Search

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the guideline endorsed first choice for patients with deficient mismatch repair or microsatellite instability high (dMMR/MSI-H) mCRC, however a significant proportion experience primary or secondary resistance. BRAF V600E mutated (BRAFm) and dMMR/MSI-H mCRC can be treated with BRAF + EGFR inhibitors but specific data on the efficacy after progression to ICIs are missing. We collected consecutive patients with BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H mCRC treated from 2017 to 2024 with a combination of BRAFi+EGFRi+/-MEKi, after disease progression on ICIs. A control cohort of BRAFm pMMR/MSS mCRC patients treated with encorafenib+cetuximab+/-binimetinib from 2nd line was used. dMMR/MSI-H (n = 50) BRAFm mCRC patients were more often > 70-year-old, with right-sided primary tumors, without liver but more lymphnode metastases than pMMR/MSS (n = 170). They were treated more frequently beyond 2nd line and 45 % were primary progressors to ICIs. Lower ORR (18 % versus 32 %, p = 0.09) and DCR (60 % versus 73 %, p = 0.11) was seen without reaching significance in dMMR/MSI-H as compared to pMMR/MSS patients. After a median follow-up of 14.04 months, no differences in PFS (median 5.13 versus 4.50 months, HR 0.83, 95 %CI: 0.57–1.20, p = 0.31) and OS (median 10.75 versus 9.11 months, HR 0.89, 95 %CI: 0.59–1.32, p = 0.55) were observed. Our results show that BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H mCRC patients benefit from BRAFi+EGFRi+/-MEKi after progression under ICIs. Despite lower ORR and DCR, the outcome is not different from that observed in pMMR/MSS BRAFm CRC and is in line with the results of the BEACON registration trial. • BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H mCRC benefit from BRAFi+EGFRi±MEKi at progression to ICIs. • Numerically lower ORR/DCR are observed for BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H vs pMMR/MSS mCRC. • PFS and OS to BRAFi+EGFRi±MEKi are similar in BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H and pMMR/MSS mCRC. • Higher severe toxicity rates to BRAFi+EGFRi±MEKi are seen for BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H mCRC. • Outcomes of BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H mCRC to BRAFi+EGFRi±MEKi are in line with BEACON trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) efficacy in patients with microsatellite instability (MSI) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) according to sporadic vs familial origin is unknown. We retrospectively analyzed 128 patients with MSI mCRC treated with first-line chemotherapy ± anti-EGFR. Among them, 61 and 67 patients were respectively categorized as familial and sporadic based on mismatch repair protein immunostaining, BRAF mutational status, and MLH1 promoter methylation status. We observed that addition of anti-EGFR to chemotherapy was associated with a statistically significant improvement of progression-free survival for familial (median = 5.0 vs 10.2 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.23 to 0.94; P = .03) but not for sporadic (median = 4.4 vs 5.4 months, HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.39 to 1.60; P = .52) MSI mCRC patients. In multivariate analysis, the survival benefit of adding anti-EGFR to chemotherapy remained statistically significant for familial MSI cases (P = .04). These findings deserve to be confirmed in a prospective study and could help decision making in MSI mCRC without access or resistant to immunotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with RAS wild‐type (WT) nonresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) may receive either bevacizumab or an anti‐epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) combined with first‐line, 5‐fluorouracil‐based chemotherapy. Without the RAS status information, the oncologist can either start chemotherapy with bevacizumab or wait for the introduction of the anti‐EGFR. Our objective was to compare both strategies in a routine practice setting. Materials and Methods: This multicenter, retrospective, propensity score–weighted study included patients with a RAS WT nonresectable mCRC, treated between 2013 and 2016 by a 5‐FU‐based chemotherapy, with either delayed anti‐EGFR or immediate anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Primary criterion was overall survival (OS). Secondary criteria were progression‐free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). Results: A total of 262 patients (129 in the anti‐VEGF group and 133 in the anti‐EGFR group) were included. Patients receiving an anti‐VEGF were more often men (68% vs. 56%), with more metastatic sites (>2 sites: 15% vs. 9%). The median delay to obtain the RAS status was 19 days (interquartile range: 13–26). Median OS was not significantly different in the two groups (29 vs. 30.5 months, p =.299), even after weighting on the propensity score (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69–1.08, p =.2024). The delayed introduction of anti‐EGFR was associated with better median PFS (13.8 vs. 11.0 months, p =.0244), even after weighting on the propensity score (HR = 0.74, 95% CI, 0.61–0.90, p =.0024). ORR was significantly higher in the anti‐EGFR group (66.7% vs. 45.6%, p =.0007). Conclusion: Delayed introduction of anti‐EGFR had no deleterious effect on OS, PFS, and ORR, compared with doublet chemotherapy with anti‐VEGF. Implications for Practice: For RAS/RAF wild‐type metastatic colorectal cancer, patients may receive 5‐fluorouracil‐based chemotherapy plus either bevacizumab or an anti‐epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). In daily practice, the time to obtain the RAS status might be long enough to consider two options: to start the chemotherapy with bevacizumab, or to start without a targeted therapy and to add the anti‐EGFR at reception of the RAS status. This study found no deleterious effect of the delayed introduction of an anti‐EGFR on survival, compared with the introduction of an anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor from cycle 1. It is possible to wait one or two cycles to introduce the anti‐EGFR while waiting for RAS status. More than half of the cases of metastatic colorectal cancer harbor a RAS mutation; however, the time to obtain RAS status might be long enough to consider delayed anti‐EGFR treatment. This article reports on the two main treatment strategies for these cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Oncologist is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Approximately 30% of patients with wild type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer are non-responders to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies (anti-EGFR mAbs), possibly due to undetected tumoral subclones harboring RAS mutations. The aim of this study was to analyze the distribution of RAS mutations in different areas of the primary tumor, metastatic lymph nodes and distant metastasis. A retrospective cohort of 18 patients with a colorectal cancer (CRC) was included in the study. Multiregion analysis was performed in 60 spatially separated tumor areas according to the pathological tumor node metastasis (pTNM) staging and KRAS, NRAS and BRAF mutations were tested using pyrosequencing. In primary tumors, intra-tumoral heterogeneity for RAS mutation was found in 33% of cases. Inter-tumoral heterogeneity for RAS mutation between primary tumors and metastatic lymph nodes or distant metastasis was found in 36% of cases. Moreover, 28% of tumors had multiple RAS mutated subclones in the same tumor. A high proportion of CRCs presented intra- and/or inter-tumoral heterogeneity, which has relevant clinical implications for anti-EGFR mAbs prescription. These results suggest the need for multiple RAS testing in different parts of the same tumor and/or more sensitive techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Randomized trials have shown a survival benefit for regorafenib over placebo in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that progressed after standard therapies. We evaluated survival and safety outcomes in patients treated with regorafenib in a real-life setting.Methods: REBECCA is a cohort study nested within a compassionate use program designed to evaluate survival, safety, and potential prognostic factors for outcome associated with regorafenib in patients with mCRC refractory to standard therapies. Treatment effects according to various patient and tumour characteristics were evaluated using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models.Results: Of 1178 patients in the compassionate use program, 654 were in the full analysis set. Median follow-up was 16.5 months. Median survival was 5.6 months. The 12-month survival rate was 22 %. Survival was independently and unfavourably affected by the following variables: poor performance status, short time from initial diagnosis of metastases to the start of regorafenib, low initial regorafenib dose, >3 metastatic sites, presence of liver metastases, and KRAS mutations. We identified prognostic groups of patients with low, intermediate, and high risk of death, with a median survival of 9.2, 5.2, and 2.5 months, respectively. Five-hundred-twenty-four patients (80 %) experienced at least one regorafenib-related adverse event, most commonly, fatigue, hand-foot skin reaction, diarrhea, anorexia, arterial hypertension, and mucositis.Conclusion: The safety and efficacy profile of regorafenib in REBECCA are similar to those in randomized trials. Our prognostic model identified subgroups of mCRC patients who derived a minimal and maximum benefit from regorafenib.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02310477 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) colon cancer (CC) is reportedly resistant to 5-fluorouracil (5FU) adjuvant chemotherapy while preliminary data suggest chemosensitivity to oxaliplatin. We assessed the efficacy of fluoropyrimidine with and without oxaliplatin in a large cohort of dMMR CC patients.Methods: This retrospective multicenter study included all consecutive patients who underwent curative surgical resection for stage II or III dMMR CC between 2000 and 2011. Prognostic factors were analyzed using Cox models, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: A total of 433 dMMR CC patients were included (56.8% stage II, 43.2% stage III). Mean follow-up was 47.0 months. The patients received surgery alone (n = 263) or surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy consisting of fluoropyrimidine with (n = 119) or without (n = 51) oxaliplatin. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 16.7% of stage II and 69.0% of stage III CC patients. As compared with surgery alone, adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy improved disease-free survival (DFS) in multivariable analysis (HR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.65, P < .001), contrary to adjuvant fluoropyrimidine alone (HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.36 to 1.49, P = .38). In the subgroup analysis, the DFS benefit of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy was statistically significant in multivariable analysis only in stage III (HR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.19 to 0.87, P = .02).Conclusion: This study supports the use of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin in stage III dMMR CC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is now well established that metastatic colorectal cancer patients without KRAS mutation (codon 12) benefit from treatment with an epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody (anti-EGFR mAb). Recently, EFGR and KRAS mutations have been shown to exist in patients who developed resistance to anti-EGFR mAb. We analyzed KRAS, BRAF V600E and EGFR S492R mutations in 37 post-anti-EGFR mAb tumor samples from 23 patients treated with chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR mAb. No EGFR S492R mutation was detected. A KRAS mutation was found after anti-EGFR mAb in only one tumor. Our results suggest that acquired EGFR S492R and KRAS mutations do not constitute the main mechanism of resistance to anti-EGFR mAb in combination with chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND A point mutation (V600E) in the BRAF oncogene is a prognostic biomarker and may predict for nonresponse to anti-EGFR antibody therapy in patients with colorectal carcinoma. BRAFV600E mutations are frequently detected in tumors with microsatellite instability and indicate a sporadic origin. We used a mutation-specific antibody to examine mutant BRAFV600E protein expression and its concordance with BRAFV600E mutation data. METHODS Primary stage III colon carcinomas were analyzed for BRAFV600E mutations in exon 15, and 50 BRAFV600E mutation carriers and 25 wild-type tumors were selected for analysis of BRAF proteins by immunohistochemistry (IHC). IHC was performed in archival tissue specimens using a pan-BRAF antibody and a mutation-specific antibody against BRAFV600E proteins. Staining was scored by 2 pathologists who were blinded to clinical and mutation data. RESULTS Using a pan-BRAF antibody, total BRAF protein expression was observed in the tumor cell cytoplasm in 74 of 75 colon carcinomas. A mutation-specific antibody identified diffuse cytoplasmic staining of mutant BRAFV600E proteins in 49 of 74 cancers. Analysis using a polymerase chain reaction-based assay revealed that all 49 of these cancers carried BRAFV600E mutations. In contrast, BRAFV600E staining was absent in all 25 tumors that carried wild-type copies of BRAF. CONCLUSIONS A BRAF mutation-specific (V600E) antibody detected tumors with BRAFV600E mutations and exhibited complete concordance with a DNA-based method. These results support the use of IHC as a simplified strategy to screen colorectal cancers for BRAFV600E mutations in clinical practice. Cancer 2013;119:2765-2770. © 2013 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The EGFR 3' untranslated region (UTR) harbors a polyadenine repeat which is polymorphic (A13/A14) and undergoes somatic deletions in microsatellite instability (MSI) colorectal cancer (CRC). These mutations could be oncogenic in colorectal tissue since they were shown to result into increased EGFR mRNA stability in CRC cell lines. Methods: First, we determined in a case control study including 429 CRC patients corresponding to different groups selected or not on age of tumor onset and/or familial history and/or MSI, whether or not, the germline EGFR A13/A14 polymorphism constitutes a genetic risk factor for CRC; second, we investigated the frequency of somatic mutations of this repeat in 179 CRC and their impact on EGFR expression. Results: No statistically significant difference in allelic frequencies of the EGFR polyA repeat polymorphism was observed between CRC patients and controls. Somatic mutations affecting the EGFR 3'UTR polyA tract were detected in 47/80 (58.8%) MSI CRC versus 0/99 microsatellite stable (MSS) tumors. Comparative analysis in 21 CRC samples of EGFR expression, between tumor and non malignant tissues, using two independent methods showed that somatic mutations of the EGFR polyA repeat did not result into an EGFR mRNA increase. Conclusion: Germline and somatic genetic variations occurring within the EGFR 3' UTR polyA tract have no impact on CRC genetic risk and EGFR expression, respectively. Genotyping of the EGFR polyA tract has no clinical utility to identify patients with a high risk for CRC or patients who could benefit from anti-EGFR antibodies [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: A deficient mismatch repair system (dMMR) results in microsatellite instability (MSI). The MSI status of a tumor predicts the response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) that are now approved in patients with dMMR/MSI metastatic colorectal cancers. In addition to the mechanisms through which MSI can activate the immune system via particular neo-antigens, this review reports the clinical and pre-clinical strategies being developed in the case of resistance to ICI, including emerging therapies and new biomarkers. A defect in the DNA repair system through a deficient mismatch repair system (dMMR) leads to microsatellite instability (MSI). Microsatellites are located in both coding and non-coding sequences and dMMR/MSI tumors are associated with a high mutation burden. Some of these mutations occur in coding sequences and lead to the production of neo-antigens able to trigger an anti-tumoral immune response. This explains why non-metastatic MSI tumors are associated with high immune infiltrates and good prognosis. Metastatic MSI tumors result from tumor escape to the immune system and are associated with poor prognosis and chemoresistance. Consequently, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are highly effective and have recently been approved in dMMR/MSI metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC). Nevertheless, some patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC have primary or secondary resistance to ICI. This review details carcinogenesis and the mechanisms through which MSI can activate the immune system. After which, we discuss mechanistic hypotheses in an attempt to explain primary and secondary resistances to ICI and emerging strategies being developed to overcome this phenomenon by targeting other immune checkpoints or through vaccination and modification of microbiota. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Patients with Lynch syndrome are at increased risk of upper gastrointestinal cancer. Recommendations for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy screening vary widely with limited data supporting effectiveness. The aim of our study was to investigate yields of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy screening in a large multicentre cohort of 172 Lynch syndrome mutation carriers. In our study, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy surveillance detects frequent neoplastic lesions particularly after the age of 40 years. Ours results suggest that Lynch patients should be considered for upper gastrointestinal endoscopic and Helicobacter pylori screening. Background: Patients with Lynch syndrome are at increased risk of gastric and duodenal cancer. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy surveillance is generally proposed, even though little data are available on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in these patients. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the prevalence and incidence of gastrointestinal lesions following upper gastrointestinal endoscopy examination in Lynch patients. Methods: A large, multicentre cohort of 172 patients with a proven germline mutation in one of the mismatch repair genes and at least one documented upper gastrointestinal endoscopy screening was assessed. Detailed information was collected on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy findings and the outcome of endoscopic follow-up. Results: Seventy neoplastic gastrointestinal lesions were diagnosed in 45 patients (26%) out of the 172 patients included. The median age at diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal lesions was 54 years. The prevalence of cancer at initial upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was 5% and the prevalence of precancerous lesions was 12%. Upper gastrointestinal lesions were more frequent after 40 years of age (p < 0.001). Helicobacter pylori infection was associated with an increased prevalence of gastric, but not duodenal, lesions (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Neoplastic upper gastrointestinal lesions are frequent in patients with Lynch syndrome, especially in those over 40 years of age. The results of our study suggest that Lynch patients should be considered for upper gastrointestinal endoscopic and Helicobacter pylori screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In most countries, participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs with the immunological fecal occult blood test (iFOBT) is low. Mutations of RAS and BRAF occur early in colorectal carcinogenesis and "liquid biopsy" allows detection of mutated circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). This prospective study aims to evaluate the performance of RAS and BRAF-mutated ctDNA in detecting CRC and advanced adenomas (AA). Methods: One hundred and thirty patients who underwent colonoscopy for suspicion of colorectal lesion were included and divided into four groups: 20 CRC, 39 AA, 31 non-advanced adenoma and/or hyperplastic polyp(s) (NAA) and 40 with no lesion. Mutated ctDNA was analyzed by droplet digital PCR. Results: ctDNA was detected in 45.0% of CRC, in 2.6% of AA and none of the NAA and "no-lesion" groups. All patients with stage II to IV mutated CRC had detectable ctDNA (n = 8/8). Among the mutated AA, only one patient had detectable ctDNA (4.3%), maybe due to limited technical sensitivity or to a low rate of ctDNA or even the absence ctDNA in plasma. Specificity and sensitivity of KRAS- and BRAF-mutated ctDNA for the detection of all CRC and AA were 100% and 16.9%, respectively. Conclusions: ctDNA had high sensitivity in detection of advanced mutated CRC but was unable to sensitively detect AA. ctDNA analysis was easy to perform and readily accepted by the population but requires combination with other circulating biomarkers before replacing iFOBT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tumor DNA mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency testing is important to the identification of Lynch syndrome and decision making regarding adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colorectal cancer (CRC) and has become an indispensable test in metastatic tumors due to the high efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in deficient MMR (dMMR) tumors. CRCs greatly benefit from this testing as approximately 15% of them are dMMR but only 3% to 5% are at a metastatic stage. MMR status can be determined by two different methods, microsatellite instability (MSI) testing on tumor DNA, and immunohistochemistry of the MMR proteins on tumor tissue. Recent studies have reported a rate of 3% to 10% of discordance between these two tests. Moreover, some reports suggest possible intra- and inter-tumoral heterogeneity of MMR and MSI status. These issues are important to know and to clarify in order to define therapeutic strategy in CRC. This review aims to detail the standard techniques used for the determination of MMR and MSI status, along with their advantages and limits. We review the discordances that may arise between these two tests, tumor heterogeneity of MMR and MSI status, and possible explanations. We also discuss the strategies designed to distinguish sporadic versus germline dMMR/MSI CRC. Finally, we present new and accurate methods aimed at determining MMR/MSI status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), RAS and BRAF mutations are currently determined by tumor sample analysis. Here, we report BRAF mutation status analysis in paired tumor tissue and plasma samples of mCRC patients included in the AGEO RASANC prospective cohort study. Four hundred and twenty-five patients were enrolled. Plasma samples were analyzed by next-generation sequencing (NGS). When no mutation was identified, we used two methylated specific biomarkers (digital droplet PCR) to determine the presence or absence of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Patients with conclusive ctDNA results were defined as those with at least one mutation or one methylated biomarker. The kappa coefficient and accuracy were 0.79 (95% CI: 0.67–0.91) and 97.3% (95% CI: 95.2–98.6%) between the BRAF status in plasma and tissue for patients with available paired samples (n = 405), and 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80–0.99) and 98.5% (95% CI: 96.4–99.5%) for those with conclusive ctDNA (n = 323). The absence of liver metastasis was the main factor associated to inconclusive ctDNA results. In patients with liver metastasis, the kappa coefficient was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.81–1.00) and accuracy was 98.6% (95% CI, 96.5–99.6%). We demonstrate satisfying concordance between tissue and plasma BRAF mutation detection, especially in patients with liver metastasis, arguing for plasma ctDNA testing for routine BRAF mutation analysis in these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Colorectal cancers (CRC) with brain metastases (BM) are scarcely described. The main objective of this study was to determine the molecular profile of CRC with BM. Methods: We included 82 CRC patients with BM. KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and mismatch repair (MMR) status were investigated on primary tumors (n = 82) and BM (n = 38). ALK, ROS1, cMET, HER-2, PD-1, PD-L1, CD3 and CD8 status were evaluated by immunohistochemistry, and when recommended, by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Results: In primary tumors, KRAS, NRAS and BRAF mutations were observed in 56%, 6%, and 6% of cases, respectively. No ROS1, ALK and cMET rearrangement was detected. Only one tumor presented HER-2 amplification. Molecular profiles were mostly concordant between BM and paired primary tumors, except for 9% of discordances for RAS mutation. CD3, CD8, PD-1 and PD-L1 expressions presented some discordance between primary tumors and BM. In multivariate analysis, multiple BM, lung metastases and PD-L1+ tumor were predictive of poor overall survival. Conclusions: CRCs with BM are associated with high frequency of RAS mutations and significant discordance for RAS mutational status between BM and paired primary tumors. Multiple BM, lung metastases and PD-L1+ have been identified as prognostic factors and can guide therapeutic decisions for CRC patients with BM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Microsatellite unstable (MSI) colorectal cancers (CRCs) are due to DNA mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency and occurs in15% of non-metastatic diseases and 5% in the metastatic setting. Nearly 30% of MSI CRCs occur in a context of constitutional mutation of the MMR system (Lynch syndrome). Others are sporadic cancers linked to a hypermethylation of the MLH-1 promoter. The pathogenic alterations of MMR genes lead to the accumulation of frequent somatic mutational events and these tumours arbour a high antigen burden and are highly infiltrated with cytotoxic T-cell lymphocytes. Microsatellite instability/DNA mismatch repair deficiency (MSI/dMMR) status has prognostic and predictive implications in non-metastatic and metastatic CRCs. The prognostic value of MSI status in non-metastatic CRCs has been studied extensively, yet the data are more limited for its predictive value in terms of adjuvant chemotherapy efficacy. In both cases (metastatic and non-metastatic settings) treatment with immune check-point inhibitors (ICIs) have shown a remarkable effectiveness in the context of MSI/dMMR status. Indeed, recent data from prospective cohorts and randomised trials have shown a dramatical improvement of survival with immunotherapy (programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-(L)1] cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 [CTLA-4] blockage) in metastatic or non-metastatic MSI/dMMR CRC. In this review we report and discuss how and for whom to test for the MSI/dMMR phenotype, as well as the prognostic value of this phenotype and the new treatment recommendations options for this unique CRC population. Despite their efficacy, primary and secondary resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are observed in more than 50% MSI-H/dMMR CRC patients and in the future how to identify these patients and to overcome resistance will be an important challenge. • Microsatellite unstable (MSI) status has to be tested in all colorectal cancer (CRC) stages for Lynch syndrome screening. • MSI patients represent 10–20% of localised and 5% of metastatic CRCs. • Localised MSI CRCs have a better prognosis than localised microsatellite stable (MSS) CRCs. • Immunotherapy is very efficient in most MSI CRCs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Encorafenib plus cetuximab is efficient in anti-EGFR-naïve patients with BRAF V600E mutated (BRAFm) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). No data are available concerning the efficacy of BRAF inhibitors associated with anti-EGFRs (B + E) in patients previously treated with an anti-EGFR agent. We retrospectively collected a series of patients with BRAFm mCRC treated with B + E after previous anti-EGFR treatment, in 14 centers. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the start of treatment, and we reported objective response and disease control rates (ORR, DCR; RECIST V1.1). Twenty-five BRAFm mCRC patients were enrolled. Prior to B + E treatment, 4/10/11 patients were treated with 1/2/> 2 previous treatment lines. Ten patients received previous panitumumab, 14 cetuximab, 1 both. Immediate progression with previous anti-EGFR was reported for 7 patients. Anti-BRAF was encorafenib for 21 patients, dabrafenib for 4 patients, with cetuximab for 24 patients and panitumumab for 1 patient. ORR was 40% (10 patients) and DCR was 80% (20 patients). Median PFS and OS were 4.8 months (95% CI, 4.01–7.95) and 10.1 months (95% CI, 7.75-NR). DCR amongst patients with previous primary resistance to anti-EGFR (N = 7) was 100%. Two patients discontinued B + E due to drug-related adverse event. Though in a limited retrospective series of patients, these results show the efficacy of the combination of anti-BRAF and anti-EGFRs in BRAFm mCRC patients previously treated with an anti-EGFR. The use of this combination should thus not be ruled out in this population with limited therapeutic options. • Series of 25 non anti-EGFR-naïve patients treated by anti-BRAF + anti-EGFR for a colorectal cancer. • Median progression free survival and overall survival were 4.8 and 10.1 months. • Ten out of 24 patients had an objective response rate. • These results are very close to those reported in BEACON trial. • This proves the efficacy of encorafenib + cetuximab in non-naïve anti-EGFR patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary Microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer predicts favorable outcomes. However, the mechanistic relationship between microsatellite instability, tumor-infiltrating immune cells, Immunoscore, and their impact on patient survival remains to be elucidated. We found significant differences in mutational patterns, chromosomal instability, and gene expression that correlated with patient microsatellite instability status. A prominent immune gene expression was observed in microsatellite-instable (MSI) tumors, as well as in a subgroup of microsatellite-stable (MSS) tumors. MSI tumors had increased frameshift mutations, showed genetic evidence of immunoediting, had higher densities of Th1, effector-memory T cells, in situ proliferating T cells, and inhibitory PD1-PDL1 cells, had high Immunoscores, and were infiltrated with mutation-specific cytotoxic T cells. Multivariate analysis revealed that Immunoscore was superior to microsatellite instability in predicting patients’ disease-specific recurrence and survival. These findings indicate that assessment of the immune status via Immunoscore provides a potent indicator of tumor recurrence beyond microsatellite-instability staging that could be an important guide for immunotherapy strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]