Search

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.

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 EGFR amplification occurs in about 1% of metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) but is not routinely tested as a prognostic or predictive biomarker for patients treated with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. Herein, we aimed to characterize the clinical and molecular landscape of EGFR-amplified mCRC. Methods In this multinational cohort study, we compared clinical data of 62 patients with EGFR-amplified vs 1459 EGFR nonamplified mCRC, as well as comprehensive genomic data of 35 EGFR-amplified vs 439 EGFR nonamplified RAS/BRAF wild-type and microsatellite stable (MSS) tumor samples. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results EGFR amplification was statistically significantly associated with left primary tumor sidedness and RAS/BRAF wild-type status. All EGFR-amplified tumors were MSS and HER2 nonamplified. Overall, EGFR-amplified samples had higher median fraction of genome altered compared with EGFR-nonamplified, RAS/BRAF wild-type MSS cohort. Patients with EGFR-amplified tumors reported longer overall survival (OS) (median OS = 71.3 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 50.7 to not available [NA]) vs EGFR-nonamplified ones (24.0 months; 95% CI = 22.8 to 25.6; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.20 to 0.44; P < .001; adjusted HR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.30 to 0.69; P < .001). In the subgroup of patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC exposed to anti-EGFR-based therapy, EGFR amplification was again associated with better OS (median OS = 54.0 months, 95% CI = 35.2 to NA, vs 29.1 months, 95% CI = 27.0 to 31.9, respectively; HR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.28 to 0.76; P = .002). Conclusion Patients with EGFR-amplified mCRC represent a biologically defined subgroup and merit dedicated clinical trials with novel and more potent EGFR-targeting strategies beyond single-agent monoclonal antibodies.

Mutation testing in the context of neoadjuvant therapy must be performed on biopsy samples. Given the issue of tumour heterogeneity, this raises the question of whether the biopsies are representative of the whole tumour. Here we have compared the mutation profiles of colorectal biopsies with their matched resection specimens. We performed next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis on 25 paired formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded colorectal cancer biopsy and primary resection samples. DNA was extracted and analysed using the TruSight tumour kit, allowing the interrogation of 26 cancer driver genes. Samples were run on an Illumina MiSeq. Mutations were validated using quick-multiplex-consensus (QMC)-polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in conjunction with high resolution melting (HRM). The paired biopsy and resection tumour samples were assessed for presence or absence of mutations, mutant allele frequency ratios, and allelic imbalance status. A total of 81 mutations were detected, in ten of the 26 genes in the TruSight kit. Two of the 25 paired cases were wild-type across all genes. The mutational profiles, allelic imbalance status, and mutant allele frequency ratios of the paired biopsy and resection samples were highly concordant (88.75–98.85%), with all but three (3.7%) of the mutations identified in the resection specimens also being present in the biopsy specimens. All 81 mutations were confirmed by QMC-PCR and HRM analysis, although four low-level mutations required a co-amplification at lower denaturation temperature (COLD)-PCR protocol to enrich for the mutant alleles. Diagnostic biopsies are adequate and reliable materials for molecular testing by NGS. The use of biopsies for molecular screening will enhance targeted neoadjuvant therapy.

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.

Background and Aims: Microsatellite instability (MSI) and mismatch-repair deficiency (dMMR) in colorectal tumors are used to select treatment for patients. Deep learning can detect MSI and dMMR in tumor samples on routine histology slides faster and cheaper than molecular assays. But clinical application of this technology requires high performance and multisite validation, which have not yet been performed. Methods: We collected hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides, and findings from molecular analyses for MSI and dMMR, from 8836 colorectal tumors (of all stages) included in the MSIDETECT consortium study, from Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Specimens with dMMR were identified by immunohistochemistry analyses of tissue microarrays for loss of MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and/or PMS2. Specimens with MSI were identified by genetic analyses. We trained a deep-learning detector to identify samples with MSI from these slides; performance was assessed by cross-validation (n=6406 specimens) and validated in an external cohort (n=771 specimens). Prespecified endpoints were area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve and area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC). Results: The deep-learning detector identified specimens with dMMR or MSI with a mean AUROC curve of 0.92 (lower bound 0.91, upper bound 0.93) and an AUPRC of 0.63 (range, 0.59–0.65), or 67% specificity and 95% sensitivity, in the cross-validation development cohort. In the validation cohort, the classifier identified samples with dMMR with an AUROC curve of 0.95 (range, 0.92–0.96) without image-preprocessing and an AUROC curve of 0.96 (range, 0.93–0.98) after color normalization. Conclusions: We developed a deep-learning system that detects colorectal cancer specimens with dMMR or MSI using hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides; it detected tissues with dMMR with an AUROC of 0.96 in a large, international validation cohort. This system might be used for high-throughput, low-cost evaluation of colorectal tissue specimens.

Objective Complex phenotypes captured on histological slides represent the biological processes at play in individual cancers, but the link to underlying molecular classification has not been clarified or systematised. In colorectal cancer (CRC), histological grading is a poor predictor of disease progression, and consensus molecular subtypes (CMSs) cannot be distinguished without gene expression profiling. We hypothesise that image analysis is a cost-effective tool to associate complex features of tissue organisation with molecular and outcome data and to resolve unclassifiable or heterogeneous cases. In this study, we present an image-based approach to predict CRC CMS from standard H&E sections using deep learning. Design Training and evaluation of a neural network were performed using a total of n=1206 tissue sections with comprehensive multi-omic data from three independent datasets (training on FOCUS trial, n=278 patients; test on rectal cancer biopsies, GRAMPIAN cohort, n=144 patients; and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), n=430 patients). Ground truth CMS calls were ascertained by matching random forest and single sample predictions from CMS classifier. Results Image-based CMS (imCMS) accurately classified slides in unseen datasets from TCGA (n=431 slides, AUC)=0.84) and rectal cancer biopsies (n=265 slides, AUC=0.85). imCMS spatially resolved intratumoural heterogeneity and provided secondary calls correlating with bioinformatic prediction from molecular data. imCMS classified samples previously unclassifiable by RNA expression profiling, reproduced the expected correlations with genomic and epigenetic alterations and showed similar prognostic associations as transcriptomic CMS. Conclusion This study shows that a prediction of RNA expression classifiers can be made from H&E images, opening the door to simple, cheap and reliable biological stratification within routine workflows.

BackgroundCpG methylation in cancer is ubiquitous and generally detected in tumour specimens using a variety of techniques at a resolution encompassing single CpG loci to genome wide. Analysis of samples with very low DNA inputs, such as formalin fixed (FFPE) biopsy specimens from clinical trials or circulating tumour DNA has been challenging and has only been typically at single CpG sites. Analysis of genome wide methylation in these specimens has been limited because of the relative expense of techniques need to carry this out. We present the results of low input experiments into the Illumina Infinium HD methylation assay on FFPE specimens and ctDNA samples.MethodsFor all experiments, the Infinium HD assay for Methylation was used. In total, forty-eight FFPE specimens were used at varying concentrations (lowest input 50ng), eighteen blood derived specimens (lowest input 10ng) and six matched ctDNA input (lowest input 10ng) / fresh tumour specimens (lowest input 250ng) were processed. Downstream analysis was performed in R/Bioconductor for QC metrics and differential methylation analysis as well as copy number calls.ResultsCorrelation coefficients for CpG methylation at the probe level averaged R2=0.99 for blood derived samples and R2>0.96 for the FFPE samples. When matched ctDNA/fresh tumour samples were compared R2>0.91. Results of differential methylation analysis did not vary significantly by DNA input in either the blood or FFPE groups. There were differences seen in the ctDNA group as compared to their paired tumour sample, possibly because of enrichment for tumour material without contaminating normal. Copy number variants observed in the tumour were generally also seen in the paired ctDNA sample.ConclusionsThe Illumina Infinium HD methylation assay can robustly detect methylation across a range of sample types, including ctDNA, down to a input of 10ng. It can also reliably detect oncogenic methylation changes and copy number variants in ctDNA.

Evidence strongly indicates that extended RAS testing should be undertaken in mCRC patients, prior to prescribing anti-EGFR therapies. With more laboratories implementing testing, the requirement for External Quality Assurance schemes increases, thus ensuring high standards of molecular analysis. Data was analysed from 15 United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Service (UK NEQAS) for Molecular Genetics Colorectal cancer external quality assurance (EQA) schemes, delivered between 2009 and 2016. Laboratories were provided annually with nine colorectal tumour samples for genotyping. Information on methodology and extent of testing coverage was requested, and scores given for genotyping, interpretation and clerical accuracy. There has been a sixfold increase in laboratory participation (18 in 2009 to 108 in 2016). For RAS genotyping, fewer laboratories now use Roche cobas®, pyrosequencing and Sanger sequencing, with more moving to next generation sequencing (NGS). NGS is the most commonly employed technology for BRAF and PIK3CA mutation screening. KRAS genotyping errors were seen in ≤10% laboratories, until the 2014–2015 scheme, when there was an increase to 16.7%, corresponding to a large increase in scheme participants. NRAS genotyping errors peaked at 25.6% in the first 2015–2016 scheme but subsequently dropped to below 5%. Interpretation and clerical accuracy scores have been consistently good throughout. Within this EQA scheme, we have observed that the quality of molecular analysis for colorectal cancer has continued to improve, despite changes in the required targets, the volume of testing and the technologies employed. It is reassuring to know that laboratories clearly recognise the importance of participating in EQA schemes.

Background Immunohistochemical quantification of the immune response is prognostic for colorectal cancer (CRC). Here, we evaluate the suitability of alternative immune classifiers on prognosis and assess whether they relate to biological features amenable to targeted therapy. Methods Overall survival by immune (CD3, CD4, CD8, CD20 and FOXP3) and immune-checkpoint (ICOS, IDO-1 and PD-L1) biomarkers in independent CRC cohorts was evaluated. Matched mutational and transcriptomic data were interrogated to identify associated biology. Results Determination of immune-cold tumours by combined low-density cell counts of CD3, CD4 and CD8 immunohistochemistry constituted the best prognosticator across stage II–IV CRC, particularly in patients with stage IV disease (HR 1.98 [95% CI: 1.47–2.67]). These immune-cold CRCs were associated with tumour hypoxia, confirmed using CAIX immunohistochemistry (P = 0.0009), which may mediate disease progression through common biology (KRAS mutations, CRIS-B subtype and SPP1 mRNA overexpression). Conclusions Given the significantly poorer survival of immune-cold CRC patients, these data illustrate that assessment of CD4-expressing cells complements low CD3 and CD8 immunohistochemical quantification in the tumour bulk, potentially facilitating immunophenotyping of patient biopsies to predict prognosis. In addition, we found immune-cold CRCs to associate with a difficult-to-treat, poor prognosis hypoxia signature, indicating that these patients may benefit from hypoxia-targeting clinical trials.

Aims:Beta2-Microglobulin (B2M) forms part of the HLA class I complex and plays a role in metastatic biology. B2M mutations occur frequently in mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer (dMMR CRC) with limited data suggesting they may protect against recurrence. Our experimental study tested this hypothesis by investigating B2M mutation status and B2M protein expression and recurrence in patients in the stage II QUASAR clinical trial. Methods:Sanger sequencing was performed for the three coding exons of B2M on 121 dMMR and a subsample of 108 pMMR tumours; 52 with recurrence and 56 without. B2M protein expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry. Mutation status and protein expression were correlated with recurrence and compared to proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) CRCs. Results:Of 121 dMMR CRCs, deleterious B2M mutations were detected in 39 (32%). Five tumours contained missense B2M-variants of unknown significance, and were thus excluded from further analyses, leaving 116 dMMR tumours. With median follow-up 7.4 years, none of the 39 B2M-mutant tumours recurred, compared with 14/77 (18%) B2M-wildtype tumours (p=0.005); six at local and eight at distant sites. Sensitivity and specificity of IHC in detecting B2M mutations was 87% and 71% respectively. Significantly (p

Objective Complex phenotypes captured on histological slides represent the biological processes at play in individual cancers, but the link to underlying molecular classification has not been clarified or systematised. In colorectal cancer (CRC), histological grading is a poor predictor of disease progression, and consensus molecular subtypes (CMSs) cannot be distinguished without gene expression profiling. We hypothesise that image analysis is a cost-effective tool to associate complex features of tissue organisation with molecular and outcome data and to resolve unclassifiable or heterogeneous cases. In this study, we present an image-based approach to predict CRC CMS from standard H&E sections using deep learning. Design Training and evaluation of a neural network were performed using a total of n=1206 tissue sections with comprehensive multi-omic data from three independent datasets (training on FOCUS trial, n=278 patients; test on rectal cancer biopsies, GRAMPIAN cohort, n=144 patients; and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), n=430 patients). Ground truth CMS calls were ascertained by matching random forest and single sample predictions from CMS classifier. Results Image-based CMS (imCMS) accurately classified slides in unseen datasets from TCGA (n=431 slides, AUC)=0.84) and rectal cancer biopsies (n=265 slides, AUC=0.85). imCMS spatially resolved intratumoural heterogeneity and provided secondary calls correlating with bioinformatic prediction from molecular data. imCMS classified samples previously unclassifiable by RNA expression profiling, reproduced the expected correlations with genomic and epigenetic alterations and showed similar prognostic associations as transcriptomic CMS. Conclusion This study shows that a prediction of RNA expression classifiers can be made from H&E images, opening the door to simple, cheap and reliable biological stratification within routine workflows.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is commonly used to treat rectal cancer but patients have different levels of response and/or toxic effects. As part of the Stratification in COloRecTal cancer (S:CORT) programme, we collected 257 rectal biopsies from two cohorts: Grampian (single hospital) and Aristotle (clinical trial). All patients had been subsequently treated with identical regimen of neoadjuvant radiotherapy and capecitabine. We performed trancriptomic, mutation and copy number profiling and aimed to identify biomarkers associated with the robust pathological endpoint of complete response (CR). Key biological determinants were identified by linear regression of different pre-defined, hypothesis-driven biomarkers for radiotherapy response, adjusted by the known confounders T and N stage. A novel RNA signature was derived using a personalised bioinformatical pipeline using a wide range of machine learning approaches. Results were validated in a publicly available transcriptomic cohort of 107 patients treated with similar dose of radiotherapy and 5-fluorouracil infusion. Further comparision of the biological determinants and the novel RNA signature were performed in the same cohorts and also TCGA by linear regression. Previously published transcriptomic signatures were retrieved and assessed in the validation, unseen cohort. Grampian and Aristotle cohorts had similar statistical power and showed similar associations of CR with biological candidates, 10 of them being significant or borderline (p The immune, stromal and epithelial components of rectal tumours are important players for prediction of CR to radiotherapy in rectal cancer. A 33-gene transcriptomic biomarker can be used to effectively select patients that are highly likely to achieve CR allowing organ preservation while modulation of the relevant biological features in the other patients may be tested to improve their poor outcome with current treatment strategies. Citation Format: Enric Domingo, Sanjay Rathee, Andrew Blake, Leslie M. Samuel, Graeme I. Murray, David Sebag-Montefiore, Simon Gollins, Nicholas West, Rubina Begum, Marian Duggan, Laura White, Susan Richman, Philip Quirke, James Robineau, Keara Redmond, Aikaterini Chatzipli, Ultan McDermott, Ian Tomlinson, Philip Dunne, Francesca Buffa, Tim Maughan. Stratification of radiotherapy and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy from multi-omic profiling in rectal cancer biopsies [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr LB129.

3504 Background: There is extensive randomised evidence supporting the use of treatment breaks in mCRC, but breaks from treatment are not universally offered to patients despite reductions in toxicity, without detriment to OS. Prior trials have shown that the combination of Cp and bevacizumab extend PFS but not OS. FOCUS4-N explores oral maintenance Cp monotherapy in patients with disease control on first line therapy. Methods: FOCUS4 was a molecularly stratified trial programme registering patients with newly diagnosed mCRC from 88 hospitals in the UK. Whilst undergoing 16 wks of first line treatment, a sample of tumour was sent for laboratory testing to stratify their disease into molecular subtypes: MSI, BRAF, PIK3CA, TP53 and RAS mutations. For some molecular groups, a targeted therapy subtrial was available but entry into the FOCUS4-N trial was offered to those in whom a targeted subtrial was unavailable. Patients were randomised 1:1 between maintenance Cp therapy or AM. The primary outcome was PFS assessed using 8-wkly RECIST reported CT scans with quality of life (using EQ5D 8 weekly) and OS as secondary outcomes. Toxicity and tolerability were assessed 4-wkly. On progression, from the nadir, patients recommenced first line treatment. Cox regression was used to assess efficacy by intention-to-treat (ITT) with adjustment for tumour location, WHO status, metastatic burden, first line treatment and biomarker subtype. Results: Between March 2014 and March 2020, 254 patients were randomised (127 to Cp and 127 to AM). Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups but event rates were higher than anticipated in the AM group and the final analysis was triggered early as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic halting recruitment. The table presents results for PFS and OS. Compliance with treatment was good with per-protocol analysis results very similar to ITT (PFS HR=0.38 (95% CI 0.28-0.51)). Toxicity from Cp v AM was as expected with G≥2 fatigue (25% v 12%), diarrhoea (23% v 13%) and hand-foot syndrome (26% v 3%). Quality of life showed no statistically significant differences between the two arms. Conclusions: Despite strong evidence of prolongation of PFS with maintenance therapy, OS remains unaffected and FOCUS4-N provides additional evidence to support the use of treatment breaks as a safe management alternative for patients who are stable or responding well to first line treatment for mCRC. Cp without bevacizumab may be used to extend PFS, in the interval after 16 weeks of combination therapy. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN#90061546. [Table: see text]

111 Background: High tumor mRNA levels of the EGFR ligands, AREG and EREG are associated with anti-EGFR agent response in patients (pts) with RAS-wt mCRC, regardless of tumor location. However, ligand RNA assays have not been adopted into routine clinical practice due to issues with analytical precision and practicality. Here we test whether AREG and EREG expression assessed by IHC can predict benefit from Pan. Methods: A retrospective biomarker study within the PICCOLO trial (NCT00389870; irinotecan [Ir] ± Pan in fluoropyrimidine-resistant RAS-wt mCRC). AREG and EREG positive tumor cells were assessed by IHC in all RAS-wt patients with available tumor tissue. Pathologists annotated tumor areas on digital images of glass slides. Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms calculated the percentage of tumor cells staining positive for AREG and EREG within the tumor areas. More than 50% AREG and/or EREG tumor cell positivity was regarded as high ligand expression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints were RECIST response rate (RR) and overall survival (OS). Results: 274 RAS-wt pts had available tumor tissue. High ligand expression (n = 132) was associated with significant PFS benefit from IrPan compared with Ir (8.0 vs 3.2 months; HR 0.54 [0.37-0.79]; p = 0.001); whereas low ligand expression (n = 142) 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 (p = 0.02) and independent of BRAF-mutation status and primary tumor location. Likewise RR was significantly improved in pts with high ligand expression (IrPan vs Ir: 48% vs 6%; risk ratio, 7.8 [2.90-20.69]; p < 0.0001) but not those with low ligand expression (IrPan vs Ir: 25% vs 14%; risk ratio, 1.8 [95% CI, 0.89-3.65]; p = 0.10) (interaction p = 0.01). Lesser effect was seen on OS. Conclusions: IHC assessment of AREG and EREG identified pts who did or did not benefit from Pan, as has been previously demonstrated through mRNA quantification. IHC represents a more practicable technique as it can be provided at the point of care and is associated with shorter turn-around times. AREG and EREG IHC may be of use in routine practice to identify patients who would benefit from anti-EGFR therapy and those for whom alternative treatment strategies should be explored.

AimsIn addition to providing external quality assessment (EQA) schemes, United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment service (UK NEQAS) for Molecular Genetics also supports the education of laboratories. As an enhancement to the Molecular Pathology EQA scheme, a human cell-line reference sample, manufactured by Thermo Fisher Scientific (AcroMetrix), was provided for analysis. This contained many variants, present at frequencies between 1% and 17.9%.MethodsOne hundred and one laboratories submitted results, with a total of 2889 test results on 53 genes being reported. Known polymorphisms, 46/2889 (1.59%) results, were excluded. Variants detected in the seven most commonly reported (and clinically relevant) genes, KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, EGFR, PIK3CA, KIT and PDGFRA, are reported here, as these genes fall within the scope of UK NEQAS EQA schemes.ResultsNext generation sequencing (NGS) was the most commonly performed testing platform. There were between 5 and 27 validated variants in the seven genes reported here. Eight laboratories correctly reported all five NRAS variants, and two correctly reported all eight BRAF variants. The validated mean variant frequency was lower than that determined by participating laboratories, with single-gene testing methodologies showing less variation in estimated frequencies than NGS platforms. Laboratories were more likely to correctly identify clinically relevant variants.ConclusionsOver 100 laboratories took the opportunity to test the ‘educational reference sample’, showing a willingness to further validate their testing platforms. While it was encouraging to see that the most widely reported variants were those which should be included in routine testing panels, reporting of variants was potentially open to interpretation, thus clarity is still required on whether laboratories selectively reported variants, by either clinical relevance or variant frequency.

Defects in the DNA mismatch repair (MMR) proteins, result in a phenotype called microsatellite instability (MSI), occurring in up to 15% of sporadic colorectal cancers. Approximately one quarter of colon cancers with deficient MMR (dMMR) develop as a result of an inherited predisposition syndrome, Lynch syndrome (formerly known as HNPCC). It is essential to identify patients who potentially have Lynch syndrome, as not only they, but also family members, may require screening and monitoring. Diagnostic criteria have been developed, based primarily on Western populations, and several methodologies are available to identify dMMR tumours, including immunohistochemistry and microsatellite testing. These criteria have provided evidence supporting the introduction of reflex testing. Yet, it is becoming increasingly clear that tests have a limited sensitivity and specificity and may yet be superseded by next generation sequencing. In this review, the limitations of diagnostic criteria are discussed, and current and emerging screening technologies explained. There is now useful evidence supporting the prognostic and predictive value of dMMR status in colorectal tumours, but much less is known about their value in extracolonic tumours, that may also feature in Lynch syndrome. This review assesses current literature relating to dMMR in endometrial, ovarian, gastric and melanoma cancers, which it would seem, may benefit from large-scale clinical trials in order to further close the gap in knowledge between colorectal and extracolonic tumours.

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.

Histopathology-based staging of colorectal cancer (CRC) has utility in assessing the prognosis of patient subtypes, but as yet cannot accurately predict individual patient's treatment response. Transcriptomics approaches, using array based or next generation sequencing (NGS) platforms, of formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue can be harnessed to develop multi-gene biomarkers for predicting both prognosis and treatment response, leading to stratification of treatment. While transcriptomics can shape future biomarker development, currently

Introduction Microsatellite stable sporadic colorectal cancers (CRCs) can be classified as either tumours with chromosomal instability (CIN+) or tumours that are ‘Microsatellite and Chromosomal Stable’ (MACS). The CIN + tumours are aneuploid whilst MACS are near-diploid; little else is known about their differences. We compared the mutation profiles of CIN + and MACS CRCs. Method Targeted Next Generation Sequencing for mutation in 26 driver genes (TruSight-26 kit) was undertaken in 46 CIN + and 35 MACSCRCs. Tumours were compared for mutation frequency, allelic imbalance and clonal heterogeneity. Results Mutations were detected in 58% genes and, overall, mutation in driver genes was at expected frequencies. Comparison of classes revealed similar mutation frequencies in most genes and allelic imbalance atAPC and TP53. Differences were seen in mutation frequency in KRAS (41% CIN+ vs 68% MACS, p = 0.015) and GNAS (0% CIN+ vs 12% MACS, p = 0.032). Twenty percent CIN + CRCs harboured mutations only in TP53 - a profile not seen in the MACS tumours (p = 0.009). None of the differences were significant after multiple testing corrections. Conclusions The mutation profiles of CIN and MACS CRCs are similar. The events allowing aneuploidy (or forcing retention of diploidy) remain unknown.

Background: The tumor microenvironment is a key feature to understand cancer biology and may be used clinically. Quantification of tissue composition is usually based either on visual pathological review (VPR) or deconvolution of whole genome molecular data. Although the former is a direct measurement it has modest reproducibility while the latter is an indirect measurement of unclear accuracy, expensive and not always available. Here we test digital pathology coupled with machine learning as a new tool to assess tissue composition. Methods: As part of the Stratification in COloRecTal cancer (S:CORT) programme, a set of over 500 colorectal cancer (CRC) archival paraffin blocks from resections and biopsies were sequentially sectioned for Hematoxylin and Eosin staining (H&E), RNA extraction, a second H&E and DNA extraction. RNA expression microarrays, targeted DNA sequencing and DNA methylation arrays were applied. Tissue composition from the H&Es was obtained by VPR of expert pathologists and by a deep neural net (DNN) algorithm after supervised training on >1,500 tissue areas from S:CORT, TCGA, TEM and CORGI CRC cohorts. Tumor purity estimates were obtained from RNA and methylation arrays. Results: DNN estimates including area and cell counts were obtained for tumor, desmoplastic stroma, inflamed stroma, mucin/hypocellular stroma, muscle, necrosis and white space. An average of 6.8x105 total cells (range: 1.2x104-2.8x106) and 1.2x105 (range: 7.2x104-1.8x106) were classified for resections and biopsies respectively. Analyses performed twice on the same H&Es obtained matching results (r=1.0). Comparison of the paired first and second H&E showed very high correlations (r~0.9) and total cell counts correlated with DNA and RNA extraction yields (r~0.6). Tumor purity estimates by VPR mildly correlated with DNN (r~0.5) but they were underestimated and very variable. As a result, copy number adjusted by VPR purity tended to be overestimated compared to adjustment with DNN estimates. The improved performance of DNN is reflected in an accurate capture of non-linear association between area and cell counts in invasive cancer. In contrast, tumor purity estimates derived from RNA or DNA methylation arrays showed better correlations compared with DNN (r~0.6) but both overestimated purity in cases with low cell counts by up to a three-fold difference. Conclusions: Tissue composition analysis with DNN allows analytical robustness, automatization and standardization and provides very high reproducibility at single cell resolution. DNN-based estimation of tumor purity is more accurate than VPR or extrapolation from molecular data derived from genome-wide omic platforms which tend to under and overestimate tumor purity respectively. DNN could be used to better plan and asses downstream molecular analyses and to investigate tissue-based metrics as potential clinical biomarkers in clinical trials. Citation Format: Enric Domingo, Aikaterini Chatzipli, Susan Richman, Andrew Blake, Claire Hardy, Celina Whalley, Keara Redmon, Ian Tomlinson, Philip Dunne, Steven Walker, Andrew Beggs, Ultan McDermott, Graeme I. Murray, Leslie M. Samuel, Matthew Seymour, Philip Quirke, Tim Maughan, Viktor H. Koelzer. Assessment of tissue composition with digital pathology in colorectal cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4446.

Contains fulltext : 182283.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Diversity in colorectal cancer biology is associated with variable responses to standard chemotherapy. We aimed to identify and validate DNA hypermethylated genes as predictive biomarkers for irinotecan treatment of metastatic CRC patients. Candidate genes were selected from 389 genes involved in DNA Damage Repair by correlation analyses between gene methylation status and drug response in 32 cell lines. A large series of samples (n=818) from two phase III clinical trials was used to evaluate these candidate genes by correlating methylation status to progression-free survival after treatment with first-line single-agent fluorouracil (Capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil) or combination chemotherapy (Capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil plus irinotecan (CAPIRI/FOLFIRI)). In the discovery (n=185) and initial validation set (n=166), patients with methylated Decoy Receptor 1 (DCR1) did not benefit from CAPIRI over Capecitabine treatment (discovery set: HR=1.2 (95%CI 0.7-1.9, p=0.6), validation set: HR=0.9 (95%CI 0.6-1.4, p=0.5)), whereas patients with unmethylated DCR1 did (discovery set: HR=0.4 (95%CI 0.3-0.6, p=0.00001), validation set: HR=0.5 (95%CI 0.3-0.7, p=0.0008)). These results could not be replicated in the external data set (n=467), where a similar effect size was found in patients with methylated and unmethylated DCR1 for FOLFIRI over 5FU treatment (methylated DCR1: HR=0.7 (95%CI 0.5-0.9, p=0.01), unmethylated DCR1: HR=0.8 (95%CI 0.6-1.2, p=0.4)). In conclusion, DCR1 promoter hypermethylation status is a potential predictive biomarker for response to treatment with irinotecan, when combined with capecitabine. This finding could not be replicated in an external validation set, in which irinotecan was combined with 5FU. These results underline the challenge and importance of extensive clinical evaluation of candidate biomarkers in multiple trials.

Contains fulltext : 118710.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) KRAS mutation testing is mandatory for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who are eligible for treatment with an epidermal growth factor receptor targeting agent, since tumors with a mutation are not sensitive to the drug. Several methods for mutation testing are in use and the need for external quality assurance has been demonstrated. An often little addressed but important issue in external quality assurance schemes is a low percentage of tumor cells in the test samples, where the analytical sensitivity of most tests becomes critical. Using artificial samples based on a mixture of cell lines with known mutation status of the KRAS gene, we assessed the reliability of a series of commonly used methods (Sanger sequencing, high resolution melting, pyrosequencing, and amplification refractory mutation system-polymerase chain reaction) on samples with 0, 2.5, 5, 10, and 15 % mutated cells. Nine laboratories throughout Europe participated and submitted a total of ten data sets. The limit of detection of each method differed, ranging from >15-5 % tumor cells. All methods showed a decreasing correct mutation call rate proportionally with decreasing percentage of tumor cells. Our findings indicate that laboratories and clinicians need to be aware of the decrease in correct mutation call rate proportionally with decreasing percentage of tumor cells and that external quality assurance schemes need to address the issue of low tumor cell percentage in the test samples.

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.

AimsSince 2008, KRAS mutation status in exon 2 has been used to predict response to anti-EGFR therapies. Recent evidence has demonstrated that NRAS status is also predictive of response. Several retrospective ‘extended RAS’ analyses have been performed on clinical trial material. Despite this, are we really moving towards such extended screening practice in reality?MethodsData were analysed from four consecutive UK National External Quality Assessment Service for Molecular Genetics Colorectal cancer External Quality Assessment schemes (during the period 2014–2016), with up to 110 laboratories (worldwide) participating in each scheme. Testing of four or five tumour samples is required per scheme. Laboratories provided information on which codons were routinely screened, and provided genotyping and interpretation results for each sample.ResultsAt least 85% of laboratories routinely tested KRAS codons 12, 13 and 61. Over the four schemes, an increasing number of laboratories routinely tested KRAS codons 59, 117 and 146. Furthermore, more laboratories were introducing next generation sequencing technologies. The pattern of ‘extended testing’ was reassuringly similar for NRAS, although fewer laboratories currently test for mutations in this gene. Alarmingly, still only 36.1% and 24.1% of participating laboratories met the ACP Molecular Pathology and Diagnostics Group and American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines, respectively, for extended RAS testing in the latest assessment.ConclusionsDespite recommendations in the UK and USA on extended RAS testing, there has clearly been, based on these results, a delay in implementation. Inadequate testing results in patients being subjected to harmful treatment regimens, which would not be the case, were routine practice altered, in line with evidence-based guidelines.

Purpose Candidate predictive biomarkers for irinotecan and oxaliplatin were assessed in 1,628 patients in Fluorouracil, Oxaliplatin, CPT-11: Use and Sequencing (FOCUS), a large randomized trial of fluorouracil alone compared with fluorouracil and irinotecan and compared with fluorouracil and oxaliplatin in advanced colorectal cancer. Methods The candidate biomarkers were: tumor immunohistochemistry for MLH1/MSH2, p53, topoisomerase-1 (Topo1), excision repair cross-complementing gene 1 (ERCC1), O-6-methylguanine-DNA-methyltranserase (MGMT), and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX2); germline DNA polymorphisms in GSTP1, ABCB1, XRCC1, ERCC2, and UGT1A1. These were screened in more than 750 patients for interaction with benefit from irinotecan or oxaliplatin; two markers (Topo1 and MLH1/MSH2) met criteria to be taken forward for analysis in the full population. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. Results One thousand three hundred thirteen patients (81%) were assessable for Topo1 immunohistochemistry (low, < 10%; moderate, 10% to 50%; or high, > 50% tumor nuclei). In patients with low Topo1, PFS was not improved by the addition of either irinotecan (hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.22) or oxaliplatin (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.07); conversely, patients with moderate/high Topo1 benefited from the addition of either drug (HR, 0.48 to 0.70 in all categories; interaction P = .005; overall, P = .001 for irinotecan; P = .05 for oxaliplatin). High Topo1 was associated with a major overall survival benefit with first-line combination chemotherapy (HR, 0.60; median benefit, 5.3 months); patients with moderate or low Topo1 did not benefit (HR, 0.92 and 1.09, respectively; interaction P = .005). MLH1/MSH2 did not show significant interaction with treatment, although the low rate of loss (4.4%) limits the power of the study for this biomarker. Conclusion Topo1 immunohistochemistry identified subpopulations that did or did not benefit from irinotecan, and possibly also from oxaliplatin. If verified independently, this information will contribute to the individualization of treatment for colorectal cancer.

Purpose: Genome-wide association studies have identified numerous loci associated with colorectal cancer risk. Several of these have also been associated with patient survival, although none have been validated. Here, we used large independent training and validation cohorts to identify robust prognostic biomarkers for colorectal cancer. Experimental Design: In our training phase, we analyzed 20 colorectal cancer-risk SNPs from 14 genome-wide associated loci, for their effects on survival in 2,083 patients with advanced colorectal cancer. A Cox survival model was used, stratified for treatment, adjusted for known prognostic factors, and corrected for multiple testing. Three SNPs were subsequently analyzed in an independent validation cohort of 5,552 colorectal cancer patients. A validated SNP was analyzed by disease stage and response to treatment. Results: Three variants associated with survival in the training phase; however, only rs9929218 at 16q22 (intron 2 of CDH1, encoding E-cadherin) was significant in the validation phase. Patients homozygous for the minor allele (AA genotype) had worse survival (training phase HR, 1.43; 95% confidence intervals; CI, 1.20–1.71, P = 5.8 × 10−5; validation phase HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01–1.37, P = 3.2 × 10−2; combined HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.14–1.43, P = 2.2 × 10−5). This effect was independent of known prognostic factors, and was significant amongst patients with stage IV disease (P = 2.7 × 10−5). rs9929218 was also associated with poor response to chemotherapy (P = 3.9 × 10−4). Conclusions: We demonstrate the potential of common inherited genetic variants to inform patient outcome and show that rs9929218 identifies approximately 8% of colorectal cancer patients with poor prognosis. rs9929218 may affect CDH1 expression and E-cadherin plays a role in epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition providing a mechanism underlying its prognostic potential. Clin Cancer Res; 21(15); 3453–61. ©2015 AACR.

Summary Adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil and folinic acid improves overall survival for resected carcinoma of the colon of Dukes' stage C by 10–12%. In metastatic disease, response rates with fluorouracil-based regimens are about 25%. Combination with newer agents such as irinotecan and oxaliplatin can improve response rates to more than 50% in selected patients. New treatments with novel molecular targets will soon be entering clinical use. Despite these improvements, many patients undergo chemotherapy for resistant cancer, thus incurring side-effects without benefit. Expression of particular genes can be tested at the protein or RNA level and can be correlated with response or resistance to particular systemic therapies. Thus, predictive-factor testing of tumour biopsy samples may allow us to select chemotherapy or immunotherapy treatments with a high likelihood of benefit for the individual patient.

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

The application of transcriptional gene signatures to stratify tumors into prognostic and predictive subtypes has evolved rapidly since the original landmark studies demonstrated the clinical utility of this approach in breast cancer. While the number of published signatures continues to increase, the likelihood of individual signatures achieving clinical utility has remained very low, with some estimates putting this figure below 1%. Transcriptional intratumoral heterogeneity (ITH), resulting from variation in stromal components at different regions of a tumor, has been shown to undermine molecular stratification of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients into prognostic and predictive subgroups. The degree of gene expression changes associated with variation in tumor microenvironment (TME) content may even mask the relatively more subtle changes associated with genetic variability and heterogeneity within the tumor epithelium. This variation in TME content, and subsequent ITH, at different regions of the tumor has long been recognised; however, in the era of precision medicine, the implications of such microenvironmental alterations in confounding patient classification are of increased importance. To examine this issue, a panel of clinically relevant prognostic and predictive transcriptional gene signatures were selected in order to assess the potential for discordant classification of patient samples based on the tumoral region profiled. Using these clinically relevant CRC gene expression signatures, we assessed the susceptibility of each signature to the confounding effects of ITH using gene expression microarray data obtained from multiple tumor regions of a cohort of 24 patients, including central tumor, the tumor invasive front and lymph node metastasis. Consensus annotated gene lists for each of the gene signatures were used, followed by in silico analysis within our multiregional clinical dataset. Sample clustering alongside correlative assessment revealed variation in the ability of each signature to cluster samples according to patient-of-origin rather than region-of-origin within the multiregion dataset. Signatures focused on cancer-cell intrinsic gene expression were found to produce more clinically useful, patient-centred classifiers, as exemplified by the recently developed CRC intrinsic signature (CRIS), which robustly clustered samples by patient rather than sample region. These findings highlight the potential of cancer-cell intrinsic signatures to reliably stratify CRC patients by minimising the confounding effects of ITH. In conclusion, our data support the clinical evaluation of signatures based on intrinsic gene expression, such as CRIS, which are unaffected by the confounding variable of transcriptional ITH and therefore have the potential to be used clinically to inform precision medicine decisions, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes. Citation Format: Philip D. Dunne, Paul O'Reilly, Aideen Roddy, Matthew Alderdice, Susan Richman, Tim Maughan, Simon McDade, Patrick Johnston, Daniel Longley, Elaine Kay, Darragh McArt, Mark Lawler. Cancer cell intrinsic gene expression signatures minimize the confounding effects of intratumoral heterogeneity in colorectal cancer patient classification [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-042. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-LB-042

Purpose: To determine the prevalence and prognostic value of mismatch repair (MMR) status and its relation to BRAF mutation (BRAFMT) status in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Experimental Design: A pooled analysis of four phase III studies in first-line treatment of mCRC (CAIRO, CAIRO2, COIN, and FOCUS) was performed. Primary outcome parameter was the hazard ratio (HR) for median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in relation to MMR and BRAF. For the pooled analysis, Cox regression analysis was performed on individual patient data. Results: The primary tumors of 3,063 patients were analyzed, of which 153 (5.0%) exhibited deficient MMR (dMMR) and 250 (8.2%) a BRAFMT. BRAFMT was observed in 53 (34.6%) of patients with dMMR tumors compared with 197 (6.8%) of patients with proficient MMR (pMMR) tumors (P < 0.001). In the pooled dataset, median PFS and OS were significantly worse for patients with dMMR compared with pMMR tumors [HR, 1.33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.12–1.57 and HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.13–1.61, respectively), and for patients with BRAFMT compared with BRAF wild-type (BRAFWT) tumors (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.17–1.54 and HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.66–2.19, respectively). PFS and OS were significantly decreased for patients with BRAFMT within the group of patients with pMMR, but not for BRAF status within dMMR, or MMR status within BRAFWT or BRAFMT. Conclusions: Prevalence of dMMR and BRAFMT in patients with mCRC is low and both biomarkers confer an inferior prognosis. Our data suggest that the poor prognosis of dMMR is driven by the BRAFMT status. Clin Cancer Res; 20(20); 5322–30. ©2014 AACR.

Background:\ud \ud Molecular characteristics of cancer vary between individuals. In future, most trials will require assessment of biomarkers to allocate patients into enriched populations in which targeted therapies are more likely to be effective. The MRC FOCUS3 trial is a feasibility study to assess key elements in the planning of such studies.\ud \ud \ud Patients and Methods:\ud \ud Patients with advanced colorectal cancer were registered from 24 centres between February 2010 and April 2011. With their consent, patients’ tumour samples were analysed for KRAS/BRAF oncogene mutation status and topoisomerase 1 (topo-1) immunohistochemistry. Patients were then classified into one of four molecular strata; within each strata patients were randomised to one of two hypothesis-driven experimental therapies or a common control arm (FOLFIRI chemotherapy). A 4-stage suite of patient information sheets (PISs) was developed to avoid patient overload.\ud \ud \ud Results:\ud \ud A total of 332 patients were registered, 244 randomised. Among randomised patients, biomarker results were provided within 10 working days (w.d.) in 71%, 15 w.d. in 91% and 20 w.d. in 99%. DNA mutation analysis was 100% concordant between two laboratories. Over 90% of participants reported excellent understanding of all aspects of the trial. In this randomised phase II setting, omission of irinotecan in the low topo-1 group was associated with increased response rate and addition of cetuximab in the KRAS, BRAF wild-type cohort was associated with longer progression-free survival.\ud \ud \ud Conclusions:\ud \ud Patient samples can be collected and analysed within workable time frames and with reproducible mutation results. Complex multi-arm designs are acceptable to patients with good PIS. Randomisation within each cohort provides outcome data that can inform clinical practice.

Background: The main toxicity of irinotecan in advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) is delayed diarrhoea. Intestinal SN-38, released by deconjugation of the parent glucuronide excreted into the bile or produced in situ by intestinal carboxylesterase, is toxic to the intestinal epithelium. The canalicular transport of irinotecan and SN-38G is mediated by ABCC2 (MRP2) and ABCB1 (MDR1) which are both inhibited by ciclosporin. We tested whether irinotecan and ciclosporin was non-inferior for anti-cancer efficacy and superior for toxicity compared with single-agent irinotecan. Methods: Six hundred and seventy-two patients with advanced, measurable CRC following prior fluoropyrimidine-containing chemotherapy were randomised to either irinotecan 3-weekly 350 mg/m(2) (or 300 mg/m(2) if age >70 or performance status (PS) = 2) or 3-weekly irinotecan at 140 mg/m(2) (120 mg/m(2) if age >70 or PS = 2) with ciclosporin 3 mg/kg t.d.s. for three days by mouth starting on the morning before irinotecan. The primary end-point was the proportion of patients alive and progression-free at 12 weeks. The key secondary end-point was the incidence of grade >= 3 diarrhoea within 12 weeks of randomisation. Results: The proportion of patients progression-free at 12 weeks with irinotecan was 53.4% compared to 47.2% with irinotecan plus ciclosporin (difference = -6.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-13.8%, 1.3%]). Since the lower limit of the 95% CI crossed the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -10.6%, non-inferiority of irinotecan plus ciclosporin compared to irinotecan alone was not statistically demonstrated. 15.0% patients developed severe diarrhoea on irinotecan compared to 13.8% on irinotecan plus ciclosporin, a non-significant difference. Interpretation: The pharmacokinetic biomodulation of irinotecan using oral ciclosporin does not improve the therapeutic index of irinotecan in advanced CRC. Funding: The trial was funded by Cancer Research UK and supported by Amgen Pharma. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Background: Therapeutic antibodies targeting EGFR have activity in advanced colorectal cancer, but results from clinical trials are inconsistent and the population in which most benefit is derived is uncertain. Our aim was to assess the addition of panitumumab to irinotecan in pretreated advanced colorectal cancer. Methods: In this open-label, randomised trial, we enrolled patients who had advanced colorectal cancer progressing after fluoropyrimidine treatment with or without oxaliplatin from 60 centres in the UK. From December, 2006 until June, 2008, molecularly unselected patients were recruited to a three-arm design including irinotecan (control), irinotecan plus ciclosporin, and irinotecan plus panitumumab (IrPan) groups. From June 10, 2008, in response to new data, the trial was amended to a prospectively stratified design, restricting panitumumab randomisation to patients with KRAS wild-type tumours; the results of the comparison between the irinotcan and IrPan groups are reported here. We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence (stratified by previous EGFR targeted therapy and then minimised by centre, WHO performance status, previous oxaliplatin, previous bevacizumab, previous dose modifications, and best previous response) to randomly allocate patients to either irinotecan or IrPan. Patients in both groups received 350 mg/m2 intravenous irinotecan every 3 weeks (300 mg/m2 if aged ≥70 years or a performance status of 2); patients in the IrPan group also received intravenous panitumumab 9 mg/kg every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival in KRAS wild-type patients who had not received previous EGFR targeted therapy, analysed by intention to treat. Tumour DNA was pyrosequenced for KRASc.146, BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA mutations, and predefined molecular subgroups were analysed for interaction with the effect of panitumumab. This study is registered, number ISRCTN93248876. Results: Between Dec 4, 2006, and Aug 31, 2010, 1198 patients were enrolled, of whom 460 were included in the primary population of patients with KRASc.12-13,61 wild-type tumours and no previous EGFR targeted therapy. 230 patients were randomly allocated to irinotecan and 230 to IrPan. There was no difference in overall survival between groups (HR 1·01, 95% CI 0·83-1·23; p=0·91), but individuals in the IrPan group had longer progression-free survival (0·78, 0·64-0·95; p=0·015) and a greater number of responses (79 [34%] patients vs 27 [12%]; p

Background: FOCUS4 is a phase II/III trial programme testing targeted agents in pts with aCRC in molecularly stratified cohorts. Her 1,2,3 signal inhibition has been hypothesized as a mechanism for tumour control in aCRC potentially sensitive to EGFR inhibition which might delay emergence of resistance in pts responding to standard therapy. Methods: The FOCUS4-D molecular cohort includes pts whose tumour biomarker assessment confirms wt status for BRAF, PIK3CA, KRAS & NRAS. Following 16 weeks of first-line therapy, patients with stable or responding tumours were randomised to receive either oral AZD8931 or matching lacebo. Patients were followed for progression-free-survival (PFS) as the primary outcome according to RECIST v1.1 criteria. Secondary outcomes included toxicity. Pre-planned interim analyses were agreed using Multi-Arm Multi-Stage (MAMS) trial design methodology triggered by occurrence of PFS events in the placebo arm. Cox regression was used to estimate PFS hazard ratios of AZD8931 relative to placebo adjusted for minimisation factors. Results: Across 18 UK sites, 32 patients were randomised (16 into each arm) between 01/2014 and 03/2016. Patients were balanced for baseline characteristics. At the first pre-planned interim analysis, the Independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended closure of FOCUS4-D on grounds of lack of activity. At this analysis, 26 patients had experienced a PFS event (11 in the placebo arm). Analyses by both Intention-to-treat (HR = 1.31 [95% CI 0.56-3.08], p = 0.54) and per-protocol (HR = 1.42 [95% CI 0.58-3.50], p = 0.49) did not indicate any benefit for PFS. Toxicity was minimal with the most frequent relating to skin rash; graded at ≥3 in 2 patients (13%). Conclusions: Despite minimal toxicity, there was no evidence to suggest any efficacy of single agent Her 1,2,3 inhibition in aCRC patients whose tumour is wt for BRAF, PIK3CA, KRAS and NRAS after induction therapy in the first-line setting. Clinical trial identification: ISRCTN90061546 EUDRACT #: 2012-005111-12 Legal entity responsible for the study: MRC CTU at University College London Funding: CRUK and MRC

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

Purpose It is uncertain whether modest benefits from adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colorectal cancer justify the toxicity, cost, and inconvenience. We investigated the usefulness of defective mismatch repair (dMMR), BRAF, and KRAS mutations in predicting tumor recurrence and sensitivity to chemotherapy. Patients and Methods Immunohistochemistry for dMMR and pyrosequencing for KRAS/BRAF were performed for 1,913 patients randomly assigned between fluorouracil and folinic acid chemotherapy and no chemotherapy in the Quick and Simple and Reliable (QUASAR) trial. Results Twenty-six percent of 695 right-sided colon, 3% of 685 left-sided colon, and 1% of 407 rectal tumors were dMMR. Similarly, 17% of right colon, 2% of left colon, and 2% of rectal tumors were BRAF mutant. KRAS mutant tumors were more evenly distributed: 40% right colon, 28% left colon, and 36% rectal tumors. Recurrence rate for dMMR tumors was half that for MMR-proficient tumors (11% [25 of 218] v 26% [438 of 1,695] recurred; risk ratio [RR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.70; P < .001). Risk of recurrence was also significantly higher for KRAS mutant than KRAS wild-type tumors (28% [150 of 542] v 21% [219 of 1,041]; RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.74; P = .002) but did not differ significantly between BRAF mutant and wild-type tumors (P = .36). No marker predicted benefit from chemotherapy with efficacy not differing significantly by MMR, KRAS, or BRAF status. The prognostic value of MMR and KRAS was similar in the presence and absence of chemotherapy. Conclusion MMR assays identify patients with a low risk of recurrence. KRAS mutational analysis provides useful additional risk stratification to guide use of chemotherapy.

As a consequence of new innovative therapies and therapeutic combinations, the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer is becoming increasingly complex. Validated molecular biomarkers could contribute to patient management, but until recently, none has been routinely used. With the recognition that activating mutations of the KRAS oncogene can predict resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor agents, the clinical value of biomarkers in advanced colorectal cancer has been brought to the fore. Prognostic and predictive biomarkers that reflect the molecular and therapeutic complexities of advanced colorectal cancer may provide valuable information regarding likely clinical outcome and therapeutic response and thus may improve patient management and therapeutic agent selection. Such biomarkers are discussed herein.

Purpose Activating mutation of the KRAS oncogene is an established predictive biomarker for resistance to anti–epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) therapies in advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC). We wanted to determine whether KRAS and/or BRAF mutation is also a predictive biomarker for other aCRC therapies. Patients and Methods The Medical Research Council Fluorouracil, Oxaliplatin and Irinotecan: Use and Sequencing (MRC FOCUS) trial compared treatment sequences including first-line fluorouracil (FU), FU/irinotecan or FU/oxaliplatin in aCRC. Tumor blocks were obtained from 711 consenting patients. DNA was extracted and KRAS codons 12, 13, and 61 and BRAF codon 600 were assessed by pyrosequencing. Mutation (mut) status was assessed first as a prognostic factor and then as a predictive biomarker for the benefit of adding irinotecan or oxaliplatin to FU. The association of BRAF-mut with loss of MLH1 was assessed by immunohistochemistry. Results Three hundred eight (43.3%) of 711 patients had KRAS-mut and 56 (7.9%) of 711 had BRAF-mut. Mutation of KRAS, BRAF, or both was present in 360 (50.6%) of 711 patients. Mutation in either KRAS or BRAF was a poor prognostic factor for overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR], 1.40; 95% CI, 1.20 to 1.65; P < .0001) but had minimal impact on progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.36; P = .05). Mutation status did not affect the impact of irinotecan or oxaliplatin on PFS or OS. BRAF-mut was weakly associated with loss of MLH1 staining (P = .012). Conclusion KRAS/BRAF mutation is associated with poor prognosis but is not a predictive biomarker for irinotecan or oxaliplatin. There is no evidence that patients with KRAS/BRAF mutated tumors are less likely to benefit from these standard chemotherapy agents.

Purpose Predicting efficacy and toxicity could potentially allow individualization of cancer therapy. We investigated putative pharmacogenetic markers of chemotherapy toxicity in a large randomized trial. Patients, Materials, and Methods Patients were randomly assigned to different sequences of chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer. First-line therapy was fluorouracil (FU), irinotecan/FU (IrFU) or oxaliplatin/FU (OxFU). Patients allocated first-line FU had planned second-line irinotecan alone, IrFU, or OxFU. The primary toxicity outcome measure was toxicity-induced delay or dose reduction; the secondary outcome was Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events grade ≥ 3 toxicity. DNA was analyzed in 1,188 patients; 1,036 were assessable for the primary outcome, including 688 treated with FU, 270 with IrFU (first or second line), 280 with OxFU (first or second line), 184 with irinotecan alone, and 454 with any irinotecan-containing regimen. Ten polymorphisms were assessed: thymidylate synthase–enhancer region (TYMS-ER), thymidylate synthase 1494 (TYMS-1494), dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD), methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR), mutL homolog 1 (MLH1), UDP glucuronyltransferase (UGT1A1), ATP-binding cassette group B gene 1 (ABCB1), x-ray cross-complementing group 1 (XRCC1), glutathione-S-transferase P1 (GSTP1), and excision repair cross-complementing gene 2 (ERCC2). Results Using the primary outcome measure, no polymorphism was significantly associated (P < .01) with the toxicity of any regimen or with the difference in toxicity of IrFU or OxFU versus FU alone. Trends (of doubtful significance) were seen for associations of XRCC1, ERCC2, and GSTP1 with toxicity during irinotecan regimens: XRCC1, primary end point, any irinotecan-containing regimen (P = .045); ERCC2, secondary end point, irinotecan alone (P = .003); GSTP1, secondary end point; IrFU (P = .039); and irinotecan alone (P = .05). There was no evidence of association of UGT1A1*28 with irinotecan toxicity. Conclusion These results do not support the routine clinical use of the evaluated polymorphisms, including UGT1A1*28. Further investigation of XRCC1, ERCC2, and GSTP1 as potential predictors of irinotecan toxicity is warranted.

3583 Background: EGFR pathway activation is important in aCRC, but EGFR expression is not predictive for anti-EGFR drug efficacy. Signalling occurs across ErbB receptors and EGFR may mediate oncoge...

3509 Background: BRAF-mut aCRC pts have poor overall survival (OS). To investigate this phenomenon, we have examined individual patient data from pts treated with chemotherapy alone in 3 RCTs to id...