Mutational evolution after chemotherapy-progression in metastatic colorectal cancer revealed by circulating tumor DNA analysis.

Emerging new mutations after treatment can provide clues to acquired resistant mechanisms. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) sequencing has enabled noninvasive repeated tumor mutational profiling. We aimed to investigate newly emerging mutations in ctDNA after disease progression in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Blood samples were prospectively collected from mCRC patients receiving palliative chemotherapy before treatment and at radiological evaluations. ctDNA from pretreatment and progressive disease (PD) samples were sequenced with a next-generation sequencing panel targeting 106 genes. A total of 712 samples from 326 patients were analyzed, and 381 pretreatment and PD pairs (163 first-line, 85 second-line and 133 later-line [≥third-line]) were compared. New mutations in PD samples (mean 2.75 mutations/sample) were observed in 49.6% (189/381) of treatments. ctDNA samples from later-line had more baseline mutations (P = .002) and were more likely to have new PD mutations (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.40-3.69) compared to first-line. RAS/BRAF wild-type tumors were more likely to develop PD mutations (adjusted OR 1.87, 95% CI: 1.22-2.87), independent of cetuximab treatment. The majority of new PD mutations (68.5%) were minor clones, suggesting an increasing clonal heterogeneity after treatment. Pathways involved by PD mutations differed by the treatment received: MAPK cascade (Gene Ontology [GO]: 0000165) in cetuximab and regulation of kinase activity (GO: 0043549) in regorafenib. The number of mutations revealed by ctDNA sequencing increased during disease progression in mCRC. Clonal heterogeneity increased after chemotherapy progression, and pathways involved were affected by chemotherapy regimens.

Personalised circulating tumour DNA assay with large-scale mutation coverage for sensitive minimal residual disease detection in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative minimal residual disease (MRD) detection using circulating-tumour DNA (ctDNA) requires a highly sensitive analysis platform. We have developed a tumour-informed, hybrid-capture ctDNA sequencing MRD assay. METHODS: Personalised target-capture panels for ctDNA detection were designed using individual variants identified in tumour whole-exome sequencing of each patient. MRD status was determined using ultra-high-depth sequencing data of plasma cell-free DNA. The MRD positivity and its association with clinical outcome were analysed in Stage II or III colorectal cancer (CRC). RESULTS: In 98 CRC patients, personalised panels for ctDNA sequencing were built from tumour data, including a median of 185 variants per patient. In silico simulation showed that increasing the number of target variants increases MRD detection sensitivity in low fractions (<0.01%). At postoperative 3-week, 21.4% of patients were positive for MRD by ctDNA. Postoperative positive MRD was strongly associated with poor disease-free survival (DFS) (adjusted hazard ratio 8.40, 95% confidence interval 3.49-20.2). Patients with a negative conversion of MRD after adjuvant therapy showed significantly better DFS (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Tumour-informed, hybrid-capture-based ctDNA assay monitoring a large number of patient-specific mutations is a sensitive strategy for MRD detection to predict recurrence in CRC.

Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab showed encouraging antitumor activity and safety in a phase 1b trial involving patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In a global, open-label, phase 3 trial, patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma who had not previously received systemic treatment were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or sorafenib until unacceptable toxic effects occurred or there was a loss of clinical benefit. The coprimary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, as assessed at an independent review facility according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1). RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 336 patients in the atezolizumab-bevacizumab group and 165 patients in the sorafenib group. At the time of the primary analysis (August 29, 2019), the hazard ratio for death with atezolizumab-bevacizumab as compared with sorafenib was 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42 to 0.79; P<0.001). Overall survival at 12 months was 67.2% (95% CI, 61.3 to 73.1) with atezolizumab-bevacizumab and 54.6% (95% CI, 45.2 to 64.0) with sorafenib. Median progression-free survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.7 to 8.3) and 4.3 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 5.6) in the respective groups (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.76; P<0.001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 56.5% of 329 patients who received at least one dose of atezolizumab-bevacizumab and in 55.1% of 156 patients who received at least one dose of sorafenib. Grade 3 or 4 hypertension occurred in 15.2% of patients in the atezolizumab-bevacizumab group; however, other high-grade toxic effects were infrequent. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, atezolizumab combined with bevacizumab resulted in better overall and progression-free survival outcomes than sorafenib. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03434379.).

Prognostic Impact of Extramural Lymphatic, Vascular, and Perineural Invasion in Stage II Colon Cancer: A Comparison With Intramural Invasion.

BACKGROUND: Lymphatic invasion, vascular invasion, and perineural invasion are prognostic factors for colon cancer. However, the prognostic significance of those factors according to the location of permeation (intramural and extramural invasion) in stage II colon cancer is still unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to clarify whether the location of lymphatic invasion, vascular invasion, and perineural invasion could affect the survival of patients with stage II colon cancer. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This study took place at a university teaching hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 1130 patients with stage II colon cancers who underwent radical surgery at the Seoul National University Hospital between July 2003 and December 2015 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients were classified according to the location of lymphatic invasion, vascular invasion, and perineural invasion. Survival outcomes were compared among those without invasion and those with intramural and extramural invasion. Primary end point is overall survival and secondary end point is disease-free survival. RESULTS: Disease-free survival and overall survival of patients with extramural invasion were worse than those of patients without invasion and those with intramural invasion. Multivariate analysis for survival outcomes confirmed that extramural invasion was a significant independent prognostic factor. However, both disease-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different between patients without invasion and those with intramural invasion. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: Extramural invasion was associated with worse prognosis in stage II colon cancer, but intramural invasion was not. Therefore, pathologic reports about the location of lymphatic invasion, vascular invasion, and perineural invasion might be helpful for predicting prognosis and for determining the need of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancers. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B939 . IMPACTO PRONSTICO DE LA INVASION EXTRAMURAL LINFTICA, VASCULAR Y PERINEURAL EN EL CNCER DE COLON ESTADO II ESTUDIO COMPARATIVO CON RELACIN A LA INVASIN INTRAMURAL: ANTECEDENTES:La invasión linfática, vascular y perineural son factores pronósticos para el cáncer de colon. Sin embargo, la importancia pronóstica de estos factores de acuerdo con la ubicación de la permeabilidad (invasión intramural y extramural) del cáncer de colon en estadío II aún no está aclarada.OBJETIVO:El presente estudio tiene por objetivo, el de aclarar si la localización de la invasión linfática, vascular y perineural podría afectar la sobrevida en los pacientes con cáncer de colon en estadío II.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohortes de caracter retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Nuestro estudio se llevó a cabo en un hospital docente universitario.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron un total de 1130 pacientes diagnosticados con cáncer de colon en estadío II, los cuales fueron sometidos a cirugía radical en el Hospital Universitario Nacional de Seúl, entre julio de 2003 y diciembre de 2015.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los pacientes fueron clasificados según la localización de la invasión linfática, vascular y perineural. Los resultados de la sobrevida fueron comparados con aquellos sin invasión y los otros con invasión intramural y extramural. El objetivo final primario fué la sobrevida global, el objetivo final secundario fué la sobrevida libre de enfermedad.RESULTADOS:La sobrevida libre de enfermedad y la sobrevida global de los pacientes con invasión extramural fueron mucho peores en relacion a las de los pacientes sin invasión y aquellos con invasión intramural. El análisis multivariado de los resultados de la sobrevida confirmaron que la invasión extramural es un factor pronóstico independiente muy significativo. Sin embargo, tanto la sobrevida libre de enfermedad, como la sobrevida global no fueron significativamente diferentes entre los pacientes sin invasión y aquellos con invasión intramural.LIMITACIONES:Estudio limitado por su diseño con caracter retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:La invasión extramural fué asociada con un peor pronóstico en el cáncer de colon en estadío II, pero la invasión intramural no lo fué. Por tanto, los informes anatomopatológicos sobre la ubicación de la invasión linfática, vascular y perineural, podrían ser útiles para predecir el pronóstico y determinar el menester de la quimioterapia adyuvante en los cánceres de colon en estadío II. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B939 . (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).

Standard versus longer interval of radical resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: A 20-year single-center experience & propensity-score matching.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the standard interval of 6-8 weeks between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and surgery, it is debated whether an interval of >8 weeks increases the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. We investigated the interval between nCRT and surgery, and its impact on oncological outcomes and postoperative complications in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with rectal cancer who underwent total mesorectal excision after long-course nCRT between 2000 and 2020. They were divided into two groups-those who underwent surgery at 6-8 and >8 weeks after nCRT. Surgical outcomes (stoma rate and postoperative complications), pCR, tumor regression grade (TRG), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared. RESULTS: We selected 770/1153 patients with rectal cancer, including 502 and 268 patients surgically treated at 6-8 and >8 weeks after nCRT, respectively. The pCR rates were similar between the two groups (14.7% vs. 15.3%, p = 0.836), while the TRG was significantly better in the >8 weeks group (p = 0.267). Additionally, the postoperative complications, recurrence, 5-year RFS, and OS rates were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although tumor regression increased in the >8 weeks group, the oncological benefits of surgery >8 weeks after nCRT remain uncertain.

Dynamic changes in longitudinal circulating tumour DNA profile during metastatic colorectal cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) has been spotlighted as an attractive biomarker because of its easy accessibility and real-time representation of tumour genetic profile. However, the clinical utility of longitudinal ctDNA monitoring has not been clearly defined. METHODS: Serial blood samples were obtained from metastatic colorectal cancer patients undergoing first-line chemotherapy. ctDNA was sequenced using a targeted next-generation sequencing platform which included 106 genes. Changes in ctDNA profile and treatment outcome were comprehensively analysed. RESULTS: A total of 272 samples from 62 patients were analysed. In all, 90.3% of patients had detectable ctDNA mutation before treatment. ctDNA clearance after chemotherapy was associated with longer progression-free survival which was independent of radiological response (adjusted hazard ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.10-0.46). Longitudinal monitoring was able to detect ctDNA progression which preceded radiological progressive disease (PD) in 58.1% (median 3.3 months). Diverse resistant mutations (34.9%) and gene amplification (7.0%) at the time of PD were discovered. For 16.3% of the PD patients, the newly identified mutations could be potential candidates of targeted therapy or clinical trial. CONCLUSION: ctDNA profile provided a more accurate landscape of tumour and dynamic changes compared to radiological evaluation. Longitudinal ctDNA monitoring may improve personalised treatment decision-making.

Updated efficacy and safety data from IMbrave150: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab vs. sorafenib for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: IMbrave150 demonstrated that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab led to significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma at the primary analysis (after a median 8.6 months of follow-up). We present updated data after 12 months of additional follow-up. METHODS: Patients with systemic treatment-naive, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma were randomized 2:1 to receive 1,200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab intravenously every 3 weeks or 400 mg sorafenib orally twice daily in this open-label, phase III study. Co-primary endpoints were OS and PFS by independently assessed RECIST 1.1 in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary efficacy endpoints included objective response rates and exploratory subgroup efficacy analyses. This is a post hoc updated analysis of efficacy and safety. RESULTS: From March 15, 2018, to January 30, 2019, 501 patients (intention-to-treat population) were randomly allocated to receive atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n = 336) or sorafenib (n = 165). On August 31, 2020, after a median 15.6 (range, 0-28.6) months of follow-up, the median OS was 19.2 months (95% CI 17.0-23.7) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 13.4 months (95% CI 11.4-16.9) with sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66; 95% CI 0.52-0.85; descriptive p <0.001). The median PFS was 6.9 (95% CI 5.7-8.6) and 4.3 (95% CI 4.0-5.6) months in the respective treatment groups (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.53-0.81; descriptive p < 0.001). Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 143 (43%) of 329 and 72 (46%) of 156 safety-evaluable patients in the respective groups, and treatment-related grade 5 events occurred in 6 (2%) and 1 (<1%) patients. CONCLUSION: After longer follow-up, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab maintained clinically meaningful survival benefits over sorafenib and had a safety profile consistent with the primary analysis. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03434379. LAY SUMMARY: The primary analysis of IMbrave150 showed that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab had significantly greater benefits than sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, but survival data were not yet mature. At this updated analysis done 12 months later, median overall survival was 5.8 months longer with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab than sorafenib, and the severity profile of treatment-related side effects remained similar. These updated results confirm atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as the first-line standard of care for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Direct Detection of Low Abundance Genes of Single Point Mutation.

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis, specifically circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis, provides enormous opportunities for noninvasive early assessment of cancers. To date, PCR-based methods have led this field. However, the limited sensitivity/specificity of PCR-based methods necessitates the search for new methods. Here, we describe a direct approach to detect KRAS G12D mutated genes in clinical ctDNA samples with the utmost LOD and sensitivity/specificity. In this study, MutS protein was immobilized on the tip of an atomic force microscope (AFM), and the protein sensed the mismatched sites of the duplex formed between the capture probe on the surface and mutated DNA. A noteworthy LOD (3 copies, 0.006% allele frequency) was achieved, along with superb sensitivity/specificity (100%/100%). These observations demonstrate that force-based AFM, in combination with the protein found in nature and properly designed capture probes/blockers, represents an exciting new avenue for ctDNA analysis.

Patient-reported outcomes with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (IMbrave150): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Understanding patients' experience of cancer treatment is important. We aimed to evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the IMbrave150 trial, which has already shown significant overall survival and progression-free survival benefits with this combination therapy. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial in 111 hospitals and cancer centres across 17 countries or regions. We included patients aged 18 years or older with systemic, treatment-naive, histologically, cytologically, or clinically confirmed unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, with disease that was not amenable to curative surgical or locoregional therapies, or progressive disease after surgical or locoregional therapies. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1; using permuted block randomisation [blocks of six], stratified by geographical region; macrovascular invasion, extrahepatic spread, or both; baseline alpha-fetoprotein concentration; and ECOG performance status) to receive 1200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab intravenously once every 3 weeks or 400 mg sorafenib orally twice a day, until loss of clinical benefit or unacceptable toxicity. The independent review facility for tumour assessment was masked to the treatment allocation. Previously reported coprimary endpoints were overall survival and independently assessed progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Prespecified secondary and exploratory analyses descriptively evaluated treatment effects on patient-reported quality of life, functioning, and disease symptoms per the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality-of-life questionnaire for cancer (QLQ-C30) and quality-of-life questionnaire for hepatocellular carcinoma (QLQ-HCC18). Time to confirmed deterioration of PROs was analysed in the intention-to-treat population; all other analyses were done in the PRO-evaluable population (patients who had a baseline PRO assessment and at least one assessment after baseline). The trial is ongoing; enrolment is closed. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03434379. FINDINGS: Between March 15, 2018, and Jan 30, 2019, 725 patients were screened and 501 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=336) or sorafenib (n=165). 309 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 145 patients in the sorafenib group were included in the PRO-evaluable population. At data cutoff (Aug 29, 2019) the median follow-up was 8·6 months (IQR 6·2-10·8). EORTC QLQ-C30 completion rates were 90% or greater for 23 of 24 treatment cycles in both groups (range 88-100% in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 80-100% in the sorafenib group). EORTC QLQ-HCC18 completion rates were 90% or greater for 20 of 24 cycles in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group (range 88-100%) and 21 of 24 cycles in the sorafenib group (range 89-100%). Compared with sorafenib, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab reduced the risk of deterioration on all EORTC QLQ-C30 generic cancer symptom scales that were prespecified for analysis (appetite loss [hazard ratio (HR) 0·57, 95% CI 0·40-0·81], diarrhoea [0·23, 0·16-0·34], fatigue [0·61, 0·46-0·81], pain [0·46, 0·34-0·62]), and two of three EORTC QLQ-HCC18 disease-specific symptom scales that were prespecified for analysis (fatigue [0·60, 0·45-0·80] and pain [0·65, 0·46-0·92], but not jaundice [0·76, 0·55-1·07]). At day 1 of treatment cycle five (after which attrition in the sorafenib group was more than 50%), the mean EORTC QLQ-C30 score changes from baseline in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib groups were: -3·29 (SD 17·56) versus -5·83 (20·63) for quality of life, -4·02 (19·42) versus -9·76 (21·33) for role functioning, and -3·77 (12·82) versus -7·60 (15·54) for physical functioning. INTERPRETATION: Prespecified analyses of PRO data showed clinically meaningful benefits in terms of patient-reported quality of life, functioning, and disease symptoms with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab compared with sorafenib, strengthening the combination therapy's positive benefit-risk profile versus that of sorafenib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Randomised Phase 1b/2 trial of tepotinib vs sorafenib in Asian patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with MET overexpression.

BACKGROUND: This open-label, Phase 1b/2 study evaluated the highly selective MET inhibitor tepotinib in systemic anticancer treatment (SACT)-naive Asian patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) with MET overexpression. METHODS: In Phase 2b, tepotinib was orally administered once daily (300, 500 or 1,000 mg) to Asian adults with aHCC. The primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and adverse events (AEs). Phase 2 randomised SACT-naive Asian adults with aHCC with MET overexpression to tepotinib (recommended Phase 2 dose [RP2D]) or sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was independently assessed time to progression (TTP). RESULTS: In Phase 1b (n = 27), no DLTs occurred; the RP2D was 500 mg. In Phase 2 (n = 90, 45 patients per arm), the primary endpoint was met: independently assessed TTP was significantly longer with tepotinib versus sorafenib (median 2.9 versus 1.4 months, HR = 0.42, 90% confidence interval: 0.26-0.70, P = 0.0043). Progression-free survival and objective response also favoured tepotinib. Treatment-related Grade ≥3 AE rates were 28.9% with tepotinib and 45.5% with sorafenib. CONCLUSIONS: Tepotinib improved TTP versus sorafenib and was generally well tolerated in SACT-naive Asian patients with aHCC with MET overexpression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01988493.

Phenotype-based single cell sequencing identifies diverse genetic subclones in CD133 positive cancer stem cells.

Tumor heterogeneity is one of the ongoing huddles in the field of colon cancer therapy. It is evident that there are countless clones which exhibit different phenotypes and therefore, single cell analysis is inevitable. Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are rare cell population within tumor which is known to function in cancer metastasis and recurrence. Although there have been trials to prove intra-tumoral heterogeneity using single cell sequencing, that of CSCs has not been clearly elucidated. Here, we articulate the presence of heterogeneous subclones within CD133 positive cancer stem cells through single cell sequencing. As a proof of principle, we performed phenotype-based high-throughput laser isolation and single cell sequencing (PHLI-seq) of CD133 positive cells in a frozen tumor tissue obtained from a patient with colorectal cancer. The result proved that CD133 positive cells were shown to be heterogeneous both in copy number and mutational profiles. Single cancer stem cell specific mutations such as RNF144A, PAK2, PARP4, ADAM21, HYDIN, KRT38 and CELSR1 could be also detected in liver metastatic tumor of the same patient. Collectively, these data suggest that single cell analysis used to spot subclones with genetic variation within rare population, will lead to new strategies to tackle colon cancer metastasis.

A phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study to assess the safety and efficacy of CKD-516, a novel vascular disrupting agent, in combination with Irinotecan in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer.

Introduction The combination of an anti-angiogenic agent with cytotoxic chemotherapy is a standard treatment strategy for metastatic colorectal cancer. CKD-516 is an oral vascular disrupting agent that was preliminarily shown to be safe and efficacious as a monotherapy in refractory solid cancers. We evaluated the recommended phase 2 dose, safety, and preliminary efficacy of CKD-516 in combination with irinotecan in treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Methods This phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study included patients with treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. CKD-516 tablets were administered for five consecutive days followed by two days off in combination with intravenous irinotecan (120 mg/m2) administered on day one of each treatment cycle every two weeks. A traditional 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was used. Results In total, 16 and 23 patients were enrolled in the dose-escalation and dose-expansion cohorts, respectively. The most common adverse events included diarrhea (79%), nausea (74%), vomiting (67%), and neutropenia (62%). No dose-limiting toxicity occurred, and the recommended phase 2 dose was determined at CKD-516/irinotecan doses of 11/120 mg/m2. No cases of cardiac ischemia, cardiac dysfunction, or thromboembolism were reported. Among the 34 patients with available tumor response assessments, one patient achieved partial response (3%) and 26 patients achieved stable disease (76%). The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.1 and 11.6 months, respectively. Conclusion This phase 1 study showed that the combination of oral CKD-516 and irinotecan is safe and tolerable in metastatic, treatment-refractory colorectal patients and showed favorable efficacy outcomes. Further studies to confirm these preliminary findings are warranted. Trial registration number NCT03076957 (Registered at March 10, 2017).

Ramucirumab in patients with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Impact of liver disease aetiology.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a common complication of chronic liver disease with diverse underlying aetiologies. REACH/REACH-2 were global phase III studies investigating ramucirumab in advanced HCC (aHCC) following sorafenib treatment. We performed an exploratory analysis of outcomes by liver disease aetiology and baseline serum viral load. METHODS: Meta-analysis was conducted in patients with aHCC and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL (N = 542) from REACH/REACH-2 trials. Individual patient-level data were pooled with results reported by aetiology subgroup (hepatitis B [HBV] or C [HCV] and Other). Pre-treatment serum HBV DNA and HCV RNA were quantified using Roche COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard model (stratified by study). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between arms in each subgroup (HBV: N = 225, HCV: N = 127, Other: N = 190). No significant difference in treatment effect by aetiology subgroup was detected (OS interaction P-value = .23). Median OS (ramucirumab vs placebo) in months was 7.7 versus 4.5 (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99) for HBV, 8.2 versus 5.5 (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.55-1.23) for HCV and 8.5 versus 5.4 (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.79) for Other. Ramucirumab showed similar overall safety profiles across subgroups. Worst outcomes were noted in patients with a detectable HBV load. Use of HBV antiviral therapy, irrespective of viral load, was beneficial for survival, liver function and liver-specific adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Ramucirumab improved survival across aetiology subgroups with a tolerable safety profile, supporting its use in patients with aHCC and elevated AFP.

Phase 1 study of MRX34, a liposomal miR-34a mimic, in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: In this first-in-human, Phase 1 study of a microRNA-based cancer therapy, the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of MRX34, a liposomal mimic of microRNA-34a (miR-34a), was determined and evaluated in patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: Adults with various solid tumours refractory to standard treatments were enrolled in 3 + 3 dose-escalation cohorts and, following RP2D determination, expansion cohorts. MRX34, with oral dexamethasone premedication, was given intravenously daily for 5 days in 3-week cycles. RESULTS: Common all-cause adverse events observed in 85 patients enrolled included fever (% all grade/G3: 72/4), chills (53/14), fatigue (51/9), back/neck pain (36/5), nausea (36/1) and dyspnoea (25/4). The RP2D was 70 mg/m2 for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and 93 mg/m2 for non-HCC cancers. Pharmacodynamic results showed delivery of miR-34a to tumours, and dose-dependent modulation of target gene expression in white blood cells. Three patients had PRs and 16 had SD lasting ≥4 cycles (median, 19 weeks, range, 11-55). CONCLUSION: MRX34 treatment with dexamethasone premedication demonstrated a manageable toxicity profile in most patients and some clinical activity. Although the trial was closed early due to serious immune-mediated AEs that resulted in four patient deaths, dose-dependent modulation of relevant target genes provides proof-of-concept for miRNA-based cancer therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01829971.

Activation of WNT/ß-catenin signaling results in resistance to a dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor in colorectal cancer cells harboring PIK3CA mutations.

PIK3CA is a frequently mutated gene in cancer, including about ~15 to 20% of colorectal cancers (CRC). PIK3CA mutations lead to activation of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway, which plays pivotal roles in tumorigenesis. Here, we investigated the mechanism of resistance of PIK3CA-mutant CRC cell lines to gedatolisib, a dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor. Out of a panel of 29 CRC cell lines, we identified 7 harboring one or more PIK3CA mutations; of these, 5 and 2 were found to be sensitive and resistant to gedatolisib, respectively. Both of the gedatolisib-resistant cell lines expressed high levels of active glycogen synthase kinase 3-beta (GSK3ß) and harbored the same frameshift mutation (c.465_466insC; H155fs*) in TCF7, which encodes a positive transcriptional regulator of the WNT/ß-catenin signaling pathway. Inhibition of GSK3ß activity in gedatolisib-resistant cells by siRNA-mediated knockdown or treatment with a GSK3ß-specific inhibitor effectively reduced the activity of molecules downstream of mTOR and also decreased signaling through the WNT/ß-catenin pathway. Notably, GSK3ß inhibition rendered the resistant cell lines sensitive to gedatolisib cytotoxicity, both in vitro and in a mouse xenograft model. Taken together, these data demonstrate that aberrant regulation of WNT/ß-catenin signaling and active GSK3ß induced by the TCF7 frameshift mutation cause resistance to the dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor gedatolisib. Cotreatment with GSK3ß inhibitors may be a strategy to overcome the resistance of PIK3CA- and TCF7-mutant CRC to PI3K/mTOR-targeted therapies.

p53 expression status is associated with cancer-specific survival in stage III and high-risk stage II colorectal cancer patients treated with oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: We attempted to elucidate whether p53 expression or TP53 mutation status was associated with cancer-specific survival in adjuvant FOLFOX-treated patients with stage III or high-risk stage II colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: We analysed CRCs (N = 621) for the presence of TP53 alterations and for p53 expression, using targeted resequencing and immunohistochemistry. CRCs were grouped into four subsets according to the p53 expression status, which included p53-no, mild, moderate and strong expression. RESULTS: The distributions of CRCs were 19.85, 11.05, 17.7% and 51.5% in the p53-no, mild, moderate and strong expression groups, respectively. Cases in the p53-mild to moderate expression group were associated with a more frequent proximal location, undifferentiated histology, lower N category, extraglandular mucin production, microsatellite instability, CIMP-P1, CK7 expression and decreased CDX2 expression compared with those of cases of the p53-no expression and p53-strong expression groups. According to survival analysis, the p53-mild expression group showed a poor 5-year relapse-free survival (hazard ratio (HR): 2.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.60-4.60, P < 0.001) and poor 5-year cancer-specific survival (HR: 2.90, 95% CI = 1.28-6.57, P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: p53-mild expression status was found to be an independent prognostic marker in adjuvant FOLFOX-treated patients with stage III and high-risk stage II CRC.

Nivolumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Sorafenib-experienced Asian cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Nivolumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, is approved in several countries to treat sorafenib-experienced patients with HCC, based on results from the CheckMate 040 study (NCT01658878). Marked differences exist in HCC clinical presentation, aetiology, treatment patterns and outcomes across regions. This analysis assessed the safety and efficacy of nivolumab in the Asian cohort of CheckMate 040. METHODS: CheckMate 040 is an international, multicentre, open-label, phase I/II study of nivolumab in adults with advanced HCC, regardless of aetiology, not amenable to curative resection or local treatment and with/without previous sorafenib treatment. This analysis included all sorafenib-experienced patients in the intent-to-treat (ITT) overall population and Asian cohort. The analysis cut-off date was March 2018. RESULTS: There were 182 and 85 patients in the ITT population and Asian cohort, respectively. In both populations, most patients were older than 60 years, had BCLC (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer) Stage C disease, and had received previous systemic therapy. A higher percentage of Asian patients had HBV infections, extrahepatic metastases and prior therapies. Median follow-up was 31.6 and 31.3 months for the ITT and Asian patients, respectively. Objective response rates were 14% and 15% in the ITT population and Asian cohort, respectively. In the Asian cohort, patients with HBV, HCV or those who were uninfected had objective response rates of 13%, 14% and 21%, respectively. The median duration of response was longer in the ITT (19.4 months) vs. Asian patients (9.7 months). Median overall survival was similar between the ITT (15.1 months) and Asian patients (14.9 months), and unaffected by aetiology in Asian patients. The nivolumab safety profile was similar and manageable across both populations. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab safety and efficacy are comparable between sorafenib-experienced ITT and Asian patients. LAY SUMMARY: The CheckMate 040 study evaluated the safety and efficacy of nivolumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who were refractory to previous sorafenib treatment or chemotherapy. This subanalysis of the data showed that treatment responses and safety in patients in Asia were similar to those of the overall treatment population, providing support for nivolumab as a treatment option for these patients. Clinical trial number: NCT01658878.

A Phase III Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Paclitaxel Versus Irinotecan in Patients with Metastatic or Recurrent Gastric Cancer Who Failed in First-line Therapy (KCSG ST10-01).

LESSONS LEARNED: Irinotecan could not be proven noninferior to paclitaxel as a second-line treatment for patients with metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer.The failure to demonstrate noninferiority may have been a result of insufficient patient enrollment.Both agents were tolerable but showed different toxicity profiles. BACKGROUND: This phase III study compared the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel versus irinotecan in patients with metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer (MRGC) who had experienced disease progression following first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive either paclitaxel (70 mg/m2; days 1, 8, 15, every 4 weeks) or irinotecan (150 mg/m2 every other week). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: This study was stopped early due to low accrual rate. A total of 112 patients were enrolled; 54 were allocated to paclitaxel and 58 to irinotecan. Median PFS for the paclitaxel and irinotecan groups was 3.5 and 2.1 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-1.88; p = .234). Noninferiority of irinotecan to paclitaxel was not proved because the upper boundary of the 95% CI (1.88) exceeded the predefined upper margin of noninferiority (1.32). Median overall survival (OS) was 8.6 months in the paclitaxel group and 7.0 months in the irinotecan group (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.91-2.11; p = .126). Among toxicities greater than or equal to grade 3, neutropenia (11.5%) was the most common, followed by peripheral neuropathy (7.7%) in the paclitaxel group, and neutropenia (34.5%) followed by nausea, vomiting, and anemia (8.6%, respectively) in the irinotecan group. CONCLUSION: Although paclitaxel showed numerically longer PFS and OS compared with irinotecan, this was statistically insignificant. Both irinotecan and paclitaxel are valid second-line treatment options in MRGC.

Association of pathway mutation with survival after recurrence in colorectal cancer patients treated with adjuvant fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Although the prognostic biomarkers associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) survival are well known, there are limited data on the association between the molecular characteristics and survival after recurrence (SAR). The purpose of this study was to assess the association between pathway mutations and SAR. METHODS: Of the 516 patients with stage III or high risk stage II CRC patients treated with surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy, 87 who had distant recurrence were included in the present study. We analyzed the association between SAR and mutations of 40 genes included in the five critical pathways of CRC (WNT, P53, RTK-RAS, TGF-ß, and PI3K). RESULTS: Mutation of genes within the WNT, P53, RTK-RAS, TGF-ß, and PI3K pathways were shown in 69(79.3%), 60(69.0%), 57(65.5%), 21(24.1%), and 19(21.8%) patients, respectively. Patients with TGF-ß pathway mutation were younger and had higher incidence of mucinous adenocarcinoma (MAC) histology and microsatellite instability-high. TGF-ß pathway mutation (median SAR of 21.6 vs. 44.4 months, p = 0.021) and MAC (20.0 vs. 44.4 months, p = 0.003) were associated with poor SAR, and receiving curative resection after recurrence was associated with favorable SAR (Not reached vs. 23.6 months, p <  0.001). Mutations in genes within other critical pathways were not associated with SAR. When MAC was excluded as a covariate, multivariate analysis revealed TGF-ß pathway mutation and curative resection after distant recurrence as an independent prognostic factor for SAR. The impact of TGF-ß pathway mutations were predicted using the PROVEAN, SIFT, and PolyPhen-2. Among 25 mutations, 23(92.0%)-24(96.0%) mutations were predicted to be damaging mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Mutation in genes within TGF-ß pathway may have negative prognostic role for SAR in CRC. Other pathway mutations were not associated with SAR.

Nivolumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate 040): an open-label, non-comparative, phase 1/2 dose escalation and expansion trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, sorafenib is the only approved drug worldwide, and outcomes remain poor. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of nivolumab, a programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitor, in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with or without chronic viral hepatitis. METHODS: We did a phase 1/2, open-label, non-comparative, dose escalation and expansion trial (CheckMate 040) of nivolumab in adults (≥18 years) with histologically confirmed advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with or without hepatitis C or B (HCV or HBV) infection. Previous sorafenib treatment was allowed. A dose-escalation phase was conducted at seven hospitals or academic centres in four countries or territories (USA, Spain, Hong Kong, and Singapore) and a dose-expansion phase was conducted at an additional 39 sites in 11 countries (Canada, UK, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan). At screening, eligible patients had Child-Pugh scores of 7 or less (Child-Pugh A or B7) for the dose-escalation phase and 6 or less (Child-Pugh A) for the dose-expansion phase, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less. Patients with HBV infection had to be receiving effective antiviral therapy (viral load <100 IU/mL); antiviral therapy was not required for patients with HCV infection. We excluded patients previously treated with an agent targeting T-cell costimulation or checkpoint pathways. Patients received intravenous nivolumab 0·1-10 mg/kg every 2 weeks in the dose-escalation phase (3+3 design). Nivolumab 3 mg/kg was given every 2 weeks in the dose-expansion phase to patients in four cohorts: sorafenib untreated or intolerant without viral hepatitis, sorafenib progressor without viral hepatitis, HCV infected, and HBV infected. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability for the escalation phase and objective response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1) for the expansion phase. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01658878. FINDINGS: Between Nov 26, 2012, and Aug 8, 2016, 262 eligible patients were treated (48 patients in the dose-escalation phase and 214 in the dose-expansion phase). 202 (77%) of 262 patients have completed treatment and follow-up is ongoing. During dose escalation, nivolumab showed a manageable safety profile, including acceptable tolerability. In this phase, 46 (96%) of 48 patients discontinued treatment, 42 (88%) due to disease progression. Incidence of treatment-related adverse events did not seem to be associated with dose and no maximum tolerated dose was reached. 12 (25%) of 48 patients had grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events. Three (6%) patients had treatment-related serious adverse events (pemphigoid, adrenal insufficiency, liver disorder). 30 (63%) of 48 patients in the dose-escalation phase died (not determined to be related to nivolumab therapy). Nivolumab 3 mg/kg was chosen for dose expansion. The objective response rate was 20% (95% CI 15-26) in patients treated with nivolumab 3 mg/kg in the dose-expansion phase and 15% (95% CI 6-28) in the dose-escalation phase. INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab had a manageable safety profile and no new signals were observed in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Durable objective responses show the potential of nivolumab for treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.