Prognostic and predictive impact of metastatic organ involvement on maintenance therapy in advanced metastatic colorectal cancer: Subgroup analysis of patients treated within the PanaMa trial (AIO KRK 0212).

Despite molecular selection, patients (pts) with RAS wildtype mCRC represent a heterogeneous population including diversity in metastatic spread. We investigated metastatic patterns for their prognostic and predictive impact on maintenance therapy with 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid ± panitumumab. The study population was stratified according to (1) number of involved metastatic sites (single vs multiple organ metastasis), liver-limited disease vs (2) liver metastasis plus one additional site, and (3) vs liver metastasis plus ≥two additional sites. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regressions were used to correlate efficacy endpoints. Single organ metastasis was observed in 133 pts (53.6%) with 102 pts (41.1%) presenting with liver-limited disease, while multiple organ metastases were reported in 114 pts (46.0). Multiple compared to single organ metastases were associated with less favorable PFS (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.13-1.93; P = .004) and OS (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.98-1.93; P = .068) of maintenance therapy. While metastatic spread involving one additional extrahepatic site was not associated with clearly impaired survival compared to liver-limited disease, pts with liver metastasis plus ≥two additional sites demonstrated less favorable PFS (HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.30-2.83; P < .001), and OS (HR 2.38, 95% CI 1.51-3.76; P < .001) of maintenance therapy. Pmab-containing maintenance therapy appeared active in both pts with multiple (HR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39-0.86; P = .006) as well as to a lesser numerical extent in pts with single organ metastasis (HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.57-1.21; P = .332; Interaction P = .183). These data may support clinical decisions when EGFR-based maintenance therapy is considered.

FIRE-9 - PORT / AIO-KRK-0418: a prospective, randomized, open, multicenter Phase III trial to investigate the efficacy of adjuvant/additive chemotherapy in patients with definitely-treated metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Additive/adjuvant chemotherapy as concept after local treatment of colorectal metastases has not been proven to be successful by phase III trials. Accordingly, a standard of care to improve relapse rates and long-term survival is not established and adjuvant chemotherapy cannot be recommended as a standard therapy due to limited evidence in literature. The PORT trial aims to generate evidence that post-resection/ablation/radiation chemotherapy improves the survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: Patients to be included into this trial must have synchronous or metachronous metastases of colorectal cancer-either resected (R0 or R1) and/or effectively treated by ablation or radiation within 3-10 weeks before randomization-and have the primary tumor resected, without radiographic evidence of active metastatic disease at study entry. The primary endpoint of the trial is progression-free survival after 24 months, secondary endpoints include overall survival, safety, quality of life, treatments (including efficacy) beyond study participation, translational endpoints, and others. One arm of the study comprising 2/3 of the population will be treated for 6 months with modified FOLFOXIRI or modified FOLFOX6 (investigator´s choice, depending on the performance status of the patients but determined before randomization), while the other arm (1/3 of the population) will be observed and undergo scheduled follow-up computed tomography scans according to the interventional arm. DISCUSSION: Optimal oncological management after removal of colorectal metastases is unclear. The PORT trial aims to generate evidence that additive/adjuvant chemotherapy after definitive treatment of colorectal metastases improves progression free and overall survival in patients with colorectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered with clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT05008809 ) and EudraCT (2020-006,144-18).

Depth of response of induction therapy and consecutive maintenance treatment in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: An analysis of the PanaMa trial (AIO KRK 0212).

BACKGROUND: In patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, depth of response (DpR) has gained importance as a novel end-point in clinical trials. We investigated the overall DpR, as well as the prognostic and predictive impact of DpR to induction therapy (six cycles of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin [FU/FA], oxaliplatin [FOLFOX] and panitumumab [Pmab]) on consecutive maintenance therapy (FU/FA plus Pmab or FU/FA alone) in patients treated within the PanaMa trial. METHODS: Central radiological assessment was performed according to RECIST 1.1. DpR was defined as percentage change in tumour diameter within defined time intervals (induction therapy, maintenance therapy, total course of therapy). For prognostic and predictive analyses, median DpR (

Exact Primary Tumor Location in mCRC: Prognostic Value and Predictive Impact on Anti-EGFR mAb Efficacy.

Primary tumor sidedness (left vs. right) has prognostic and predictive impact on anti-EGFR agent efficacy and thus management of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This analysis evaluates the relevance of primary tumor location (PTL) in RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC patients, when dividing the colorectal frame into six segments. This pooled analysis, performed on a single-patient basis of five randomized first-line therapy trials, evaluates the impact of exact PTL classification on baseline characteristics, prognosis and prediction of anti-EGFR antibody efficacy by chi-square and log-rank tests, the Kaplan-Meier method, Cox and logistic regressions. The PTL was significantly associated with metastatic spread: liver (p = 0.001), lung (p = 0.047), peritoneal (p < 0.001) and lymph nodes (p = 0.048). A multivariate analysis indicated an impact on anti-EGFR agent efficacy in terms of overall survival depending on the exact primary tumor location: from detrimental in caecal (HR 2.63), rather neutral effects in the ascending colon (HR 1.24), right flexure/transverse colon (HR 0.99) and left flexure/descending colon (HR 0.91) to clear benefit in sigmoid (HR 0.71) and rectal (HR 0.58) primaries. Exact primary tumor location affects anti-EGFR antibody efficacy in a rather continuous than a dichotomous fashion in RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC patients. This perspective might help to support clinical decisions when anti-EGFR antibodies are considered.

NeoRAS wild-type in metastatic colorectal cancer: Myth or truth?-Case series and review of the literature.

Upfront KRAS and NRAS gene testing ('RAS') is the standard of care for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), to guide first-line treatment. The presence of RAS mutation (MT) is a negative predictor for the efficacy of anti-EGFR antibodies and the use of cetuximab and panitumumab is restricted to RAS wild-type (WT) mCRC. Conversion from RAS WT to RAS MT mCRC after treatment with anti-EGFR antibodies is a known and well-described acquired resistance mechanism. The by far less frequent 'NeoRAS wild-type' phenomenon (reversion from RAS MT to RAS WT) has recently drawn attention. The proposed effect of chemotherapy on RAS status in mCRC patients is not fully understood. Because of the intriguing biological consequence of a RAS MT to RAS WT reversion, subsequent treatment of NeoRAS WT patients with anti-EGFR antibodies is increasingly being discussed. Here, we report three clinical cases of NeoRAS WT mCRC patients, which received standard-of-care regimens for RAS MT mCRC. Anti-EGFR antibodies were used in two out of three patients after progression of the disease. One of the patients had a long-term response. In line with our observations, NeoRAS WT phenomenon occurs in clinical practice. Retesting of RAS status during treatment should be discussed in patients with unusual long-term clinical courses of RAS MT mCRC to optimise treatment strategy and to evaluate the use of anti-EGFR antibodies.