Search

Background: In clinical trials, combined 5-fluorouracil (5FU) plus oxaliplatin improves the survival of patients who have resected, stage III colon cancer with manageable toxicity. However, the tolerability of this in the general population of patients with colon cancer is uncertain.Methods: Adverse outcomes were compared in patients with stage III colon cancer who received either 5FU or 5FU/oxaliplatin within 120 days of undergoing resection versus a control group of patients with stage II colon cancer who did not receive chemotherapy in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database and in data from the New York State Cancer Registry linked to Medicare and Medicaid. Hospitalizations, emergency room (ER) visits, and outpatient adverse events (AEs) were measured in claims from 30 days to 9 months after patients underwent resection. Multiple logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios of events by treatment. Propensity score matching was used to minimize selection bias.Results: Adverse outcomes were more frequent for chemotherapy recipients. AE rates were higher in patients who received 5FU/oxaliplatin (81%) compared with patients who received 5FU alone (72%), in the SEER-Medicare data. The effect of oxaliplatin on AEs was greater in older patients: The odds ratio was 2.10 (95% confidence interval, 1.53-2.87) for patients aged ≥ 75 years versus 1.75 (95% confidence interval, 1.39-2.21) for patients aged <75 years. ER use was high in Medicaid patients (83% of those who received chemotherapy), but neither ER use nor hospitalization was increased by oxaliplatin. The 60-day mortality rate was 1% to 3% for patients who received 5FU alone and 1% to 2% for patients who received combined 5FU/oxaliplatin.Conclusions: The incremental harms of adjuvant chemotherapy with 5FU/oxaliplatin versus 5FU alone were modest in patients with stage III colon cancer who were insured by Medicare and Medicaid. The additional harms in patients aged ≥ 75 years largely were restricted to outpatient events and did not extend to an increased rate of hospitalization or early death. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) is the standard adjuvant therapy for resected stage III colon cancer. Adding cetuximab to FOLFOX benefits patients with metastatic wild-type KRAS but not mutated KRAS colon cancer.Objective: To assess the potential benefit of cetuximab added to the modified sixth version of the FOLFOX regimen (mFOLFOX6) in patients with resected stage III wild-type KRAS colon cancer.Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized trial of 2686 patients aged 18 years or older at multiple institutions across North America enrolled following resection and informed consent between February 10, 2004, and November 25, 2009. The primary randomized comparison was 12 biweekly cycles of mFOLFOX6 with and without cetuximab. KRAS mutation status was centrally determined. The trial was halted after a planned interim analysis of 48% of predicted events (246/515) occurring in 1863 (of 2070 planned) patients with tumors having wild-type KRAS. A total of 717 patients with mutated KRAS and 106 with indeterminate KRAS were accrued. The 2070 patients with wild-type KRAS provided 90% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.33 (2-sided α = .05), with planned interim efficacy analyses after 25%, 50%, and 75% of expected relapses.Main Outcome Measures: Disease-free survival in patients with wild-type KRAS mutations. Secondary end points included overall survival and toxicity.Results: Median (range) follow-up was 28 (0-68) months. The trial demonstrated no benefit when adding cetuximab. Three-year disease-free survival for mFOLFOX6 alone was 74.6% vs 71.5% with the addition of cetuximab (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.98-1.49; P = .08) in patients with wild-type KRAS, and 67.1% vs 65.0% (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.86-1.46; P = .38) in patients with mutated KRAS, with no significant benefit in any subgroups assessed. Among all patients, grade 3 or higher adverse events (72.5% vs 52.3%; odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% CI, 2.1-2.8; P < .001) and failure to complete 12 cycles (33% vs 23%; OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.4-1.9; P < .001) were significantly higher with cetuximab. Increased toxicity and greater detrimental differences in all outcomes were observed in patients aged 70 years or older.Conclusion: Among patients with stage III resected colon cancer, the use of cetuximab with adjuvant mFOLFOX6 compared with mFOLFOX6 alone did not result in improved disease-free survival.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00079274. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although preclinical and epidemiological data suggest that statins may have antineoplastic properties, the impact of statin use on patient survival after a curative resection of stage III colon cancer is unknown.Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study of 842 patients with stage III colon cancer enrolled in a randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial from April 1999 to May 2001 to investigate the relationship between statin use and survival. Disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were investigated by Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests in the overall study population and in a subset of patients stratified by KRAS mutation status (n = 394), and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the simultaneous impact of confounding variables. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: Among 842 patients, 134 (15.9%) reported statin use after completing adjuvant chemotherapy. DFS among statin users and nonusers was similar (hazard ratio [HR] of cancer recurrence or death = 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.73 to 1.49). RFS and OS were also similar between statin users and nonusers (adjusted HR of cancer recurrence = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.77 to 1.69; adjusted HR of death = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.77 to 1.71). Survival outcomes were similar regardless of increasing duration of statin use before cancer diagnosis (P(trend) = .63, .63, and .59 for DFS, RFS, and OS, respectively). The impact of statin use did not differ by tumor KRAS mutation status, with similar DFS, RFS, and OS for statin use among mutant and wild-type subgroups (P(interaction) = .84, .67, and .98 for DFS, RFS, and OS, respectively).Conclusion: Statin use during and after adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with improved DFS, RFS, or OS in patients with stage III colon cancer, regardless of KRAS mutation status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and gemcitabine administered concurrently with radiation in patients with locally advanced, nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer.Methods: Eligible patients had histologically confirmed pancreatic adenocarcinoma deemed locally unresectable without evidence of metastatic disease. In addition, all patients underwent laparoscopy or laparotomy before study entry to rule out peritoneal carcinomatosis. Patients received radiation therapy (50.4 Gy) with concurrent infusional 5FU (200 mg/m(2) 5 days/week) and weekly gemcitabine (200 mg/m(2) ). After a 3-week break, patients received weekly gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m(2) for 3 of 4 weeks, for 4 cycles. The primary endpoint of the trial was the proportion of patients surviving 9 months from study entry. Secondary endpoints included objective tumor response, CA19-9 response, overall survival (OS) time to progression (TTP), and toxicity.Results: Between November 2001 and October 2004, 81 patients were enrolled, 78 of whom were eligible for analysis. With a median follow-up of 55.2 months, the median OS was 12.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.9-14.9) and the median TTP was 10 months (95% CI, 6.4-12.0). An objective tumor response was seen in 19 patients (25%), and among 56 patients with an elevated CA19-9 at baseline, 29 (52%) had a sustained CA19-9 response. Overall, 41% of patients had grade 3 or greater treatment-related gastrointestinal adverse events.Conclusions: The combination of 5FU, gemcitabine, and radiation is well tolerated. Survival is comparable with the best results of other recent studies of 5FU and radiation or gemcitabine and radiation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Colon cancer is treated adjuvantly with 5-flourouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin, most commonly as part of the FOLFOX regimen, which has less toxicity than the older regimen FLOX (bolus 5-FU and oxaliplatin) that has fallen out of favor. For patients who cannot tolerate oxaliplatin, 5-FU can be given as a single agent. Patients with metastatic disease may be treated with a number of regimens, including FOLFOX and FOLFIRI; however, the environment is a not a monotonous vanilla and chocolate FOLFOX and FOLFIRI. Cytotoxic agents, sequentially or in combination, are frequently combined with biologic agents to improve response in metastatic disease. Clinical investigators have focused considerable attention on how best to apply all the agents active in metastatic colon cancer, a practice in evolution. In this article, we highlight important, informative research regarding cytotoxic chemotherapy for colon cancer. We also recognize the contribution made by skilled surgeons, interventional radiologists, and radiation oncologists who will push the envelope and as well, the pharmacogenomic and molecular markers that help us to understand mechanisms of disease, predict toxicity, and refine our therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since 1996, 6 new drugs have been introduced for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Although they are promising, these drugs frequently are given in the palliative and are much more expensive than older treatments. The objective of the current study was to measure the cost implications of treatment with sequential regimens that include chemotherapy and/or monoclonal antibodies.Methods: A Markov model was used to evaluate a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients with newly diagnosed, metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients supposedly received up to 3 lines of treatment before supportive care and subsequent death. Data were obtained from published, multicenter phase 2 and randomized phase 3 clinical trials. Sensitivity analyses were conducted on the efficacy, toxicity, and cost.Results: Using drug costs alone, treatment that included new chemotherapeutic agents increased survival at an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $100,000 per discounted life-year (DLY). The addition of monoclonal antibodies improved survival at an ICER of >$170,000 per DLY. The results were most sensitive to changes in the initial regimen. Even with significant improvements in clinical characteristics (efficacy and toxicity), treatment with the most effective regimens still had very high ICERs.Conclusions: Treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer with the most effective regimens came at very high incremental costs. The authors concluded that cost-effectiveness analyses should be a routine component of the drug-development process, so that physicians and patients are informed appropriately regarding the value of new innovations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has changed dramatically from the 1980s, when only fluorouracil (5-FU) was available for treatment and the median survival was at best 12 months, to a time when mCRC is considered more of a chronic disease in which the median survival is now reported in excess of 2 years. This review traces the evolution of treatment in this setting, including studies of single-agent vs combination treatment with 5-FU/leucovorin, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine, comparisons of simultaenous and sequential regimens, and the role of targeted agents such as bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The overall 5-year survival rate for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) is less than 10%. Median survival with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) therapy is approximately 12 months. Recent additions to the chemotherapy armamentarium for this disease have begun to prolong median survival times. In trials in which patients are exposed to all three approved chemotherapy agents, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and 5-FU/LV, or capecitabine during the course of their disease, median survival has reached 20 months. The addition of oxaliplatin and irinotecan to 5-FU/LV regimens has also led to the maintenance of quality of life for longer intervals than were traditionally observed with 5-FU/LV alone. Current standard first-line regimens for metastatic CRC are FOLFOX (infusional 5-FU/LV with oxaliplatin) and FOLFIRI (infusional 5-FU/LV with irinotecan). The addition of bevacizumab to a two-drug regimen (irinotecan with 5-FU/LV) prolongs median survival to 20 months, with a modest amount of additional toxicity. Improvements in this median survival have not yet been realized with modifications to the current standard regimens; however, the oral agent capecitabine appears to be a reasonable substitute for infusional 5-FU/LV in combination regimens or as a single agent, with the advantage of reducing the inconvenience of the long infusion time. Ongoing investigations will identify a place for capecitabine, epidermal growth factor inhibitors, and new cytotoxics in the treatment of metastatic CRC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy and toxicity of fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy in patients aged 70 years and older with resected Stage II or III colon cancer who are at high risk for recurrence. BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer accounts for 15% of all cancers in men and women and, after lung cancer, is the second-leading cause of cancer overall and the first in women aged 75 and older. 1 Older patients with cancer do not receive what is considered to be standard chemotherapy and are treated less often than younger patients regardless of the disease site or stage at diagnosis. 2,3 Adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer reduces the risk of death significantly, compared with surgery alone. 4,5 Currently, fluorouracil plus leucovorin for 6 to 8 months is standard adjuvant treatment for node-positive Stage III colon cancer. 6,7 The benefits of fluorouracil-based therapy for Stage II colon cancer are unclear. For all patients with colon carcinoma in the National Cancer Data Base, the use of surgery plus chemotherapy declined with age; 40% of patients younger than 50 received both treatments, compared with 20% of patients aged 70 to 79. There is now accumulating evidence suggesting that selected older patients can receive the same benefit as their younger counterparts, without a significant increase in toxic effects. A careful appraisal of the treatment of older patients with adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer is presented. DATA SOURCES: All reported studies (except three trials that have not yet completed follow-up and one trial unavailable because of computer malfunction) comparing postoperative fluorouracil plus leucovorin or fluorouracil plus levamisole with surgery alone were identified using a Medline search, a search of bibliographies, and discussion with the leaders of each identified trial. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Seven studies that met the following criteria were included in this pooled analysis:... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Rectal cancer is often clinically resistant to radiotherapy (RT) and identifying molecular markers to define the biologic basis for this phenomenon would be valuable. The nuclear factor κ-light chain-enhancer of activated B cells (NF-κB) is a potential anti-apoptotic transcription factor that has been associated with resistance to RT in model systems. The present study was designed to evaluate NF-κB activation in patients with rectal cancer undergoing chemoradiotherapy to determine whether NF-κB activity correlates with the outcome in rectal cancer patients.Methods and Materials: A total of 22 patients underwent biopsy at multiple points in a prospective study and the data from another 50 were analyzed retrospectively. The pretreatment tumor tissue was analyzed for multiple NF-κB subunits by immunohistochemistry. Serial tumor biopsy cores were analyzed for NF-κB-regulated gene expression using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction and for NF-κB subunit nuclear localization using immunohistochemistry.Results: Several NF-κB target genes (Bcl-2, cellular inhibitor of apoptosis protein [cIAP]2, interleukin-8, and tumor necrosis factor receptor-associated-1) were significantly upregulated by a single fraction of RT at 24 h, demonstrating for the first time that NF-κB is activated by RT in human rectal tumors. The baseline NF-κB p50 nuclear expression did not correlate with the pathologic response to RT. However, an increasing baseline p50 level was prognostic for overall survival (hazard ratio, 2.15; p = .040).Conclusion: NF-κB nuclear expression at baseline in rectal cancer was prognostic for overall survival but not predictive of the response to RT. Larger patient numbers are needed to assess the effect of NF-κB target gene upregulation on the response to RT. Our results suggest that NF-κB might play an important role in tumor metastasis but not to the resistance to chemoradiotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Colon cancers with high-frequency microsatellite instability have clinical and pathological features that distinguish them from microsatellite-stable tumors. We investigated the usefulness of microsatellite-instability status as a predictor of the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil in stage II and stage III colon cancer.Methods: Tumor specimens were collected from patients with colon cancer who were enrolled in randomized trials of fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy. Microsatellite instability was assessed with the use of mononucleotide and dinucleotide markers.Results: Of 570 tissue specimens, 95 (16.7 percent) exhibited high-frequency microsatellite instability. Among 287 patients who did not receive adjuvant therapy, those with tumors displaying high-frequency microsatellite instability had a better five-year rate of overall survival than patients with tumors exhibiting microsatellite stability or low-frequency instability (hazard ratio for death, 0.31 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.14 to 0.72]; P=0.004). Among patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, high-frequency microsatellite instability was not correlated with increased overall survival (hazard ratio for death, 1.07 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.62 to 1.86]; P=0.80). The benefit of treatment differed significantly according to the microsatellite-instability status (P=0.01). Adjuvant chemotherapy improved overall survival among patients with microsatellite-stable tumors or tumors exhibiting low-frequency microsatellite instability, according to a multivariate analysis adjusted for stage and grade (hazard ratio for death, 0.72 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.53 to 0.99]; P=0.04). By contrast, there was no benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in the group with high-frequency microsatellite instability.Conclusions: Fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy benefited patients with stage II or stage III colon cancer with microsatellite-stable tumors or tumors exhibiting low-frequency microsatellite instability but not those with tumors exhibiting high-frequency microsatellite instability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The expression of the protein Mesothelin (MSLN) is highly variable in several malignancies, including colorectal cancer (CRC), and high levels are associated with aggressive clinicopathological features and worse patient survival. Colorectal cancer is both a common and deadly cancer; being the third most common in incidence and second most common cause of cancer-related death. While systemic therapy remains the primary therapeutic option for most patients with stage IV (metastatic; m) CRC, their disease eventually becomes treatment refractory, and 85% succumb within 5 years. Microsatellite-stable (MSS) CRC tumors, which constitute more than 90% of patients with mCRC, are generally refractory to immunotherapeutic interventions. In our current work, we characterize MSLN levels in CRC, specifically correlating expression with clinical outcomes in relevant CRC subtypes, and explore how MSLN expression impacts the status of immune activation and suppression in the peritumoral microenvironment. Higher MSLN expression is prevalent in CMS1 and CMS4 CRC subtypes and correlates with higher gene mutation rates across the patient cohorts. Further, MSLN-high patients exhibit increased M1/M2 macrophage infiltration, PD-L1 staining, immune-inhibitory gene expression, enrichment in inflammatory, TGF-β, IL6/JAK/STAT3, IL2/STAT5 signaling pathways, and mutation in KRAS and FBXW7. Together, these results suggest that MSLN protein is a potential target for antigen-specific therapy and supports investigation into its tumorigenic effects to identify possible therapeutic interventions for patients with high MSLN expressing MSS CRC., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Although histological and molecular classifications have been extensively studied for gastric cancer (GC), targeted therapies for GC remain limited. CDH1 mutations (MT) are characteristic of genomically stable GC and are associated with poor prognosis, but lack effective or targeted therapies. Here, we showed the overall mutation frequency of CDH1 was 9.7% (155 of 1596). CDH1-MT GC showed significantly lower rates of PD-L1 positivity (CPS score ≥1) than CDH1-wildtype (WT) GC (56.7% vs. 73.3%, p < 0.05). Compared to CDH1-WT GC, mutations of ARID1A, WRN, POT1, CDK12, and FANCC were significantly higher, while TP53 and APC were significantly lower in CDH1-MT GC (p < 0.05); The rates of KRAS and HER2 amplifications were significantly lower, while CRKL and IGF1R amplifications were significantly higher in CDH1-MT GC, compared to CDH1-WT GC (p < 0.05). Frequently altered genes in CDH1-MT GC were especially enriched in DNA damage repair and cell cycle checkpoint pathways. Inhibition of E-cadherin sensitized GC cell lines to PARP and Wee1 inhibitors by disrupting DNA damage repair pathway and cell cycle checkpoint. This is the largest study to investigate the distinct genomic landscape of CDH1-MT GC. Our data indicated GC patients with CDH1 mutations could potentially benefit from agents targeting PARP and Wee1., (© 2024. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Purpose: The adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer (CC) is chemotherapy combining fluoropyrimidine (FP) and oxaliplatin (OX). FP regimen plus OX (FPOX) may benefit in high-risk stage II CC. We performed a pooled analysis of pivotal MOSAIC and C-07 studies evaluating FPOX for the treatment of high-risk stage II CC according to prognostic factors, number of high-risk factors, and current clinicopathologic risk classification on the basis of T stage, tumor perforation, and number of lymph nodes examined., Patients and Methods: One thousand five hundred and ninety-five patients with stage II CC receiving FP or FPOX were pooled. The overall survival (OS) benefit of OX was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and unadjusted Cox models stratified by study. Three thousand and fifty-nine patients with stage III CC were used only for interaction tests between the allocated chemotherapy and stage., Results: In the pooled analysis of stage II patients, independent prognostic factors in multivariable analysis were sex, age, perforation/obstruction, and tumor sidedness. There was a significant interaction in OS between stage and allocated chemotherapy with hazard ratios (HRs) of 1.03 for stage II (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.29; P = .813) and 0.82 for stage III (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.92; P = .001; P int = .073). There was no benefit from the addition of OX to FP for any of the prognostic factors. The number of high-risk factors tested was not predictive of OX benefit. According to the currently agreed clinicopathologic risk classification, no OS benefit of OX was observed, as HR was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.63 to 1.18; P = .349)., Conclusion: No OS benefit of adjuvant OX was found in high-risk stage II CC, regardless of the definition used to characterize tumors as having a high risk for recurrence. Hence, our analysis suggests that OX should not be the standard of care for adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II CC, even in high-risk patients.

Background: Both inflammation and insufficient physical inactivity contribute to individual-level risk of disease recurrence and death in stage III colon cancer. The extent to which increased inflammatory risk can be offset by sufficient physical activity remains unknown., Methods: This cohort study was nested within the CALGB/SWOG 80702 (Alliance) randomized trial. Inflammatory burden was quantified by high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and soluble tumor necrosis factor-α receptor 2 after recovery from tumor resection. Physical activity was measured during and after postoperative chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival., Results: The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 88.4% among patients with low inflammation and sufficient physical activity (referent group for all comparisons), 84.9% with low inflammation and insufficient physical activity [absolute risk difference (RD): -3.5%, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -11.3, 4.3; P = .38], 78.0% with intermediate inflammation and insufficient physical activity (RD: -10.4%, 95% CI: -17.4, -3.3; P = .007), and 79.7% with high inflammation and insufficient physical activity (RD: -8.7%, 95% CI: -15.7, -1.6; P = .022). In contrast, the 3-year disease-free survival rate was 87.3% among patients with intermediate inflammation and sufficient physical activity (RD: -1.1%, 95% CI: -7.5, 5.3; P = .74) and 84.4% with high inflammation and sufficient physical activity (RD: -4.0%, 95% CI: -12.3, 4.3; P = .34)., Conclusion: In this observational study of stage III colon cancer patients, physical activity was associated with improved disease-free survival despite high inflammation. Patients with intermediate or high inflammation who were physically active had disease-free survival rates that were not statistically significantly different from those with low inflammation., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: The liver is the most frequent site of metastases in colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to assess the response rate and survival outcomes in metastatic CRC patients with non-liver metastases (NLM) compared to those with liver metastases (LM) across different lines of treatment., Methods: A total of 17,924 mCRC patients included in 26 trials from the ARCAD CRC database were analyzed. The analysis was conducted based on the presence or absence of LM across different treatment groups: chemotherapy (CT) alone, CT + anti-VEGF, CT + anti-EGFR in KRAS wild-type tumors, within the first-line (1 L) and second-line (2 L), and patients enrolled in third-line (≥3 L) trials treated with trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib or placebo. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR)., Results: Out of the 17,924 patients, 14,066 had LM (30.6 % with only liver involvement and 69.4 % with liver and other metastatic sites), while 3858 patients had NLM. In the CT alone and CT + anti-VEGF subgroups, NLM patients showed better OS and PFS in the 1 L and 2 L settings. However, in the CT + anti-EGFR 1 L and 2 L subgroups, there was no significant difference in OS and PFS between NLM and LM patients. In the ≥ 3 L subgroups, better OS and PFS were observed in NLM patients. ORRs were higher in LM patients than in NLM patients across all cohorts treated in the 1 L and only in the anti-EGFR cohort in the 2 L., Conclusion: LM is a poor prognostic factor for mCRC increasing from 1 L to ≥ 3 L except for patients in 1 L and 2 L receiving CT+anti-EGFR. These data justify using LM as a stratification factor in future trials for patients with unresectable mCRC., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Benoist Chibaudel reports consulting and advisory role from Amgen, Bayer, Beigine, Biocartis, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Revolution Medicines, Roche, SeqOne, Sanofi, Servier, Takeda. Josep Tabernero reports personal financial interest in form of scientific consultancy role for Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiff Oncology, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech Inc, HalioDX SAS, Hutchison MediPharma International, Ikena Oncology, Inspirna Inc, IQVIA, Lilly, Menarini, Merck Serono, Merus, MSD, Mirati, Neophore, Novartis, Ona Therapeutics, Orion Biotechnology, Peptomyc, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, Scandion Oncology, Scorpion Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Servier, Sotio Biotech, Taiho, Tessa Therapeutics, TheraMyc and Tolremo Therapeutics. Stocks: Oniria Therapeutics and also educational collaboration with Imedex/HMP, Medscape Education, MJH Life Sciences, PeerView Institute for Medical Education and Physicians Education Resource (PER). Qian Shi reports consulting/advisory role from Yiviva Inc, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Hoosier Cancer Research Network, Kronos Bio, and Mirati Therapeutics Inc; Honorarium/speaker role from Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd (to myself), research funds from Celgene/BMS, Roche/Genentech, Janssen, Novartis (to institution). Thierry Andre reports attending advisory board meetings and receiving consulting fees from Abbvie, Astellas, Aptitude Health, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gritstone Oncology, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co. Inc., Nordic Oncology, Seagen, Servier, Takeda and Transgène and honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co. Inc., Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, Seagen and Servier; and support for meetings from Merck & Co. Inc. and Servier. John Zalcberg reports leadership from ICON Group, Lipotek, PRAXIS; Stock from Biomarin, Ophthea, Amarin, Concert Pharmaceuticals, Frequency Therapeutics, Gilead, Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, UniQure, Zogenix, Orphazyme, Moderna Therapeutics, TWST, Novavax, Teladoc; Honoraria from Gilead Sciences, MSD Oncology, Viatris; Consulting & Advisory Role from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Specialized Therapeutics, CEND, Deciphera, REVOLUTION MEDICINE, FivePHusion, Genorbio, 1Global, Novatech, Alloplex Biotherapeutics Inc, Oncology Republic; Research Funding from BMS, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, IQvia, Mylan, Ipsen, Eisai, Medtronic, MSD Oncology, Servier; Travel from MSD Oncology, ICON Group, PRAXIS.Eric Van Cutsem repors participation to advisory boards for Abbvie, ALX, Amgen, Array, Astellas, Astrazeneca, Bayer, Beigene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi, GSK, Incyte, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck KGaA, Mirati, Novartis, Nordic, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Servier, Takeda, Terumo, Taiho, Zymeworks; research grants from Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck KGaA, Novartis, Roche, Servier paid to his institution. Takayuki Yoshino reports honoraria from Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Merck Biopharma Co., Ltd., Bayer Yakuhin, Ltd., Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., MSD K.K.; consulting fee from Sumitomo Corp.; research grant from Amgen K.K., Bristol-Myers Squibb K.K., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd., Eisai Co., Ltd, FALCO biosystems Ltd., Genomedia Inc., MEDICAL & BIOLOGICAL LABORATORIES CO., LTD., Merus N.V., Molecular Health GmbH, MSD K.K., Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim Co ., Ltd., Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Pfizer Japan Inc.,Roche Diagnostics K.K., Sanofi K.K., Sysmex Corp., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Richard Adams reports receiving consulting fees from Takeda, Bayer, GSK; honoraria from Amgen, Bayer, Seagen; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from Servier, Takeda; Participation on Advisory Board from Takeda, Seagen. Carsten Bokemeyer repors receiving consulting fees as advisory boards from Astra Zeneca, Bayer Healthcare, BioNTech, Heaxal, Lindis Biotech, and Sanofi Aventis; as Invited Speaker from AOK Germany, med update, and Roche Pharma; reports honoraria from DGHO, Hamburg Cancer Society, National Network of German Cancer Centers (DKH), Northern German Society of Internal Medicine, DGHO, German Cancer Society. Cornelis J. A. Punt repors receiving consulting fees as advisory boards from Nordic Pharma. Richard M Goldberg receiving consulting fees as advisory boards from Fight for Colorectal Cancer, US NCI. Volker Heinemann repors receiving consulting fees from Merck, Amgen, Roche, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Servier, Novartis, Pierre-Fabre, Halozyme, MSD, BMS, GSK, Janssen, Terumo, Sirtex, Oncosil, Nordic, Boehringer-Ingelheim; honoraria from Merck, Amgen, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Pfizer, Pierre-Fabre, AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, Novartis, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Celgene, Sirtex, Seagen, GSK; support for attending from Merck, Amgen, MSD, Nordic, AstraZeneca, Servier: reports stock from BionTech. Chiara Cremolini repors receiving consulting fees from Nordic Pharma, Merck, Pierre Fabre, Servier, Takeda; reports honoraria from Takeda, MSD, Amgen, Merck, Pierre Fabre, Servier, Bayer; participation to advisory board from Mirat. Miriam Koopman repors receiving consulting fees from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Personal Genome Diagnostics (PGDx), Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sirtex, Servier and PI participation from the international cohort study PROMETCO with Servier as sponsor; participation to advisory board from Eisai, Nordic Farma, Merck-Serono, Pierre Fabre, Servier; as leadership or fiduciary role in Chair ESMO RWDD working group, co-chair DCCG, PI PLCRC (national observational cohort study), involved in several clinical trials as PI or co-investigator in CRC. Alan Venook repors receiving consulting fees from Amgen, Genentech/Roche, Deciphera; participation on Advisory Board in Amgen, Agenus. Timothy Maughan repors receiving consulting fees from Merck KGAa, Cancer Research UK, Astrazeneca, Ground Truth Laboratories, Perspectum, Nordin Pharma; participation on Advisory Board and leadership in Cancer Research UK, National Cancer Research Institute-University of Liverpool. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)