Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab with or without atezolizumab in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (AtezoTRIBE): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have not shown clinical benefit to patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) or microsatellite stable (MSS) tumours in previous studies. Both an active combination chemotherapy (FOLFOXIRI; fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) and bevacizumab seem able to increase the immunogenicity of pMMR or MSS tumours. We aimed to provide preliminary evidence of benefit from the addition of the anti-PD-L1 agent atezolizumab to first-line FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: AtezoTRIBE was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 study of patients (aged 18-70 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] performance status of 0-2 and aged 71-75 years with an ECOG performance status of 0) with histologically confirmed, unresectable, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer and adequate organ function, who were recruited from 22 oncology centres in Italy. Patients were stratified according to centre, ECOG performance status, primary tumour site, and previous adjuvant therapy. A randomisation system incorporating a minimisation algorithm randomly assigned (1:2) patients via a masked web-based allocation procedure to two groups: the control group received first-line FOLFOXIRI (intravenous 165 mg/m2 irinotecan, 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin, 200 mg/m2 leucovorin, and 3200 mg/m2 fluorouracil as a 48 h infusion) plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg intravenously), and the atezolizumab group received the same regimen plus atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously). Combination treatments were administered up to eight 14-day cycles followed by maintenance with fluorouracil and leucovorin plus bevacizumab with or without atezolizumab, according to randomisation group, until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, analysed by the intention-to-treat principle. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. The study recruitment is completed. The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03721653. FINDINGS: Between Nov 30, 2018, and Feb 26, 2020, 218 patients were randomly assigned and received treatment (73 in the control group and 145 in the atezolizumab group). At the data cutoff (Aug 1, 2021), median follow-up was 19·9 months (IQR 17·3-23·9). Median progression-free survival was 13·1 months (80% CI 12·5-13·8) in the atezolizumab group and 11·5 months (10·0-12·6) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·69 [80% CI 0·56-0·85]; p=0·012; adjusted HR 0·70 [80% CI 0·57-0·87]; log-rank test p=0·018). The most frequent all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (59 [42%] of 142 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 26 [36%] of 72 patients in the control group), diarrhoea (21 [15%] vs nine [13%]), and febrile neutropenia (14 [10%] vs seven [10%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 39 (27%) patients in the atezolizumab group and in 19 (26%) patients in the control group. Two (1%) treatment-related deaths (due to acute myocardial infarction and bronchopulmonary haemorrhage) were reported in the atezolizumab group; none were reported in the control group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of atezolizumab to first-line FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab is safe and improved progression-free survival in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: GONO Foundation, ARCO Foundation, F Hoffmann-La Roche, and Roche.

Early onset metastatic colorectal cancer in patients receiving panitumumab-based upfront strategy: Overall and sex-specific outcomes in the Valentino trial.

Anti-EGFRs plus doublet chemotherapy is considered the optimal upfront option for RAS/BRAF wild-type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Early-onset (EO) mCRC has an increasing incidence and its prognostic/predictive role and management is debatable. We performed a post hoc analysis of Valentino study, that randomized RAS wild-type mCRC patients to two panitumumab-based maintenance regimens after FOLFOX/panitumumab induction. We assessed the safety and efficacy outcomes in patients stratified for age (<50/≥50 years old). We assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (ORR), rate of treatment-related and panitumumab-related adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL). In 229 patients enrolled, 35 (15%) had EO mCRC, with a higher rate of female sex (P = .020) and lower rate of primary tumor resection (P = .001). Median PFS and OS were 10.9 vs 10.8 months (P = .593) and 28.1 vs 27.5 months (P = .865) in patients <50 and ≥50 years old, respectively, with no significant impact of maintenance arm. ORR and disease control rate were 74% vs 65% (P = .337) and 97% vs 81% (P = .013) in patients <50 or ≥50 years old. In younger patients, a trend for increased chemotherapy-related AEs (peculiarly anemia) was shown, while significantly decreased EGFR-related hypomagnesemia and increased skin rash were reported. No significant differences in treatment intensity or QoL were observed. In patients with EO mCRC and RAS wild-type status, we found no differences in terms of survival outcomes based on age when selecting maintenance strategies. Management of treatment-related AEs should consider the differential toxicity profile of age and sex.

Benefit from upfront FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab in BRAFV600E-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer patients: does primary tumour location matter?

BACKGROUND: Recent data suggest that BRAFV600E-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with right-sided tumours and ECOG-PS = 0 may achieve benefit from the triplet regimen differently than those with left-sided tumours and ECOG-PS > 0. METHODS: The predictive impact of primary sidedness and ECOG-PS was evaluated in a large real-life dataset of 296 BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC patients treated with upfront triplet or doublet ± bevacizumab. Biological differences between right- and left-sided BRAFV600E-mutated CRCs were further investigated in an independent cohort of 1162 samples. RESULTS: A significant interaction effect between primary sidedness and treatment intensity was reported in terms of both PFS (p = 0.010) and OS (p = 0.003), with a beneficial effect of the triplet in the right-sided group and a possible detrimental effect in the left-sided. No interaction effect was observed between ECOG-PS and chemo-backbone. In the MSS/pMMR population, a consistent trend for a side-related subgroup effect was observed when FOLFOXIRI ± bevacizumab was compared to oxaliplatin-based doublets±bevacizumab (p = 0.097 and 0.16 for PFS and OS, respectively). Among MSS/pMMR tumours, the BM1 subtype was more prevalent in the right-sided group (p = 0.0019, q = 0.0139). No significant differences were observed according to sidedness in the MSI-H/dMMR population. CONCLUSIONS: Real-life data support the use of FOLFOXIRI ± bevacizumab only in BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC patients with right-sided tumours.

Variant allele frequency in baseline circulating tumour DNA to measure tumour burden and to stratify outcomes in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: a translational objective of the Valentino study.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), baseline circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) variant allele fraction (VAF) might serve as a surrogate of disease burden and should be evaluated in comparison with CEA and RECIST-defined sum of target lesions. METHODS: In this pre-planned analysis of the VALENTINO trial, we included patients with RAS wild-type mCRC receiving upfront FOLFOX/panitumumab with available baseline liquid biopsy. CtDNA was analysed by means of a 14-gene NGS panel. For each patient, the gene with the highest VAF in ctDNA was selected. RESULTS: The final cohort included 135 patients. The median VAF was 12.6% (IQR: 2.0-45.2%). Higher VAF was observed in patients with liver metastases and with synchronous metastases presentation. Patients with high VAF had poorer median OS compared to those with low VAF (21.8 vs 36.5 months; HR: 1.82, 95%CI: 1.20-2.76; p = 0.005). VAF outperformed baseline CEA and target lesion diameter in the prognostic stratification and remained significantly correlated with OS (p = 0.003) in a multivariate model. VAF was not significantly correlated with dimensional response and PFS. CONCLUSION: CtDNA measured by VAF is prognostic in patients with RAS wild-type mCRC. Response and PFS after an anti-EGFR-based first-line strategy are independent from initial tumour burden.

CEA increase as a marker of disease progression after first-line induction therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. A pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies.

BACKGROUND: In mCRC, CEA is used to monitor response to systemic therapy together with imaging. After the end of induction, no major improvement in tumour shrinkage is expected, and the availability of a marker able to predict progressive disease (PD) versus no-PD might allow avoiding CT scans. METHODS: We pooled data from patients with baseline CEA ≥ 10 ng/mL included in TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies with the aim of identifying a threshold for percent increase of CEA from nadir able to predict PD after the end of the induction therapy. RESULTS: In total, 1178 paired CEA and radiological assessments from 434 patients were included. According to the optimal cut-off determined by ROC, a CEA increase of at least 120% from nadir differentiated between PD and no-PD with a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 78%, excluding PD in the 92% of radiological assessments and allowing to avoid the 67% of CT scans. However, CEA cut-off of 120% was not able to detect radiological PD in 26% of cases. In order to mitigate this issue, a different clinically relevant threshold was evaluated based on the best sensitivity cut-off. Therefore, using any CEA increase from nadir as a threshold, the sensitivity grew to 93% and only in the 7% of cases the radiological PD was not detected. CONCLUSIONS: In mCRC with baseline CEA ≥ 10 ng/mL, CEA values can accurately predict PD versus no-PD after the end of the first-line induction therapy.

Treatments after progression to first-line FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies by GONO.

BACKGROUND: FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab (bev) is a first-line regimen of proven activity and efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer. The upfront exposure to three cytotoxics raises concerns about the efficacy of treatments after progression. METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of treatments after progression to upfront FOLFOXIRI/bev in patients enrolled in two randomised Phase 3 studies (TRIBE and TRIBE2) that compared FOLFOXIRI/bev to doublets (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI)/bev. Response rate, progression-free survival (2nd PFS) and overall survival (2nd OS) during treatments after progression were assessed. The RECIST response in first line and the oxaliplatin and irinotecan-free interval (OIFI) were investigated as potential predictors of benefit from FOLFOXIRI ± bev reintroduction. RESULTS: Longer 2nd PFS was reported in patients receiving FOLFOXIRI ± bev reintroduction compared to doublets ± bev or other treatments (6.1 versus 4.4 and 3.9 months, respectively, P = 0.013), and seems limited to patients achieving a response during first line (6.9 versus 4.2 and 4.7 months, respectively, P = 0.005) and an OIFI ≥ 4 months (7.2 versus 6.5 and 4.6 months, respectively, P = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: First-line FOLFOXIRI/bev does not impair the administration of effective second-line therapies. First-line response and longer OIFI seem associated with improved response and 2nd PFS from FOLFOXIRI ± bev reintroduction, without impacting 2nd OS.

FOLFOXIRI-Bevacizumab or FOLFOX-Panitumumab in Patients with Left-Sided RAS/BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Doublets plus anti-epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFRs) are the preferred upfront option for patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Initial therapy with FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab is superior to doublets plus bevacizumab independently from primary tumor sidedness and RAS/BRAF status. No randomized comparison between FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab versus doublets plus anti-EGFRs is available in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We selected patients with left-sided RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with first-line FOLFOX-panitumumab or FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab in five randomized trials: Valentino, TRIBE, TRIBE2, STEAM, and CHARTA. A propensity score-based analysis was performed to compare FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab with FOLFOX-panitumumab. RESULTS: A total of 185 patients received FOLFOX-panitumumab and 132 received FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 13.3 and 33.1 months in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group compared with 11.4 and 30.3 months in the FOLFOX-panitumumab group (propensity score-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for PFS, 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-1.04; p = .11; propensity score-adjusted HR for OS, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.59-1.08; p = .14). No significant differences in overall response rate and disease control rate were observed. A statistically nonsignificant difference in favor of FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab was observed for OS after secondary resection of metastases. Chemotherapy-related adverse events were more frequent in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group, with specific regard to grade 3 and 4 neutropenia (48% vs. 26%, adjusted p = .001). CONCLUSION: Although randomized comparison is lacking, both FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab and FOLFOX-panitumumab are valuable treatment options in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A propensity score-based analysis of five trials was performed to compare FOLFOX-panitumumab versus FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). No significant differences were observed, but FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab achieved numerically superior survival outcomes versus FOLFOX-panitumumab. Chemotherapy-related adverse events were more frequent in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group. These observations suggest that although doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFRs remains the preferred treatment in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC, FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab is a valuable option able to provide similar, if not better, outcomes at the price of a moderate increase in toxicity and may be adopted based on patients' preference and potential impact on quality of life.

Systemic doxycycline for pre-emptive treatment of anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving first-line panitumumab-based therapy: a post hoc analysis of the Valentino study.

INTRODUCTION: The combination of anti-EGFRs and doublet chemotherapy is considered the optimal upfront option for patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The prophylactic or reactive treatment with tetracyclines for EGFR inhibitor-induced skin toxicity is currently clinical practice, though non-conclusive results are available. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the Valentino study that randomized RAS wild-type mCRC patients to two panitumumab-based maintenance regimens after the first-line induction, aimed at assessing the safety and efficacy of the administration of a pre-emptive doxycycline prophylaxis for anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity. We assessed the rate of treatment-related and panitumumab-related adverse events (AEs), treatment intensity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 226 patients, out of the 229 enrolled in the Valentino study, were eligible for the analysis. Overall, 143 (63%) and 83 (37%) patients received or not the antibiotic prophylaxis for skin toxicity. Any grade and G3/4 panitumumab-related AEs were reported in 89% versus 92% (p = 0.650) and 27% versus 27% (p = 1.000) patients who received or not the pre-emptive prophylaxis, respectively. Any grade and G3/4 skin rash occurred in 81% versus 90% (p = 0.085) and 27% versus 25% (p = 0.876) patients receiving or not the prophylaxis, respectively. No significant differences in terms of treatment duration, treatment delays or dose reductions, PFS, and OS were observed in the two sub-populations. CONCLUSION: The adequate management of anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity is fundamental to optimize the outcome of mCRC patients, balancing the survival benefit with patients' quality of life, especially in the first-line setting.

Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab and reintroduction after progression versus mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (TRIBE2): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The triplet FOLFOXIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab showed improved outcomes for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, compared with FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab. However, the actual benefit of the upfront exposure to the three cytotoxic drugs compared with a preplanned sequential strategy of doublets was not clear, and neither was the feasibility or efficacy of therapies after disease progression. We aimed to compare a preplanned strategy of upfront FOLFOXIRI followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression versus a sequence of mFOLFOX6 (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) and FOLFIRI doublets, in combination with bevacizumab. METHODS: TRIBE2 was an open-label, phase 3, randomised study of patients aged 18-75 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2, with unresectable, previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, recruited from 58 Italian oncology units. Patients were stratified according to centre, ECOG performance status, primary tumour location, and previous adjuvant chemotherapy. A randomisation system incorporating a minimisation algorithm was used to randomly assign patients (1:1) via a masked web-based allocation procedure to two different treatment strategies. In the control group, patients received first-line mFOLFOX6 (85 mg/m2 of intravenous oxaliplatin concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin over 120 min; 400 mg/m2 intravenous bolus of fluorouracil; 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab (5 mg/kg intravenously over 30 min) followed by FOLFIRI (180 mg/m2 of intravenous irinotecan over 120 min concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin; 400 mg/m2 intravenous bolus of fluorouracil; 2400 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab after disease progression. In the experimental group, patients received FOLFOXIRI (165 mg/m2 of intravenous irinotecan over 60 min; 85 mg/m2 intravenous oxaliplatin concurrently with 200 mg/m2 of leucovorin over 120 min; 3200 mg/m2 continuous infusion of fluorouracil for 48 h) plus bevacizumab followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression. Combination treatments were repeated every 14 days for up to eight cycles followed by fluorouracil and leucovorin (at the same dose administered at the last induction cycle) plus bevacizumab maintenance until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, or consent withdrawal. Patients and investigators were not masked. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival 2, defined as the time from randomisation to disease progression on any treatment given after first disease progression, or death, analysed by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. Study recruitment is complete and follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02339116. FINDINGS: Between Feb 26, 2015, and May 15, 2017, 679 patients were randomly assigned and received treatment (340 in the control group and 339 in the experimental group). At data cut-off (July 30, 2019) median follow-up was 35·9 months (IQR 30·1-41·4). Median progression-free survival 2 was 19·2 months (95% CI 17·3-21·4) in the experimental group and 16·4 months (15·1-17·5) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74, 95% CI 0·63-0·88; p=0·0005). During the first-line treatment, the most frequent of all-cause grade 3-4 events were diarrhoea (57 [17%] vs 18 [5%]), neutropenia (168 [50%] vs 71 [21%]), and arterial hypertension (25 [7%] vs 35 [10%]) in the experimental group compared with the control group. Serious adverse events occurred in 84 (25%) patients in the experimental group and in 56 (17%) patients in the control group. Eight treatment-related deaths were reported in the experimental group (two intestinal occlusions, two intestinal perforations, two sepsis, one myocardial infarction, and one bleeding) and four in the control group (two occlusions, one perforation, and one pulmonary embolism). After first disease progression, no substantial differences in the incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported between the control and experimental groups, with the exception of neurotoxicity, which was only reported in the experimental group (six [5%] of 132 patients). Serious adverse events after disease progression occurred in 20 (15%) patients in the experimental group and 25 (12%) in the control group. Three treatment-related deaths after first disease progression were reported in the experimental group (two intestinal occlusions and one sepsis) and four in the control group (one intestinal occlusion, one intestinal perforation, one cerebrovascular event, and one sepsis). INTERPRETATION: Upfront FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab followed by the reintroduction of the same regimen after disease progression seems to be a preferable therapeutic strategy to sequential administration of chemotherapy doublets, in combination with bevacizumab, for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer selected according to the study criteria. FUNDING: The GONO Cooperative Group, the ARCO Foundation, and F Hoffmann-La Roche.

The Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value is a new prognostic biomarker in metastatic colorectal cancer: results from a pooled-analysis of the Valentino and TRIBE first-line trials.

BACKGROUND: Immune-inflammatory biomarkers (IIBs) showed a prognostic relevance in patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC). We aimed at evaluating the prognostic power of a new comprehensive biomarker, the Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value (PIV), in patients with mCRC receiving first-line therapy. METHODS: In the present pooled-analysis, we included patients enrolled in the Valentino and TRIBE trials. PIV was calculated as: (neutrophil count × platelet count × monocyte count)/lymphocyte count. A cut-off was determined using the maximally selected rank statistics method. Generalised boosted regression (GBR), the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox hazards regression models were used for survival analyses. RESULTS: A total of 438 patients were included. Overall, 208 patients (47%) had a low-baseline PIV and 230 (53%) had a high-baseline PIV. Patients with high PIV experienced a worse PFS (HR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.36-2.03, P < 0.001) and worse OS (HR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.57-2.57; P < 0.001) compared to patients with low PIV. PIV outperformed the other IIBs in the GBR model and in the multivariable models. CONCLUSION: PIV is a strong predictor of survival outcomes with better performance than other well-known IIBs in patients with mCRC treated with first-line therapy. PIV should be prospectively validated to better stratify mCRC patients undergoing first-line therapy.

AtezoTRIBE: a randomised phase II study of FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab alone or in combination with atezolizumab as initial therapy for patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) reported remarkable achievements in several solid tumours. However, in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) promising results are limited to patients with deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high (dMMR/MSI-high) tumours due to their immune-enriched microenvironment. Combining cytotoxic agents and bevacizumab in mCRC with proficient mismatch repair/microsatellite stability (pMMR/MSS) could make ICIs efficacious by increasing the exposure of neoantigens, especially with highly active chemotherapy regimens, inducing immunogenic cell death, increasing the tumoral infiltration of CD8+ T-cells and reducing tumour-associated myeloid-derived suppressor cells. VEGF-blockade also plays an immunomodulatory role by inhibiting the expansion of T regulatory lymphocytes. Consistently with this rationale, a phase Ib study combined the anti-PDL-1 atezolizumab with FOLFOX/bevacizumab as first-line treatment of mCRC, irrespective of microsatellite status, and reported interesting activity and efficacy results, without safety concerns. Phase III trials led to identify FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab as an upfront therapeutic option in selected mCRC patients. Drawing from these considerations, the combination of atezolizumab with an intensified upfront treatment (FOLFOXIRI) and bevacizumab could be worthy of investigation. METHODS: AtezoTRIBE is a prospective, open label, phase II, comparative trial in which initially unresectable and previously untreated mCRC patients, irrespective of microsatellite status, are randomized in a 1:2 ratio to receive up to 8 cycles of FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab alone or in combination with atezolizumab, followed by maintenance with bevacizumab plus 5-fluoruracil/leucovorin with or without atezolizumab according to treatment arm until disease progression. The primary endpoint is PFS. Assuming a median PFS of 12 months for standard arm, 201 patients should be randomized in a 1:2 ratio to detect a hazard ratio of 0.66 in favour of the experimental arm. A safety run-in phase including the first 6 patients enrolled in the FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab/atezolizumab arm was planned, and no unexpected adverse events or severe toxicities were highlighted by the Safety Monitoring Committee. DISCUSSION: The AtezoTRIBE study aims at assessing whether the addition of atezolizumab to an intensified chemotherapy plus bevacizumab might be an efficacious upfront strategy for the treatment of mCRC, irrespective of the microsatellite status. TRIAL REGISTRATION: AtezoTRIBE is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03721653 ), October 26th, 2018 and at EUDRACT (2017-000977-35), Februray 28th, 2017.

CK7 and consensus molecular subtypes as major prognosticators in V600EBRAF mutated metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: V600EBRAF mutated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a subtype (10%) with overall poor prognosis, but the clinical experience suggests a great heterogeneity in survival. It is still unexplored the real distribution of traditional and innovative biomarkers among V600EBRAF mutated mCRC and which is their role in the improvement of clinical prediction of survival outcomes. METHODS: Data and tissue specimens from 155 V600EBRAF mutated mCRC patients treated at eight Italian Units of Oncology were collected. Specimens were analysed by means of immunohistochemistry profiling performed on tissue microarrays. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: CDX2 loss conferred worse OS (HR = 1.72, 95%CI 1.03-2.86, p = 0.036), as well as high CK7 expression (HR = 2.17, 95%CI 1.10-4.29, p = 0.026). According to Consensus Molecular Subtypes (CMS), CMS1 patients had better OS compared to CMS2-3/CMS4 (HR = 0.37, 95%CI 0.19-0.71, p = 0.003). Samples showing less TILs had worse OS (HR = 1.72, 95%CI 1.16-2.56, p = 0.007). Progression-free survival analyses led to similar results. At multivariate analysis, CK7 and CMS subgrouping retained their significant correlation with OS. CONCLUSION: The present study provides new evidence on how several well-established biomarkers perform in a homogenousV600EBRAF mutated mCRC population, with important and independent information added to standard clinical prognosticators. These data could be useful to inform further translational research, for patients' stratification in clinical trials and in routine clinical practice to better estimate patients' prognosis.

Is a pharmacogenomic panel useful to estimate the risk of oxaliplatin-related neurotoxicity in colorectal cancer patients?

Oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (OXPN) is a dose-limiting toxicity in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in drug transport may lead to higher intracellular oxaliplatin accumulation in the dorsal root ganglia and thus increased risk of OXPN. In this study, a panel of 5 SNPs, namely ABCC2 (-24C > T/rs717620 and c.4544 G > A/rs8187710), ABCG2 (c.421 C > A/rs2231142), ABCB1 (c.3435 C > T/rs1045642) and SLC31A1 (c.-36 + 2451 T > G/rs10981694), was evaluated to assess their association with grade 2-3 OXPN in metastatic CRC patients. SNPs were considered according to a dominant model (heterozygous + homozygous). Germline DNA was available from 120 patients who received oxaliplatin between 2010 and 2016. An external cohort of 80 patients was used to validate our results. At the univariable logistic analyses, there were no significant associations between SNPs and incidence of OXPN. Taking into account the strength of observed association between OXPN and the SNPs, a clinical risk score was developed as linear predictor from a multivariable logistic model including all the SNPs together. This score was significantly associated with grade 2-3 OXPN (p = 0.036), but the external calibration was not satisfactory due to relevant discrepancies between the two series. Our data suggest that the concomitant evaluation of multiple SNPs in oxaliplatin transporters is an exploratory strategy that may deserve further investigation for treatment customization in CRC patients.

Early modifications of circulating microRNAs levels in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with regorafenib.

Biomarkers able to improve the cost/benefit ratio are urgently needed for metastatic colorectal cancer patients that are eligible to receive regorafenib. Here, we measured plasma levels of ten circulating microRNAs (c-miRNAs) and we investigated their early changes during treatment, as well as possible correlation with clinical outcome. Ten literature-selected c-miRNAs were quantified by qRT-PCR on plasma samples collected at baseline (d1) and after 15 days of treatment (d15). C-miRNAs showing significant changes were further analyzed to establish correlations with outcome. A decision tree-based approach was employed to define a c-miRNA signature able to predict the outcome. Results achieved in an exploratory cohort were tested in a validation group. In the exploratory cohort (n = 34), the levels of c-miR-21 (p = 0.06), c-miR-141 (p = 0.04), and c-miR-601 (p = 0.01) increased at d15 compared with d1. A c-miRNA signature involving c-miR-21, c-miR-221, and c-miR-760 predicted response to treatment (p < 0.0001) and was significantly associated to PFS (HR = 10.68; 95% CI 3.2-35.65; p < 0.0001). In the validation cohort (n = 36), the increase in c-miR-21 (p = 0.02) and c-miR-601 (p = 0.02) levels at d15 was confirmed, but the associations with outcome were not. Our data indicate that early changes of c-miRNA levels might be influenced by regorafenib treatment. However, further studies are needed to establish the predictive power of such modifications.

Trifluridine/Tipiracil (TAS-102) in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Register in the Frame of the Italian Compassionate Use Program.

BACKGROUND: TAS-102 is indicated for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with, or not considered candidates for, available therapies. Given the complete inefficacy in half of patients, the lack of predictive factors, the palliative setting, and the financial and clinical toxicity, optimizing the cost-benefit ratio is crucial. The "ColonLife" nomogram allows an estimate of the 12-week life expectancy of patients with refractory mCRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected data from patients treated at eight Italian centers in the compassionate use program. Baseline characteristics of patients who were or were not progression free at 6 months were compared. The discriminative ability of the ColonLife nomogram was assessed. Among patients who received both TAS-102 and regorafenib, clinical outcomes of the two sequences were compared. RESULTS: This study included 341 patients. Six (2%) and 93 (27%) patients achieved response and disease stabilization, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.4 months with an estimated 6-month PFS rate of 19%; the median overall survival (OS) was 6.2 months. An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0, normal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and a time from the diagnosis of metastatic disease of >18 months were independently associated with higher chances of a patient being progression free at 6 months. The discriminative ability of ColonLife was confirmed. Among 121 patients who received both regorafenib and TAS-102, no differences in first or second PFS or OS were reported between the two sequences. CONCLUSION: One out of five patients achieves clinical benefit with TAS-102. ECOG PS, LDH, and time from diagnosis of metastatic disease may help to identify these patients. Excluding patients with very short life expectancy appears a reasonable approach. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Improving the cost-efficacy ratio of TAS-102 in metastatic colorectal cancer is needed to spare useless toxicities in a definitely palliative setting. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, lactate dehydrogenase levels, and time from the diagnosis of metastatic disease may help to identify patients more likely to achieve benefit. Properly designed prognostic tools (i.e., the "ColonLife" nomogram) may enable excluding from further treatments patients with very limited life expectancy.

Pharmacokinetic analysis of metronomic capecitabine in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

The aim of the present study was to assess the pharmacokinetics (PK) of metronomic capecitabine and its metabolites in a population of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Thirty-four patients (M/F, 22/12) with a diagnosis of mCRC received capecitabine 800 mg p.o. twice a day and cyclophosphamide 50 mg/day p.o. Blood samples were collected at baseline, 15 min, 30 min, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, 3 h and 5 h at day 1 after capecitabine administration. Plasma concentrations of capecitabine and its metabolites were measured by high performance liquid chromatography and the main PK parameters were calculated. Maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax) of capecitabine (11.51 ± 9.73 µg/ml) occurred at 0.5 h, whereas the Cmax of 5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine (5'-DFCR; 2.45 ± 2.93 µg/ml), 5'-deoxy-5-fluorouridine (5'-DFUR; 6.43 ± 8.2 µg/ml), and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU; 0.24 ± 0.16 µg/ml) were found at 1 h, 1.5 h and 1 h, respectively. Capecitabine, 5'-DFCR, 5'-DFUR and 5-FU AUCs at day 1 were 21.30 ± 10.78, 5.2 ± 4.6, 19.59 ± 3.83 and 0.66 ± 0.77 hxµg/ml, respectively. In conclusion, low doses of capecitabine were rapidly absorbed and extensively metabolized, achieving measurable plasma concentrations in a heavily pretreated population of patients.

The Winding Roadmap of Biomarkers toward Clinic: Lessons from Predictors of Resistance to Anti-EGFRs in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

In the evolving molecular landscape of metastatic colorectal cancer, optimizing available tools to select patients to receive anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibodies is a modern challenge of colorectal oncologists. Several molecular biomarkers have been investigated in recent years as potential predictors of resistance to anti-EGFR agents in preclinical and clinical retrospective series. Nevertheless, none of them have been implemented in clinical practice due to the lack of a formal prospective demonstration. Here, we propose a literature review of molecular alterations associated with resistance to anti-EGFRs, underlining the reasons why their roadmap from laboratories to clinics was prematurely halted.

The role of primary tumour sidedness, EGFR gene copy number and EGFR promoter methylation in RAS/BRAF wild-type colorectal cancer patients receiving irinotecan/cetuximab.

BACKGROUND: The data from randomised trials suggested that primary tumour sidedness could represent a prognostic and predictive factor in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients, particularly during treatment with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy. However, an in-deep molecular selection might overcome the predictive role of primary tumour location in this setting. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis in which tumour samples from RAS/BRAF wild-type (WT) metastatic CRC patients treated with second-third-line irinotecan/cetuximab were analysed for EGFR gene copy number (GCN) and promoter methylation. Study objective was to evaluate the correlation of tumour sidedness, EGFR promoter methylation and EGFR GCN with clinical outcome. Median follow-up duration was 14.3 months. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were included in the study, 27.3% had right-sided CRC, 72.7% had left-sided CRC; 36.4% had EGFR GCN<2.12 tumour, 63.6% had EGFR GCN⩾2.12 tumour; 50% had EGFR promoter-methylated tumour. Right-sided colorectal cancer (RSCRC) were associated with reduced overall response rate (ORR) (4.2% for RSCRC vs 35.9% for left sided colorectal cancer (LSCRC), P=0.0030), shorter progression-free survival (PFS) (3.0 vs 6.75 months, P<0.0001) and shorter overall survival (OS) (8 vs 13.6 months, P<0.0001). EGFR GCN<2.12 tumours were associated with reduced ORR (6.2% for EGFR GCN<2.12 vs 39.3% for EGFR GCN⩾2.12 tumours, P=0.0009), shorter PFS (3.5 vs 6.5 months, P=0.0006) and shorter OS (8.5 vs 14.0 months, P<0.0001). Epidermal growth factor receptor-methylated tumours were associated with reduced ORR (9.1% for methylated vs 45.5% for unmethylated, P=0.0001), shorter PFS (3 vs 7.67 months, P<0.0001) and shorter OS (8 vs 17 months, P<0.0001). At multivariate analysis, EGFR GCN and EGFR promoter methylation maintained their independent role for ORR (respectively P=0.0082 and 0.0025), PFS (respectively P=0.0048 and<0.0001) and OS (respectively P=0.0001 and<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, an accurate molecular selection based on an all RAS and BRAF analysis along with EGFR GCN and EGFR promoter methylation status seems to be more relevant than primary tumour sidedness in the prediction of clinical outcome during cetuximab/irinotecan therapy. However, these data need to be validated with future prospective and translational studies.

TRIBE-2: a phase III, randomized, open-label, strategy trial in unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer patients by the GONO group.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy plus bevacizumab is a standard first-line treatment for unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Different chemotherapy backbones may be chosen, including one to three drugs, based on patients' general conditions and comorbidities, treatments' objectives, and disease characteristics. TRIBE trial demonstrated a significant advantage in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival for FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab as compared with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab. Based on recent evidence, the de-intensification of the upfront regimen after 4-6 months of treatment is nowadays regarded as a valuable option. Moreover, the prolonged inhibition of angiogenesis, and in particular the continuation of bevacizumab beyond the evidence of disease progression, is an efficacious strategy in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer patients. METHODS/DESIGN: TRIBE-2 is a prospective, open-label, multicentric phase III randomized trial in which unresectable and previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer patients are randomized to receive first-line FOLFOX plus bevacizumab followed by FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab after disease progression or FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab followed by the re-introduction of the same regimen after disease progression. The primary endpoint is to compare the efficacy of the two proposed treatment strategies in terms of Progression Free Survival 2. DISCUSSION: The TRIBE-2 study aims at answering the question whether the upfront use of FOLFOXIRI improves the clinical outcome of metastatic colorectal cancer patients, when compared with the pre-planned, sequential use of oxaliplatin-based and irinotecan-based doublets. Both proposed treatment strategies are designed to exploit the effectiveness of the prolonged inhibition of angiogenesis, alternating short (up to 4 months) induction periods and less intensive maintenance phases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: TRIBE2 is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02339116 . January 12, 2015. TRIBE-2 is registered at EUDRACT 2014-004436-19, October 10, 2014.

Location of Primary Tumor and Benefit From Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibodies in Patients With RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Right- and left-sided colorectal cancers (CRCs) differ in clinical and molecular characteristics. Some retrospective analyses suggested that patients with right-sided tumors derive less benefit from anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies; however, molecular selection in those studies was not extensive. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic CRC (mCRC) who were treated with single-agent anti-EGFRs or with cetuximab-irinotecan (if refractory to previous irinotecan) were included in the study. Differences in outcome between patients with right- and left-sided tumors were investigated. RESULTS: Of 75 patients, 14 and 61 had right- and left-sided tumors, respectively. None of the right-sided tumors responded according to RECIST, compared with 24 left-sided tumors (overall response rate: 0% vs. 41%; p = .0032), and only 2 patients with right-sided tumors (15%) versus 47 patients with left-sided tumors (80%) achieved disease control (p < .0001). The median duration of progression-free survival was 2.3 and 6.6 months in patients with right-sided and left-sided tumors, respectively (hazard ratio: 3.97; 95% confidence interval: 2.09-7.53; p < .0001). CONCLUSION: Patients with right-sided RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC seemed to derive no benefit from single-agent anti-EGFRs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Right- and left-sided colorectal tumors have peculiar epidemiological and clinicopathological characteristics, distinct gene expression profiles and genetic alterations, and different prognoses. This study assessed the potential predictive impact of primary tumor site with regard to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody treatment in patients with RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. The results demonstrated the lack of activity of anti-EGFRs in RAS and BRAF wild-type, right-sided tumors, thus suggesting a potential role for primary tumor location in driving treatment choices.