Search

Table S1: Baseline patient demographics and disease characteristics. Table S2: mRNA/IHC AREG/EREG concordance table. Figure S1: AREG/EREG IHC scatterplot. Table S3: Prognostic effect of dichotomous AREG/EREG. Table S4: AREG/EREG and RECIST response rate. Table S5: AREG and EREG as individual continuous variables. Table S6: AREG/EREG predictive analyses adjusted for BRAF mutation, PTL and peritoneal metastases. Table S7: Exploratory analyses of different AREG/EREG cut points. Table S8: AREG/EREG IHC in biopsy and resection specimens.

Purpose:High tumor mRNA levels of the EGFR ligands amphiregulin (AREG) and epiregulin (EREG) are associated with anti-EGFR agent response in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, ligand RNA assays have not been adopted into routine practice due to issues with analytic precision and practicality. We investigated whether AREG/EREG IHC could predict benefit from the anti-EGFR agent panitumumab.Experimental Design:Artificial intelligence algorithms were developed to assess AREG/EREG IHC in 274 patients from the PICCOLO trial of irinotecan with or without panitumumab (Ir vs. IrPan) in RAS wild-type mCRC. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were RECIST response rate (RR) and overall survival (OS). Models were repeated adjusting separately for BRAF mutation status and primary tumor location (PTL).Results:High ligand expression was associated with significant PFS benefit from IrPan compared with Ir [8.0 vs. 3.2 months; HR, 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.37–0.79; P = 0.001]; whereas low ligand expression was not (3.4 vs. 4.4 months; HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.74–1.49; P = 0.78). The ligand-treatment interaction was significant (Pinteraction = 0.02) and remained significant after adjustment for BRAF-mutation status and PTL. Likewise, RECIST RR was significantly improved in patients with high ligand expression (IrPan vs. Ir: 48% vs. 6%; P < 0.0001) but not those with low ligand expression (25% vs. 14%; P = 0.10; Pinteraction = 0.01). The effect on OS was similar but not statistically significant.Conclusions:AREG/EREG IHC identified patients who benefitted from the addition of panitumumab to irinotecan chemotherapy. IHC is a practicable assay that may be of use in routine practice.

PURPOSE Despite extensive randomized evidence supporting the use of treatment breaks in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), they are not universally offered to patients despite improvements in quality of life without detriment to overall survival (OS). FOCUS4-N was set up to explore the impact of oral maintenance therapy in patients who are responding to first-line therapy. METHODS FOCUS4 was a molecularly stratified trial program that registered patients with newly diagnosed mCRC. The FOCUS4-N trial was offered to patients in whom a targeted subtrial was unavailable or biomarker tests failed. Patients were randomly assigned using a 1:1 ratio between maintenance capecitabine and active monitoring (AM). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) with secondary outcomes including OS toxicity and tolerability. RESULTS Between March 2014 and March 2020, 254 patients were randomly assigned (127 to capecitabine and 127 to AM) across 88 UK sites. Baseline characteristics were balanced. There was strong evidence of efficacy for PFS (hazard ratio = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.75; P < .0001), but no significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.27; P = .66) was observed. Compliance with treatment was good, and toxicity from capecitabine versus AM was as expected with grade ≥ 2 fatigue (25% v 12%), diarrhea (23% v 13%), and hand-foot syndrome (26% v 3%). Quality of life showed little difference between the groups. CONCLUSION Despite strong evidence of disease control with maintenance therapy, OS remains unaffected and FOCUS4-N provides additional evidence to support the use of treatment breaks as safe management alternatives for patients who are stable or responding to first-line treatment for mCRC. Capecitabine without bevacizumab may be used to extend PFS in the interval after 16 weeks of first-line therapy.

The international FOxTROT trial, recently published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, (ref awaited) is the first randomised controlled trial testing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil in locally advanced but operable colon cancer. 1053 patients with operable, radiologically staged T3-T4, N1-2, M0 colon cancer were recruited from over 100 sites in the UK, Sweden and Denmark. Patients were randomised to 6 weeks of planned chemotherapy before resectional surgery, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy; or upfront surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (total 18 weeks in both arms). NAC was safe and, compared with standard treatment, there was no increase in surgical complications, a higher R0 rate (95% vs 89%, p0.001), and significant primary and nodal pathological downstaging. The trial met its primary endpoint with fewer patients experiencing recurrent or residual disease at 2 years with NAC compared with control: (16.8% vs 21.2%, risk ratio=0.74, p=0.042). Rapid translation of these results into patient benefit is expected, particularly as the chemotherapeutic agents are already used routinely and do not incur any additional cost or toxicity. However, offering NAC as standard care for advanced colon cancer requires adaptations to current treatment pathways so presents organisational challenges. To date, the Leeds Cancer Centre, St James's University Hospital, UK has commenced 64 patients on the novel pathway following presentation and adoption of the FOxTROT results. Here, we describe our experience and share strategies developed across the MDT to minimise impact on person hours, service capacity and budget, whilst building patient safety and confidence.

Purpose: High tumor mRNA levels of the EGFR ligands amphiregulin (AREG) and epiregulin (EREG) are associated with anti-EGFR agent response in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, ligand RNA assays have not been adopted into routine practice due to issues with analytic precision and practicality. We investigated whether AREG/EREG IHC could predict benefit from the anti-EGFR agent panitumumab. Experimental Design: Artificial intelligence algorithms were developed to assess AREG/EREG IHC in 274 patients from the PICCOLO trial of irinotecan with or without panitumumab (Ir vs. IrPan) in RAS wild-type mCRC. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were RECIST response rate (RR) and overall survival (OS). Models were repeated adjusting separately for BRAF mutation status and primary tumor location (PTL). Results: High ligand expression was associated with significant PFS benefit from IrPan compared with Ir [8.0 vs. 3.2 months; HR, 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.37–0.79; P = 0.001]; whereas low ligand expression was not (3.4 vs. 4.4 months; HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.74–1.49; P = 0.78). The ligand-treatment interaction was significant (Pinteraction = 0.02) and remained significant after adjustment for BRAF-mutation status and PTL. Likewise, RECIST RR was significantly improved in patients with high ligand expression (IrPan vs. Ir: 48% vs. 6%; P < 0.0001) but not those with low ligand expression (25% vs. 14%; P = 0.10; Pinteraction = 0.01). The effect on OS was similar but not statistically significant. Conclusions: AREG/EREG IHC identified patients who benefitted from the addition of panitumumab to irinotecan chemotherapy. IHC is a practicable assay that may be of use in routine practice.

BACKGROUND: Primary tumour location (PTL) is being adopted by clinicians to guide treatment decisions in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Here we test PTL as a predictive marker for panitumumab efficacy, and examine its relationship with an extended biomarker profile. We also examine rectal tumours as a separate location. PATIENTS AND METHODS: mCRC patients from the second-line PICCOLO trial of irinotecan versus irinotecan/panitumumab (IrPan). PTL was classified as right-PTL, left-PTL or rectal-PTL. PTL was assessed as a predictive biomarker for IrPan effect in RAS-wild-type (RAS-wt) patients (compared with irinotecan alone), then tested for independence alongside an extended biomarker profile (BRAF, epiregulin/amphiregulin (EREG/AREG) and HER3 mRNA expression). RESULTS: PTL data were available for 1180 patients (98.5%), of whom 558 were RAS-wt. High HER3 expression was independently predictive of panitumumab overall survival improvement, but PTL and EREG/AREG were not. IrPan progression-free survival (PFS) improvement compared with irinotecan was seen in left-PTL [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61, P = 0.002) but not right-PTL (HR = 0.98, P = 0.90) (interaction P = 0.05; RAS/BRAF-wt interaction P = 0.10), or in rectal-PTL (HR = 0.82, P = 0.20) (interaction P = 0.14 compared with left-PTL; RAS/BRAF-wt interaction P = 0.04). Patients with right-PTL and high EREG/AREG or HER3 expression, had IrPan PFS improvement (high EREG/AREG HR = 0.20, P = 0.04; high HER3 HR = 0.33, P = 0.10) compared with irinotecan. Similar effect was seen for rectal-PTL patients (high EREG/AREG HR = 0.44, P = 0.03; high HER3 HR = 0.34, P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: RAS-wt patients with left-PTL are more likely to have panitumumab PFS advantage than those with right-PTL or rectal-PTL. However, an extended biomarker panel demonstrated significant heterogeneity in panitumumab PFS effect within a tumour location. AREG/EREG and HER3 mRNA expression identifies patients with right-PTL or rectal-PTL who achieve similar PFS effect with panitumumab as left-colon patients. Testing could provide a more reliable basis for clinical decision making. Further validation and development of these biomarkers is required to optimise routine patient care. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN identifier: ISRCTN93248876. ispartof: ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY vol:31 issue:8 pages:1021-1029 ispartof: location:England status: published

Background Patient selection for addition of anti-EGFR therapy to chemotherapy for patients with RAS and BRAF wildtype metastatic colorectal cancer can still be optimised. Here we investigate the effect of anti-EGFR therapy on survival in different consensus molecular subtypes (CMSs) and stratified by primary tumour location. Methods Retrospective analyses, using the immunohistochemistry-based CMS classifier, were performed in the COIN (first-line oxaliplatin backbone with or without cetuximab) and PICCOLO trial (second-line irinotecan with or without panitumumab). Tumour tissue was available for 323 patients (20%) and 349 (41%), respectively. Results When using an irinotecan backbone, anti-EGFR therapy is effective in both CMS2/3 and CMS4 in left-sided primary tumours (progression-free survival (PFS): HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26–0.75, P = 0.003 and HR 0.12, 95% CI 0.04–0.36, P P = 0.02). Efficacy using an oxaliplatin backbone was restricted to left-sided CMS2/3 tumours (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36–0.96, P = 0.034). Conclusions The subtype-specific efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy is dependent on the chemotherapy backbone. This may provide the possibility of subtype-specific treatment strategies for a more optimal use of anti-EGFR therapy.

High tumor mRNA levels of the EGFR ligands amphiregulin (AREG) and epiregulin (EREG) are associated with anti-EGFR agent response in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, ligand RNA assays have not been adopted into routine practice due to issues with analytic precision and practicality. We investigated whether AREG/EREG IHC could predict benefit from the anti-EGFR agent panitumumab.Artificial intelligence algorithms were developed to assess AREG/EREG IHC in 274 patients from the PICCOLO trial of irinotecan with or without panitumumab (Ir vs. IrPan) inHigh ligand expression was associated with significant PFS benefit from IrPan compared with Ir [8.0 vs. 3.2 months; HR, 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.37-0.79;AREG/EREG IHC identified patients who benefitted from the addition of panitumumab to irinotecan chemotherapy. IHC is a practicable assay that may be of use in routine practice.

The presence of peritoneal metastases in patients with advanced colorectal cancer is associated with poor prognosis but the mechanisms for this are unclear. This review summarises the current knowledge of the pathophysiology, clinical features, prevalence, prognosis, and molecular biology of peritoneal metastases and the risk factors for the development of peritoneal metastases following resection of a primary colorectal tumour. Furthermore, the evidence for treatment strategies are described including cytoreductive surgery, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, early post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy, sequential post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy and emerging novel strategies. Active areas of research should include the identification of individuals at high risk of peritoneal metastases after curative resection of primary tumour, development of a surveillance program for high-risk patients, optimisation of systematic therapies and further investigation of the use of intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Imatinib therapy has improved outcomes in advanced GISTs. Current guidelines suggest monitoring with CT scanning every 12 weeks. There are no validated biomarkers to assist disease evaluation. We identified 50 patients treated with imatinib for GIST in a single tertiary center. We assessed the prognostic value of D-dimers by Cox regression, and the utility as a biomarker for radiological progression (rPD) using receiver-operator curve (ROC) analysis. In asymptomatic patients with D-dimer levels

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) (HER1) signaling depends on ligand binding and dimerization with itself or other HER receptors. We previously showed in a randomized trial that high EGFR ligand expression is predictive of panitumumab benefit in advanced colorectal cancer. Tumor expression of HER3 may further refine the RAS wild-type (wt) population benefitting from anti-EGFR agents.To examine HER3 messenger RNA expression as a prognostic and predictive biomarker for anti-EGFR therapy in a randomized clinical trial of panitumumab.The study was a prospectively planned retrospective biomarker study of pretreatment samples from the PICCOLO trial that tested the addition of panitumumab to irinotecan therapy in patients with KRAS wt advanced colorectal cancer who experienced failure with prior fluoropyrimidine treatment. HER3 was assessed as a prognostic marker, then as a predictive biomarker in patients with RAS wt, first as a continuous variable and then as a binary (high vs low) variable. Relationship with MEK-AKT pathway mutations and EGFR ligands epiregulin and amphiregulin (EREG/AREG) were also assessed.Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points were response rate and overall survival (OS).In 308 patients (mean age at randomization, 61.6 years; 193 men) higher HER3 was weakly prognostic for OS (hazard ratio [HR] per 2-fold change, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-0.99; P = .04) but not PFS (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83-1.05; P = .25). Higher HER3 was predictive, being associated with prolonged PFS on irinotecan plus panitumumab (IrPan) (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.82; P .001), but not irinotecan (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.82-1.13; P = .65) in patients with RAS wt, with significant interaction between biomarker and treatment (P = .001). Similar interaction was seen for OS (P = .004). In an exploratory binary model, dividing the population at the 66th percentile, HER3 was predictive of panitumumab benefit: in patients with high HER3 expression, median PFS was 8.2 months (IrPan) vs 4.4 months (irinotecan) (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19-0.58; P .001). Patients with low HER3 expression gained no benefit in PFS: 3.3 months (IrPan) vs 4.3 months (irinotecan) (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.67-1.38; P = .84), with significant interaction (P = .002). The binary model was also predictive for OS, with significant interaction (P = .01). Combining HER3 and ligand data, patients with HER3-high, AREG/EREG-high tumors gained markedly from panitumumab (PFS HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.11-0.51; P .005 and OS HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.18-0.73; P = .004). Conversely, patients with HER3-low, AREG/EREG-low tumors did not benefit (PFS HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.73-1.79; P = .57 and OS HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.92-2.26; P = .11).High HER3 expression identified patients with RAS wt who gained markedly from panitumumab, and those who did not, with statistically significant biomarker-treatment interactions for PFS and OS. This finding provides insight into the mechanism of anti-EGFR agents and is of potential clinical utility.

To improve strategies for the treatment of BRAF-mutant advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC) patients, we examined individual data from patients treated with chemotherapy alone in three randomised trials to identify points on the treatment pathway where outcomes differ from BRAF wild-types.2530 aCRC patients were assessed from three randomised trials. End-points were progression-free survival, response rate, disease control rate, post-progression survival (P-PS) and overall survival. Treatments included first-line oxaliplatin/fluorouracil (OxFU) and second-line irinotecan. Clinicians were unaware of BRAF-status.231 patients (9.1%) had BRAF-mutant tumours. BRAF-mutation conferred significantly worse survival independent of associated clinicopathological factors known to be prognostic. Compared with wild-type, BRAF-mutant patients treated with first-line OxFU had similar DCR (59.2% versus 72%; adjusted OR = 0.76, P = 0.24) and PFS (5.7 versus 6.3 months; adjusted HR = 1.14, P = 0.26). Following progression on first-line chemotherapy, BRAF-mutant patients had a markedly shorter P-PS (4.2 versus 9.2 months, adjusted HR = 1.69, P 6 months; OS = 24.0 months); however, 36.5% progressed rapidly through first-line chemotherapy and thereafter, with OS = 4.7 months.BRAF-mutant aCRC confers a markedly worse prognosis independent of associated clinicopathological features. Chemotherapy provides meaningful improvements in outcome throughout treatment lines. Post-progression survival is markedly worse and vigilance is required to ensure appropriate delivery of treatment after first-line progression.

Background: Whilst RAS mutations predict which aCRC patients (pts) will not benefit from anti-EGFR agents, RAS-wt status does not reliably predict who will. Several studies report that high EGFR ligand expression (EREG/AREG) is predictive of anti-EGFR agent benefit but progression towards clinical utility is limited by lack of consensus on a clinical dichotomisation point and additional tumor material required. Here we explore EGFR copy number as a biomarker of prognosis and predictor of Pan benefit in a randomised trial in aCRC. Methods: EGFR CN, EREG/AREG RNA expression, RAS/RAF mutations were assessed in tumor from 275 pts randomised to 2nd-line irinotecan (Ir) or IrPan (PICCOLO, Lancet Onc 14:749-59). EGFR CN status was measured by the Affymetrix OncoScan array, analysed using Biodiscovery Nexus software and defined as normal (2 copies) or gain (>2 copies). Prognostic analysis was in Ir alone pts. Predictive analysis, in the 234 RAS-wt pts, compared baseline values with outcomes using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: 196 (71.3%) pts were classified as EGFR gain and 79 (28.7%) as normal. EGFR gain was significantly associated with high EREG and AREG RNA expression (both p

3561Background: RAS mut status predicts lack of benefit from anti-EGFR agents in aCRC, but its impact on prognosis and chemotherapy outcomes is less clear. Previously we have reported that the poor...

Importance RAS wild-type (wt) status is necessary but not sufficient for response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agents in advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC). RNA expression of EGFR ligands epiregulin (EREG) and amphiregulin (AREG) may correlate with EGFR-targeted therapy efficacy in aCRC, so may represent a much-needed additional predictive marker for these drugs. Objective To examine a novel ligand model in a randomized clinical trial of panitumumab, irinotecan, and ciclosporin in colorectal cancer (PICCOLO) with with the a priori hypothesis that high tumor expression of either AREG or EREG would predict panitumumab therapy benefit in RAS -wt patients; and low expression, lack of efficacy. Design, Setting, and Participants Prospectively planned retrospective biomarker study from the PICCOLO trial, which tested the addition of panitumumab to irinotecan therapy in patients with KRAS wt aCRC who experienced failure with prior fluoropyrimidine treatment. The analysis was conducted between 2012 and 2014. A predefined dichotomous model classified tumors as “high expressor” (either EREG or AREG in top tertile for messenger RNA level) or “low expressor” (neither EREG nor AREG in top tertile). Ligand expression was assessed as a prognostic and predictive biomarker. Expression of AREG/EREG and RAS and BRAF mutations were assessed in archival tumor tissue. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points were response rate and overall survival (OS). Results Of the 696 PICCOLO trial patients in the irinotecan–vs–irinotecan with panitumumab randomization, 331 had sufficient tumor tissue available and measurement of ligand expression was successful in 323. High ligand expression was not prognostic for OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79 [95% CI, 0.58-1.09]; P = .15) or PFS (HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.68-1.27]; P = .64). The primary population had RAS wt aCRC (n = 220); for RAS wt patients with high ligand expression, median (interquartile range [IQR]) PFS was 8.3 [4.0-11.0] months (irinotecan with panitumumab) vs 4.4 [2.8-6.7] months (irinotecan alone); HR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.24-0.61]; P RAS wt patients with low ligand expression, median (IQR) PFS was 3.2 [2.7-8.1] months (irinotecan with panitumumab) vs 4.0 [2.7-7.5] months (irinotecan); HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.64-1.37]; P = .73; interaction test results were significant [ P = .01]). Less marked effects were seen for response rate (interaction P = .17) and OS (interaction P = .11). Conclusions and Relevance High ligand expression is a predictive marker for panitumumab therapy benefit on PFS in RAS wt patients; conversely, patients with low ligand expression gained no benefit. The current “opt-in” strategy for anti-EGFR therapy in all patients with RAS wt aCRC should be questioned. Expression of EREG/AREG is a useful biomarker for anti-EGFR therapy; optimization for clinical use is indicated. Trial Registration isrctn Identifier:ISRCTN93248876

Aim: Links between inflammation, the immune response and cancer outcomes are compelling. The dNLR, calculated from a standard blood count, is a simple measure of inflammatory response, and in retrospective series high dNLR has been reported to be associated with poorer outcomes in aCRC. We examined dNLR as a prognostic marker, and assessed its predictive utility for two treatments in large phase III trials in aCRC. Methods: 2484 patients (pts) were studied, from the FOCUS (Lancet 370:143, 2007) and PICCOLO trials (Lancet Oncol 14:749, 2013). dNLR was calculated from the pre-randomisation blood count and prospectively defined as “high” (≥2) or “low” ( Results: 52.8% pts had high dNLR; 47.2% had low dNLR. High dNLR was independently associated with reduced OS in both trials (FOCUS: n = 1810 HR 1.51, p 25% after 6 weeks of chemotherapy was associated with a higher risk of disease progression at 12 weeks (OR = 1.6, p = 0.02) and inferior PFS (HR = 1.34, p Conclusions: The dNLR provides prognostic information and may provide an early warning when chemotherapy is failing. It might also help identify patients who could be treated safely with less intensive 1st line chemotherapy, but confirmatory data are required. Given that dNLR is readily and freely calculated from routine clinical data, its integration into routine patient evaluation should be considered following further validation. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Aim: Variations in tumour biology and outcomes depending upon PTL have been reported in aCRC. We tested effects of PTL in two phase III randomised trials. Methods: We studied 2075 pts, from FOCUS (1st-line; n = 1390; Lancet 370: 143-52) and PICCOLO (2nd-line; n = 685; Lancet Oncol 14:749-59). We compared: (1) right colon (RC) vs [left colon (LC) or rectum] and (2) LC vs rectum. Association of PTL with RAS/RAF, AREG/EREG and MMR was assessed where available. PTL was tested as a prognostic factor, then for predictive utility by testing PTL/treatment interactions on OS and PFS for: 1st line FU vs doublet (FOCUS); 1st-line irinotecan doublet vs oxaliplatin doublet (FOCUS); 2nd line irinotecan (Ir) +/- panitumumab (Pan) (KRAS-wt pts, PICCOLO). Results: PTL was RC in 575 (28%), LC in 801 (39%) and rectum in 699 (34%) pts. RC tumours had more BRAF mutations (n = 1136, 22% vs 6%, p Interaction test p-values for treatment comparisons Comparison Interaction Test p-values RC vs LC/rectum LC vs Rectum OS PFS OS PFS 1st line doublet vs single-agent FU (1334 pts) 0.39 0.84 0.48 0.8 1st line OxFU doublet vs IrFU doublet (452 pts) 0.99 0.67 0.18 0.50 2nd line Ir +/- Pan KRAS-WT (450 pts) 0.35 0.13 0.63 0.46 2nd line Ir +/- Pan KRAS/BRAF-WT (341 pts) 0.72 0.89 0.83 0.19 Conclusions: We confirm that RC tumours are biologically distinct, and have worse outcomes with 1st-line therapy. We did not find PTL to be predictive for the benefit of the drugs under test in these trials, so cannot recommend its use for selection of therapy. Better objective predictive biomarkers are required. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.