Different Genomic Clusters Impact on Responses in Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer Treated with Cisplatin Plus Gemcitabine Plus Durvalumab.

BACKGROUND: The results reported in the TOPAZ-1 phase III trial led to the approval of the combination of cisplatin and gemcitabine with durvalumab as the new first-line standard of care for patients with locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma. OBJECTIVE: We performed a clustering analysis to classify patients into different groups based on their mutation profile, correlating the results of the analysis with clinical outcomes. METHODS: We selected 51 patients with cholangiocarcinoma who were treated with the combination of chemotherapy and durvalumab and who were screened using the next-generation sequencing-based FoundationOne gene panel. We conducted mutation-based clustering of tumors and a survival analysis. RESULTS: Three main clusters were identified. Cluster 1 is mostly characterized by mutations in genes belonging to the chromatin modification pathway, altered in 100% of patients. Cluster 2 is characterized by the alteration of several pathways, among which DNA damage control, chromatin modification, RTK/RAS, cell-cycle apoptosis, TP53, and PI3K were the most affected. Finally, most altered pathways in cluster 3 were RTK/RAS and cell-cycle apoptosis. Overall response rate was 4/13 (31%), 12/24 (50%), and 0/10 (0%) in cluster 1, cluster 2, and cluster 3, respectively, and the difference between the three clusters was statistically significant (p = 0.0188). CONCLUSIONS: By grouping patients into three clusters with distinct molecular and genomic alterations, our analysis showed that patients included in cluster 2 had higher overall response rates, whereas patients included in cluster 3 had no objective response. Further investigations on larger and external cohorts are needed in order to validate our results.

Molecular screening with liquid biopsy for anti-EGFR retreatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: preliminary data from the randomized phase 2 PARERE trial.

Background: Retreatment with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies is a promising strategy in patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who achieved benefit from previous anti-EGFR exposure upon exclusion of mutations in RAS/BRAF genes according to circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis by means of liquid biopsy (LB). This treatment approach is now being investigated in the randomized phase II trial PARERE (NCT04787341). We here present preliminary findings of molecular screening. Methods: Patients with RAS/BRAFV600E wt mCRC according to tissue genotyping who benefited from previous anti-EGFR-based treatment (fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and antiangiogenics) and then experienced disease progression to EGFR targeting were eligible for screening in the PARERE trial. The next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel Oncomine™ was employed for ctDNA testing. Results: A total of 218 patients underwent LB, and ctDNA sequencing was successful in 201 of them (92%). RAS/BRAFV600E mutations were found in 68 (34%) patients and were mainly subclonal (median variant allele fraction [VAF] for KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutant clones: 0.52%, 0.62%, and 0.12%, respectively; p = 0.01), with KRASQ61H being the most frequently detected (31%). Anti-EGFR-free intervals did not predict ctDNA molecular status (p = 0.12). Among the 133 patients with RAS/BRAFV600E wt tumors according to LB, 40 (30%) harbored a mutation in at least another gene potentially implied in anti-EGFR resistance, mainly with subclonal expression (median VAF, 0.56%). In detail, alterations in PIK3CA, FBXW7, GNAS, MAP2K, ERBB2, BRAF (class I and II non-BRAFV600E), SMAD, EGFR, AKT1, and CTNNB1 occurred in 13%, 8%, 7%, 3%, 2%, 2%, 1%, 1%, 1%, and 1% cases, respectively. Co-mutations were detected in 13 (33%) out of 40 patients. Conclusions: This is the largest prospective cohort of mCRC patients screened with LB for anti-EGFR retreatment in a randomized study. ctDNA genotyping reveals that at least one out of three patients candidate for retreatment should be excluded from this therapy, and other potential drivers of anti-EGFR resistance are found in approximately one out of three patients with RAS/BRAFV600E wt ctDNA.