Annamaria Ruzzo

BACKGROUND: KRAS codons 12 and 13 mutations predict resistance to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (moAbs) in metastatic colorectal cancer. Also, BRAF V600E mutation has been associated with resistance. Additional KRAS mutations are described in CRC. METHODS: We investigated the role of KRAS codons 61 and 146 and BRAF V600E mutations in predicting resistance to cetuximab plus irinotecan in a cohort of KRAS codons 12 and 13 wild-type patients. RESULTS: Among 87 KRAS codons 12 and 13 wild-type patients, KRAS codons 61 and 146 were mutated in 7 and 1 case, respectively. None of mutated patients responded vs 22 of 68 wild type (P=0.096). Eleven patients were not evaluable. KRAS mutations were associated with shorter progression-free survival (PFS, HR: 0.46, P=0.028). None of 13 BRAF-mutated patients responded vs 24 of 74 BRAF wild type (P=0.016). BRAF mutation was associated with a trend towards shorter PFS (HR: 0.59, P=0.073). In the subgroup of BRAF wild-type patients, KRAS codons 61/146 mutations determined a lower response rate (0 vs 37%, P=0.047) and worse PFS (HR: 0.45, P=0.023). Patients bearing KRAS or BRAF mutations had poorer response rate (0 vs 37%, P=0.0005) and PFS (HR: 0.51, P=0.006) compared with KRAS and BRAF wild-type patients. CONCLUSION: Assessing KRAS codons 61/146 and BRAF V600E mutations might help optimising the selection of the candidate patients to receive anti-EGFR moAbs.

PURPOSE: PTEN, AKT, and KRAS are epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) downstream regulators. KRAS mutations confer resistance to cetuximab. This retrospective study investigated the role of PTEN loss, AKT phosphorylation, and KRAS mutations on the activity of cetuximab plus irinotecan in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cohort of patients with irinotecan-refractory mCRC who were treated with cetuximab plus irinotecan was tested for PTEN immunoreactivity (ie, immunohistochemistry; IHC), pAKT IHC, and KRAS mutations. Analyses were performed both on primary tumors and on related metastases, and the association among IHC, mutational results, and treatment outcomes was investigated. RESULTS: One-hundred two patients were eligible. Ninety-six primary tumors, 59 metastases, and 53 paired samples were available. Forty-nine primary tumors (58% of assessable samples) had a preserved PTEN expression (PTEN-positive), whereas 35 (40% of assessable samples) were pAKT-positive. Levels of concordance between primary tumors and metastases were 60%, 68%, and 95% for PTEN, pAKT, and KRAS, respectively. PTEN status on primary tumors and pAKT status both on primary tumors and on metastases did not predict response or progression-free survival (PFS). On metastases, 12 (36%) of 33 patients with PTEN-positive tumors were responders compared with one (5%) of 22 who had PTEN-negative tumors (P = .007). The median PFS of patients with PTEN-positive metastases was 4.7 months compared with 3.3 months for those with PTEN-negative metastases (hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; P = .005). Patients with PTEN-positive metastases and KRAS wild type had longer PFS compared with other patients (5.5 months v 3.8 months; HR, 0.42; P = .001). CONCLUSION: PTEN loss in metastases may be predictive of resistance to cetuximab plus irinotecan. The combination of PTEN IHC and KRAS mutational analyses could help to identify a subgroup of patients with mCRC who have higher chances of benefiting from EGFR inhibition.

PURPOSE: The objective is to investigate whether polymorphisms with putative influence on fluorouracil/oxaliplatin activity are associated with clinical outcomes of patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with first-line oxaliplatin, folinic acid, and fluorouracil palliative chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled onto medical oncology units in Central Italy. Patients were required to have cytologically/histologically confirmed metastatic disease with at least one measurable lesion. Peripheral blood samples were used for genotyping 12 polymorphisms in thymidylate synthase, methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase, xeroderma pigmentosum group D (XPD), excision repair cross complementing group 1 (ERCC1), x-ray cross complementing group 1, x-ray cross complementing protein 3, glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) genes. The primary end point of the study was to investigate the association between genotypes and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: In 166 patients, ERCC1-118 T/T, XPD-751 A/C, and XPD-751 C/C genotypes were independently associated with adverse PFS. The presence of two risk genotypes (ERCC1-118 T/T combined with either XPD-751 A/C or XPD-751 C/C) occurred in 50 patients (31%). This profiling showed an independent role for unfavorable PFS with a hazard ratio of 2.84% and 95% CI of 1.47 to 5.45 (P = .002). Neurotoxicity was significantly associated with GSTP1-105 A/G. Carriers of the GSTP1-105 G/G genotype were more prone to suffer from grade 3 neurotoxicity than carriers of GSTP1-105 A/G and GSTP1-105 A/A genotypes. CONCLUSION: A pharmacogenetic approach may be an innovative strategy for optimizing palliative chemotherapy in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. These findings deserve confirmation in additional prospective studies.

Abstract Purpose. Several studies have suggested that KRAS somatic mutations may predict resistance to cetuximab- and panitumumab-based treatments in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Nevertheless, most experiences were conducted on samples from primaries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the grade of concordance in terms of KRAS status between primaries and related metastases. Patients and Methods. We analyzed KRAS codon 12 and 13 mutations from formalin-fixed sections of 107 CRC primaries and related metastases. Eight pairs were excluded from the analysis because of the low amount of tumor tissue in the available samples. The main characteristics were: 50 men, 49 women; median age at diagnosis, 71 years (range, 41–84). The metastatic sites analyzed were the liver in 80 patients (80.8%), lung in seven patients (7.1%), and other sites in 12 patients (12.1%). Results. A KRAS mutation was found in 38 (38.4%) primary tumors and in 36 (36.4%) related metastases. The rate of concordance was 96.0% (95% confidence interval, 90.0%–98.9%). Discordance was observed in only four (4%) patients. Conclusions. Our results indicate that the detection of KRAS mutations in either primary or metastatic tumors from patients with CRC is concordant and this assessment could be used to predict response to targeted therapies such as cetuximab and panitumumab. Learning Objectives After completing this course, the reader should be able to: Describe the importance of KRAS mutations in CRC patients.Explain the relevance to cancer treatment of concordance of KRAS status between primary tumors and metastases in CRC patients.Discuss the impact of KRAS mutations as a predictive/prognostic factor in CRC patients. CME This article is available for continuing medical education credit at http://CME.TheOncologist.com