene Mutations ◽  
Bioinformatic Analysis ◽  
Genetic Alterations ◽  
Molecular Heterogeneity ◽  
Clinical Approach ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ras Genes

The response of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) to the first-line conventional combination therapy is highly variable, reflecting the elevated heterogeneity of the disease. The genetic alterations underlying this heterogeneity have been thoroughly characterized through omic approaches requiring elevated efforts and costs. In order to translate the knowledge of CRC molecular heterogeneity into a practical clinical approach, we utilized a simplified Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) based platform to screen a cohort of 77 patients treated with first-line conventional therapy. Samples were sequenced using a panel of hotspots and targeted regions of 22 genes commonly involved in CRC. This revealed 51 patients carrying actionable gene mutations, 22 of which carried druggable alterations. These mutations were frequently associated with additional genetic alterations. To take into account this molecular complexity and assisted by an unbiased bioinformatic analysis, we defined three subgroups of patients carrying distinct molecular patterns. We demonstrated these three molecular subgroups are associated with a different response to first-line conventional combination therapies. The best outcome was achieved in patients exclusively carrying mutations on TP53 and/or RAS genes. By contrast, in patients carrying mutations in any of the other genes, alone or associated with mutations of TP53/RAS, the expected response is much worse compared to patients with exclusive TP53/RAS mutations. Additionally, our data indicate that the standard approach has limited efficacy in patients without any mutations in the genes included in the panel. In conclusion, we identified a reliable and easy-to-use approach for a simplified molecular-based stratification of mCRC patients that predicts the efficacy of the first-line conventional combination therapy.

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.

Irinotecan/Fluorouracil Combination in First-Line Therapy of Older and Younger Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Combined Analysis of 2,691 Patients in Randomized Controlled Trials

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 1443-1451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunnar Folprecht ◽  
Matthew T. Seymour ◽  
Leonard Saltz ◽  
Jean-Yves Douillard ◽  
Hartmut Hecker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Significant Interaction ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Younger Patients ◽  
Combined Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii Trials

PurposeUncertainty exists about whether elderly patients benefit to the same extent as younger patients from combination therapy with irinotecan in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC).Patients and MethodsCombined analysis was carried out with source data from the fluorouracil (FU)/folinic acid (FA) and the irinotecan/FU/FA arms of four first-line, phase III trials of CRC to investigate the efficacy and safety of combination and monotherapy in elderly (age ≥ 70 years; n = 599) compared with younger (age < 70 years; n = 2,092) patients.ResultsResponse rates were improved with irinotecan-based combination therapy compared with FU/FA in patients both younger than 70 years and ≥ 70 years (46.6% v 29.0% P < .0001; and 50.5% v 30.3%, P < .0001, respectively). With irinotecan/FU/FA, progression-free survival was better for both younger (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.85; P < .0001) and elderly patients (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.90; P = .0026). In younger patients, overall survival was improved with combination therapy (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.92; P = .0003). The same trend was observed in elderly patients (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.05; P = .15). There was no significant interaction between treatment arm and age in the regression analysis. The expected differences in toxicity between combination and monotherapy in elderly and younger patients were observed. A significant interaction between treatment and age (cutoff, 70 years) for vomiting and hepatotoxicity was not confirmed by analysis that used age as a continuous variable.ConclusionPatients older than 70 years of age who were selected for inclusion in phase III trials derived similar benefits as younger patients from irinotecan-containing chemotherapy, and the risk of toxicity was similar.

scholarly journals Pooled Safety and Efficacy Analysis Examining the Effect of Performance Status on Outcomes in Nine First-Line Treatment Trials Using Individual Data From Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (12) ◽  
pp. 1948-1955 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel J. Sargent ◽  
Claus Henning Köhne ◽  
Hanna Kelly Sanoff ◽  
Brian M. Bot ◽  
Matthew T. Seymour ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Individual Data ◽  
First Line ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose Performance status (PS) is a prognostic factor in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Clinical trials typically enroll less than 10% of patients with a PS of 2 (PS2); thus, the benefit of systemic chemotherapy in PS2 patients is uncertain. Patients and Methods Individual data from 6,286 patients (509 PS2 patients) from nine clinical trials were used to compare treatment efficacy by PS. Progression-free survival (PFS), grade ≥ 3 adverse events, 60-day all-cause mortality, overall survival (OS), and response rate (RR) were explored in the full set of nine trials and in the five trials comparing first-line monotherapy with combination therapy. Results Compared with patients with PS of 0 or 1, PS2 patients had significantly higher rates of grade ≥ 3 nausea (8.5% v 16.4%, respectively; P < .0001) and vomiting (7.6% v 11.9%, respectively; P = .006) and 60-day all-cause mortality (2.8% v 12.0%, respectively; P < .0001). PS2 was prognostic for PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.52; P < .0001; median PFS, 7.6 months for PS 0 or 1 v 4.9 months for PS2), OS (HR = 2.18; P < .0001; median OS, 17.3 months for PS 0 or 1 v 8.5 months for PS2), and RR (odds ratio = 0.61; P < .0001; 43.8% for PS 0 or 1 v 32.0% for PS2). The relative benefit and toxicity of experimental versus control treatment and monotherapy versus combination therapy were not different in PS 0 or 1 patients versus PS2 patients. Conclusion In clinical trials, PS2 patients derive similar benefit from superior treatment as patients with PS of 0 to 1 but with an increased risk of toxicities and 12% 60-day mortality. Although current treatment provides benefit, new approaches are required to approach 1-year median survival for PS2 patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document