COLUMBIA-1: a randomised study of durvalumab plus oleclumab in combination with chemotherapy and bevacizumab in metastatic microsatellite-stable colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: To determine whether the addition of durvalumab (anti-PD-L1) and oleclumab (anti-CD73) to standard-of-care treatment (FOLFOX and bevacizumab) enhances the anti-tumour effect in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: COLUMBIA-1 (NCT04068610) was a Phase Ib (feasibility; Part 1)/Phase II (randomised; Part 2) trial in patients with treatment-naïve microsatellite stable mCRC. Patients in Part 2 were randomised to receive standard-of-care (control arm) or standard-of-care plus durvalumab and oleclumab (experimental arm). Primary objectives included safety and efficacy. RESULTS: Seven patients were enrolled in Part 1 and 52 in Part 2 (n = 26 in each arm). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) occurred in 80.8% and 65.4% of patients in the control and experimental arms of Part 2, respectively, with 26.9% and 46.3% experiencing serious TEAEs. The confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was numerically higher in the experimental arm compared with the control arm (61.5% [95% confidence interval (CI), 40.6-79.8] vs 46.2% [95% CI, 26.6-66.6]) but did not meet the statistically significant threshold in either arm. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of FOLFOX and bevacizumab in combination with durvalumab and oleclumab was manageable; however, the efficacy results do not warrant further development of this combination in patients with microsatellite stable mCRC. REGISTRATION: NCT04068610.

Binimetinib in combination with nivolumab or nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with previously treated microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer with RAS mutations in an open-label phase 1b/2 study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with previously treated RAS-mutated microsatellite-stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), a multicenter open-label phase 1b/2 trial was conducted to define the safety and efficacy of the MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor binimetinib in combination with the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) nivolumab (anti-PD-1) or nivolumab and another ICI, ipilimumab (anti-CTLA4). METHODS: In phase 1b, participants were randomly assigned to Arm 1A (binimetinib 45 mg twice daily [BID] plus nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks [Q4W]) or Arm 1B (binimetinib 45 mg BID plus nivolumab 480 mg Q4W and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 8 weeks [Q8W]) to determine the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of binimetinib. The MTD/RP2D was defined as the highest dosage combination that did not cause medically unacceptable dose-limiting toxicities in more than 35% of treated participants in Cycle 1. During phase 2, participants were randomly assigned to Arm 2A (binimetinib MTD/RP2D plus nivolumab) or Arm 2B (binimetinib MTD/RP2D plus nivolumab and ipilimumab) to assess the safety and clinical activity of these combinations. RESULTS: In phase 1b, 21 participants were randomized to Arm 1A or Arm 1B; during phase 2, 54 participants were randomized to Arm 2A or Arm 2B. The binimetinib MTD/RP2D was determined to be 45 mg BID. In phase 2, no participants receiving binimetinib plus nivolumab achieved a response. Of the 27 participants receiving binimetinib, nivolumab, and ipilimumab, the overall response rate was 7.4% (90% CI: 1.3, 21.5). Out of 75 participants overall, 74 (98.7%) reported treatment-related adverse events (AEs), of whom 17 (22.7%) reported treatment-related serious AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The RP2D binimetinib regimen had a safety profile similar to previous binimetinib studies or nivolumab and ipilimumab combination studies. There was a lack of clinical benefit with either drug combination. Therefore, these data do not support further development of binimetinib in combination with nivolumab or nivolumab and ipilimumab in RAS-mutated MSS mCRC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03271047 (09/01/2017).

Plain language summary of SUNLIGHT: trifluridine/tipiracil and bevacizumab for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary describing the results from a phase 3 clinical trial called SUNLIGHT. The study looked at treatment with orally administered trifluridine/tipiracil plus intravenously administered bevacizumab in people with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that is refractory to treatment.This study included people whose cancer had grown or spread beyond its original location after no more than two previous treatments. People in the study received either the combination of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab or they received trifluridine/tipiracil alone. The aims of the study were to see how long people lived after treatment with trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab compared with trifluridine/tipiracil alone and to find out how well the combination of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab worked at slowing down the spread of the cancer. Researchers also looked at side effects from taking the medicines and at how treatment affected people's physical functioning. WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS?: People in the combination group lived longer (a median of 10.8 months) than people who received trifluridine/tipiracil alone (7.5 months). In addition, the time it took for the cancer to worsen was longer for those who received the combination treatment (a median of 5.6 months) compared with those who received trifluridine/tipiracil alone (2.4 months). People's physical functioning took longer to worsen with combination therapy (a median of 9.3 months) than it did with trifluridine/tipiracil alone (6.3 months), as measured by the impact of treatment on people's ability to carry out daily living activities. The most common side effects in both treatment groups were low levels of white blood cells, known as neutrophils (neutropenia), nausea, and low levels of healthy red blood cells (anemia). WHAT WERE THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS REPORTED BY THE RESEARCHERS?: The results from the study suggest that treatment with oral trifluridine/tipiracil plus intravenous (IV) bevacizumab could help people with refractory mCRC live longer and maintain good physical functioning, and it could slow the worsening of their cancer.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04737187 (SUNLIGHT) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Targeting KRAS G12C Mutation in Colorectal Cancer, A Review: New Arrows in the Quiver.

Kirsten rat sarcoma virus oncogene homolog (KRAS) is the most frequently mutated oncogene in human cancer. In colorectal cancer (CRC), KRAS mutations are present in more than 50% of cases, and the KRAS glycine-to-cysteine mutation at codon 12 (KRAS G12C) occurs in up to 4% of patients. This mutation is associated with short responses to standard chemotherapy and worse overall survival compared to non-G12C mutations. In recent years, several KRAS G12C inhibitors have demonstrated clinical activity, although all patients eventually progressed. The identification of negative feedback through the EGFR receptor has led to the development of KRAS inhibitors plus an anti-EGFR combination, thus boosting antitumor activity. Currently, several KRAS G12C inhibitors are under development, and results from phase I and phase II clinical trials are promising. Moreover, the phase III CodeBreaK 300 trial demonstrates the superiority of sotorasib-panitumumab over trifluridine/tipiracil, establishing a new standard of care for patients with colorectal cancer harboring KRAS G12C mutations. Other combinations such as adagrasib-cetuximab, divarasib-cetuximab, or FOLFIRI-panitumumab-sotorasib have also shown a meaningful response rate and are currently under evaluation. Nonetheless, most of these patients will eventually relapse. In this setting, liquid biopsy emerges as a critical tool to characterize the mechanisms of resistance, consisting mainly of acquired genomic alterations in the MAPK and PI3K pathways and tyrosine kinase receptor alterations, but gene fusions, histological changes, or conformational changes in the kinase have also been described. In this paper, we review the development of KRAS G12C inhibitors in colorectal cancer as well as the main mechanisms of resistance.

Current and Emerging Treatment Paradigms in Colorectal Cancer: Integrating Hallmarks of Cancer.

The treatment of unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer has evolved over the last two decades, as knowledge of cancer biology has broadened and new targets have emerged. 'The Hallmarks of Cancer' illustrate the crucial capabilities acquired by cells to become malignant and represent the evolution of knowledge of tumor biology. This review integrates these novel targets and therapies into selected hallmarks: sustaining proliferative signaling, inducing vasculature, avoiding immune destruction, genome instability and mutation, reprogramming cellular metabolism, and resisting cell death. The different strategies and combinations under study are based on treatments with anti-EGFR, anti-VEGF, and anti-HER2 agents, KRAS G12C inhibitors, BRAF and MEK inhibitors, and immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, new approaches are emerging, including vaccines, WEE1 inhibitors, and PARP inhibitors, among others. The further deciphering of cancer biology will unravel new targets, develop novel therapies, and improve patients' outcomes.

Delphi consensus for the third-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: The optimal drug regimen and sequence are still unknown for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who are candidates for third-line (3L) or subsequent treatment. The aim of this study is to know the opinion of experts on the most appropriate treatment options for mCRC in 3L and to clarify certain clinical decisions in Spain. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi method, a group of experts discussed the treatment in 3L of patients with mCRC and developed a questionnaire with 21 items divided into 5 sections. RESULTS: After 2 rounds, the 67 panelists consulted agreed on 17 items (81%). They considered that the main objective of 3L is to equally increase survival and improve patients' quality of life (QoL), but preferably the QoL. It was agreed that patients with mCRC in 3L prefer to receive active versus symptomatic treatment. Panelists considered trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) to be the best oral treatment available to them in 3L. In patients with MSI-H or dMMR and BRAF V600E, the panelists mostly prefer targeted treatments. Panelists agreed the use of a therapeutic sequence that not only increases outcomes but also allows patients to be treated later. Finally, it was agreed that FTD/TPI has a mechanism of action that allows it to be used in patients refractory to previous treatment with 5-fluorouracil. CONCLUSION: The experts agreed with most of the proposed items on 3L treatment of mCRC, prioritizing therapeutic options that increase survival and preserve QoL, while facilitating the possibility that patients can continue to be treated later.

Determinants of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer With Permanent Liver- Limited Disease.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a complex and genetically heterogeneous disease presenting a specific metastatic pattern, with the liver being the most common site of metastasis. Around 20%-25% of patients with CRC will develop exclusively hepatic metastatic disease throughout their disease history. With its specific characteristics and therapeutic options, liver-limited disease (LLD) should be considered as a specific entity. The identification of these patients is particularly relevant in view of the growing interest in liver transplantation in selected patients with advanced CRC. Identifying why some patients will develop only LLD remains a challenge, mainly because of a lack of a systemic understanding of this complex and interlinked phenomenon given that cancer has traditionally been investigated according to distinct physiological compartments. Recently, multidisciplinary efforts and new diagnostic tools have made it possible to study some of these complex issues in greater depth and may help identify targets and specific treatment strategies to benefit these patients. In this review we analyze the underlying biology and available tools to help clinicians better understand this increasingly common and specific disease.

Cetuximab as a Key Partner in Personalized Targeted Therapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Cetuximab, a chimeric IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), has revolutionized personalized treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. This review highlights the mechanism of action, characteristics, and optimal indications for cetuximab in mCRC. Cetuximab has emerged as a pivotal partner for novel therapies in specific molecular subgroups, including BRAF V600E, KRAS G12C, and HER2-altered mCRC. Combining cetuximab with immunotherapy and other targeted agents further expands the therapeutic landscape, offering renewed hope for mCRC patients who face the development of resistance to conventional therapies. Ongoing clinical trials have continued to uncover innovative cetuximab-based treatment strategies, promising a brighter future for mCRC patients. This review provides a comprehensive overview of cetuximab's role and its evolving importance in personalized targeted therapy of mCRC patients, offering valuable insights into the evolving landscape of colorectal cancer treatment.

Epidermal growth factor receptor antagonists in colorectal cancer: emerging strategies for precision therapy.

INTRODUCTION: The global prevalence of colorectal cancer highlights the need to enhance treatment strategies for improved patient outcomes. The pivotal role of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling in regulating cellular processes for this disease pinpoints its value as a therapeutic target, despite the emergence of resistance mechanisms over time. AREAS COVERED: This review discusses the clinical evidence supporting the use of EGFR inhibitors in molecularly-selected patients based on molecular characteristics (notably BRAF V600E and KRAS G12C) including combination approaches targeting different points in in the signaling pathway, as well as strategies such as EGFR inhibitor rechallenge. The role of HER2 inhibitors and emerging approaches such as bispecific antibodies are also reviewed. EXPERT OPINION: Recently, inhibitors targeting the KRAS G12C variant have emerged, albeit with modest monotherapy activity compared to other tumor types, emphasizing the influence of histologic origins on the EGFR signaling pathway. Integration of EGFR inhibitors into precision medicine has facilitated tailored therapies addressing resistance mechanisms. Patient selection for EGFR inhibitor rechallenge guided by ctDNA findings is crucial, with ongoing investigations exploring novel combinations to enhance EGFR blockade, highlighting the transformative potential of precision medicine in shaping the future of mCRC treatment toward personalized and targeted approaches.

Modified FOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab with and without nivolumab for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: phase 2 results from the CheckMate 9X8 randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include fluoropyrimidine-containing regimens with oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan and a biologic agent. Immunotherapy may enhance antitumor activity in combination with standard therapies in patients with mCRC. Here, we present phase 2 results of nivolumab plus standard-of-care therapy (SOC; 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin/bevacizumab) versus SOC in the first-line treatment of patients with mCRC (CheckMate 9X8). METHODS: CheckMate 9X8 was a multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 2/3 trial. Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age with unresectable mCRC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive nivolumab 240 mg plus SOC or SOC alone every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1. Secondary endpoints included PFS by investigator assessment; objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, duration of response, and time to response, all by BICR and investigator assessments; overall survival; and safety. Preplanned exploratory biomarker analyses were also performed. RESULTS: From February 2018 through April 2019, 310 patients were enrolled, of which 195 patients were randomized to nivolumab plus SOC (n=127) or SOC (n=68). At 21.5-month minimum follow-up, PFS with nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC did not meet the prespecified threshold for statistical significance; median PFS by BICR was 11.9 months in both arms (HR, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.53 to 1.23); p=0.30). Higher PFS rates after 12 months (18 months: 28% vs 9%), higher ORR (60% vs 46%), and durable responses (median 12.9 vs 9.3 months) were observed with nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 75% versus 48% of patients; no new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The CheckMate 9X8 trial investigating first-line nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC in patients with mCRC did not meet its primary endpoint of PFS by BICR. Nivolumab plus SOC showed numerically higher PFS rates after 12 months, a higher response rate, and more durable responses compared with SOC alone, with acceptable safety. Further investigation to identify subgroups of patients with mCRC that may benefit from nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC in the first-line setting is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03414983.

Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab Versus Standard of Care for Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Final Analysis of the Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III LEAP-017 Study.

PURPOSE: Treatment options are limited for patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In the LEAP-017 study, we evaluate whether lenvatinib in combination with pembrolizumab improves outcomes compared with standard of care (SOC) in previously treated mismatch repair proficient or not microsatellite instability high (pMMR or not MSI-H) mCRC. METHODS: In this international, multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label, phase III study, eligible patients age 18 years and older with unresectable, pMMR or not MSI-H mCRC, that had progressed on or after, or could not tolerate, standard treatment, were randomly assigned 1:1 to lenvatinib 20 mg orally once daily plus pembrolizumab 400 mg intravenously once every 6 weeks or investigator's choice of regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil (SOC). Randomization was stratified by presence or absence of liver metastases. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). LEAP-017 is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04776148), and has completed recruitment. RESULTS: Between April 8, 2021, and December 21, 2021, 480 patients were randomly assigned to lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (n = 241) or SOC (n = 239). At final analysis (median follow-up of 18.6 months [IQR, 3.9]), median OS with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus SOC was 9.8 versus 9.3 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.02]; P = .0379; prespecified threshold P = .0214). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 58.4% (lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab) versus 42.1% (SOC) of patients. Two participants died due to treatment-related adverse events, both in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab arm. CONCLUSION: In patients with pMMR or not MSI-H mCRC that had progressed on previous therapy, there was no statistically significant improvement in OS after lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab treatment versus SOC. No new safety signals were observed.

Precision oncology and systemic targeted therapy in Pseudomyxoma Peritonei.

PURPOSE: Pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) is a rare and poorly understood malignant condition characterized by the accumulation of intra-abdominal mucin produced from peritoneal metastases. Currently, cytoreductive surgery remains the mainstay of treatment but disease recurrence and death after relapse frequently occur in PMP patients. New therapeutic strategies are therefore urgently needed for these patients. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A total of 120 PMP samples from 50 patients were processed to generate a collection of 50 patient-derived organoids (PDO) and xenograft (PDX) models. Whole exome sequencing (WES), immunohistochemistry analyses and in vitro and in vivo drug efficacy studies were performed. RESULTS: In this study, we have generated a collection of PMP preclinical models and identified druggable targets, including BRAFV600E, KRASG12C and KRASG12D,that could also be detected in intra-abdominal mucin biopsies of PMP patients using droplet digital PCR. Preclinical models preserved the histopathological markers from the original patient sample. The BRAFV600E inhibitor encorafenib reduced cell viability of BRAFV600E PMP-PDO models. Proof-of-concept in vivo experiments showed that a systemic treatment with encorafenib significantly reduced tumor growth and prolonged survival in subcutaneous and orthotopic BRAFV600E-PMP-PDX mouse models. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates for the first time that systemic targeted therapies can effectively control PMP tumors. BRAF signaling pathway inhibition represents a new therapeutic opportunity for BRAFV600E PMP patients who have a poor prognosis. Importantly, our present data and collection of preclinical models pave the way for evaluating the efficacy of other systemic targeted therapies toward extending the promise of precision oncology to PMP patients.