Blood serum amyloid A as potential biomarker of pembrolizumab efficacy for patients affected by advanced non-small cell lung cancer overexpressing PD-L1: results of the exploratory "FoRECATT" study.

BACKGROUND: Identifying the patients who may benefit the most from immune checkpoints inhibitors remains a great challenge for clinicians. Here we investigate on blood serum amyloid A (SAA) as biomarker of response to upfront pembrolizumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% receiving upfront pembrolizumab (P cohort) and with PD-L1 0-49% treated with chemotherapy (CT cohort) were evaluated for blood SAA and radiological response at baseline and every 9 weeks. Endpoints were response rate (RR) according to RECIST1.1, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The most accurate SAA cut-off to predict response was established with ROC analysis in the P cohort. RESULTS: In the P Cohort (n = 42), the overall RR was 38%. After a median follow-up of 18.5 months (mo), baseline SAA ≤ the ROC-derived cut-off (29.9 mg/L; n = 28/42.67%) was significantly associated with higher RR (53.6 versus 7.1%; OR15, 95% CI 1.72-130.7, p = 0.009), longer PFS (17.4 versus 2.1 mo; p < 0.0001) and OS (not reached versus 7.2mo; p < 0.0001) compared with SAA > 29.9 mg/L. In multivariate analysis, low SAA positively affects PFS (p = 0.001) and OS (p = 0.048) irrespective of ECOG PS, number of metastatic sites and pleural effusion. SAA monitoring (n = 40) was also significantly associated with survival endpoints: median PFS 17.4 versus 2.1 mo and median OS not reached versus 7.2 mo when SAA remained low (n = 14) and high (n = 12), respectively. In the CT Cohort (n = 30), RR was not affected by SAA level (p > 0.05) while low SAA at baseline (n = 17) was associated with better PFS (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16-0.90, p = 0.006) and OS (HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09-0.67, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Low SAA predicts good survival outcomes irrespective of treatment for advanced NSCLC patients and higher likelihood of response to upfront pembrolizumab only. The strong prognostic value might be exploited to easily identify patients most likely to benefit from immunotherapy. A further study (FoRECATT-2) is ongoing to confirm results in a larger sample size and to investigate the effect of SAA on immune response in vitro assays.

Efficacy of third-line anti-EGFR-based treatment versus regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil according to primary tumor site in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

Background: Right- (R) and left-sided (L) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) exhibit different clinical and molecular features. Several retrospective analyses showed that survival benefit of anti-EGFR-based therapy is limited to RAS/BRAF wt L-sided mCRC patients. Few data are available about third-line anti-EGFR efficacy according to primary tumor site. Methods: RAS/BRAF wt patients mCRC treated with third-line anti-EGFR-based therapy versus regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil (R/T) were retrospectively collected. The objective of the analysis was to compare treatment efficacy according to tumor site. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate (RR) and toxicity. Results: A total of 76 RAS/BRAF wt mCRC patients, treated with third-line anti-EGFR-based therapy or R/T, were enrolled. Of those, 19 (25%) patients had a R-sided tumor (9 patients received anti-EGFR treatment and 10 patients R/T) and 57 (75%) patients had a L-sided tumor (30 patients received anti-EGFR treatment and 27 patients R/T). A significant PFS [7.2 vs 3.6 months, HR 0.43 (95% CI 0.2-0.76), p= 0.004] and OS benefit [14.9 vs 10.9 months, HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.28-0.98), p= 0.045] in favor of anti-EGFR therapy vs R/T was observed in the L-sided tumor group. No difference in PFS and OS was observed in the R-sided tumor group. A significant interaction according to primary tumor site and third-line regimen was observed for PFS (p= 0.05). RR was significantly higher in L-sided patients treated with anti-EGFR vs R/T (43% vs. 0%; p <0.0001), no difference was observed in R-sided patients. At the multivariate analysis, third-line regimen was independently associated with PFS in L-sided patients. Conclusions: Our results demonstrated a different benefit from third-line anti-EGFR-based therapy according to primary tumor site, confirming the role of L-sided tumor in predicting benefit from third-line anti-EGFR vs R/T. At the same time, no difference was observed in R-sided tumor.

Treatment Settings and Outcomes with Regorafenib and Trifluridine/Tipiracil at Third-Line Treatment and beyond in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Real-World Multicenter Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with refractory mCRC rarely undergo third-line or subsequent treatment. This strategy could negatively impact their survival. In this setting, regorafenib (R) and trifluridine/tipiracil (T) are two key new treatment options with statistically significant improvements in overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease control with different tolerance profiles. This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of these agents in real-world practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 2012-2022, 866 patients diagnosed with mCRC who received sequential R and T (T/R, n = 146; R/T, n = 116]) or T (n = 325]) or R (n = 279) only were retrospectively recruited from 13 Italian cancer institutes. RESULTS: The median OS is significantly longer in the R/T group (15.9 months) than in the T/R group (13.9 months) (p = 0.0194). The R/T sequence had a statistically significant advantage in the mPFS, which was 8.8 months with T/R vs. 11.2 months with R/T (p = 0.0005). We did not find significant differences in outcomes between groups receiving T or R only. A total of 582 grade 3/4 toxicities were recorded. The frequency of grade 3/4 hand-foot skin reactions was higher in the R/T sequence compared to the reverse sequence (37.3% vs. 7.4%) (p = 0.01), while grade 3/4 neutropenia was slightly lower in the R/T group than in the T/R group (66.2% vs. 78.2%) (p = 0.13). Toxicities in the non-sequential groups were similar and in line with previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: The R/T sequence resulted in a significantly longer OS and PFS and improved disease control compared with the reverse sequence. R and T given not sequentially have similar impacts on survival. More data are needed to define the best sequence and to explore the efficacy of sequential (T/R or R/T) treatment combined with molecular-targeted drugs.

Retrospective Correlation between First Drug Treatment Duration and Survival Outcomes in Sequential Treatment with Regorafenib and Trifluridine/Tipiracil in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Real-World Subgroup Analysis.

Background: Patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) rarely receive third-line or further treatment. In this context, regorafenib (R) and trifluridine/tipiracil (T) are two important novel therapeutic choices with statistically significant increases in overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease control, with different toxicity profiles. This study is a subgroup analysis of our larger retrospective study, already published, whose objective was to assess the outcomes of patients when R and T were given sequentially. Patients and Methods: The study involved thirteen Italian cancer centers on a 10-year retrospective observation (2012-2022). In this subgroup analysis, we focused our attention on the correlation between the first drug treatment duration (<3 months, 3 to <6 months and ≥6 months) and survival outcomes in patients who had received the sequence regorafenib-to-trifluridine/tipiracil, or vice versa. Results: The initial study included 866 patients with mCRC who received sequential T/R, or R/T, or T or R alone. This analysis is focused on evaluating the impact of the duration of the first treatment in the sequence on clinical outcomes (OS, PFS) and includes 146 and 116 patients of the T/R and R/T sequences, respectively. Based on the duration of the first drug treatment, subgroups for the T/R sequence included 27 patients (18.4%) who received T for <3 months, 86 (58.9%) treated for 3 to <6 months, and 33 (22.6%) treated for ≥6 months; in the reverse sequence (R as the first drug), subgroups included 18 patients (15.5%) who received their first treatment for <3 months, 62 (53.4%) treated for 3 to <6 months, and 35 (31.0%) treated for ≥6 months. In patients who received their first drug treatment for a period of 3 to <6 months, the R/T sequence had a significantly longer median OS (13.7 vs. 10.8 months, p = 0.0069) and a longer median PFS (10.8 vs. 8.5 months, p = 0.0003) than the T/R group. There were no statistically significant differences between groups with first drug treatment durations of <3 months and ≥6 months. Conclusions: Our analysis seems to suggest that the administration of R for a period of 3 to <6 months before that of T can prolong both OS and PFS, as compared to the opposite sequence.

PTEN Loss as a Predictor of Tumor Heterogeneity and Poor Prognosis in Patients With EGFR-mutant Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer Receiving Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Rapid disease progression of patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been recently associated with tumor heterogeneity, which may be mirrored by coexisting concomitant alterations. The aim of this analysis was to investigate the correlation between loss of function of PTEN and the efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in this population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Archival tumor blocks from patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC who were administered upfront tyrosine kinase inhibitors were retrospectively collected. The status of 4 genes (PTEN, TP53, c-MET, IGFR) was evaluated by immunohistochemistry, and it was correlated with overall response rate, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were included. In multivariate analysis, PTEN loss (hazard ratio [HR], 3.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.56-7.66; P = .002), IGFR overexpression (HR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.03-4.77; P = .04), liver metastases (HR, 3.55; 95% CI, 1.46-8.65; P = .005), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≥ 1 (HR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.04-6.34; P = .04) were significantly associated with shorter PFS. Patients with PTEN loss had a median PFS of 6 months (2-year PFS, 11.6%), whereas patients without PTEN loss had a median PFS of 18 months (2-year PFS, 43.6%) (log-rank P < .005). In the multivariate analysis, PTEN loss (HR, 5.92; 95% CI, 2.37-14.81; P < .005), liver metastases (HR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.06-6.51; P = .037), and ECOG PS ≥ 1 (HR, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.15-6.81; P = .024) were significantly associated with shorter OS. Patients with PTEN loss had a median OS of 6 months (2-year OS, 12.2%), whereas in patients without PTEN loss, OS was not reached (2-year OS, 63.9%) (log-rank P < .0005). CONCLUSIONS: A low-cost and reproducible immunohistochemistry assay for PTEN loss analysis represents a potential tool for identifying tumor heterogeneity in patients with advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC.

Clinical, Pathological and Prognostic Features of Rare BRAF Mutations in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC): A Bi-Institutional Retrospective Analysis (REBUS Study).

Recently, retrospective analysis began to shed light on metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) harboring rare BRAF non-V600 mutations, documenting a distinct phenotype and a favorable prognosis. This study aimed to confirm features and prognosis of rare BRAF non-V600 mCRCs compared to BRAF V600E and BRAF wild-type mCRCs treated at two Italian Institutions. Overall, 537 cases were retrospectively evaluated: 221 RAS/BRAF wild-type, 261 RAS mutated, 46 BRAF V600E and 9 BRAF non-V600. Compared to BRAF V600E mCRC, BRAF non-V600 mCRC were more frequently left-sided, had a lower tumor burden and displayed a lower grade and an MMR proficient/MSS status. In addition, non-V600 mCRC patients underwent more frequently to resection of metastases with radical intent. Median overall survival (mOS) was significantly longer in the non-V600 compared to the V600E group. At multivariate analysis, only age < 65 years and ECOG PS 0 were identified as independent predictors of better OS. BRAF V600E mCRCs showed a statistically significant worse mOS when compared to BRAF wild-type mCRCs, whereas no significant difference was observed between BRAF non-V600 and BRAF wild-type mCRCs. Our study corroborates available evidence concerning incidence, clinicopathologic characteristics and prognosis of BRAF-mutated mCRCs.

Clinicians' Attitude to Doublet Plus Anti-EGFR Versus Triplet Plus Bevacizumab as First-line Treatment in Left-Sided RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Multicenter, "Real-Life", Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Doublets plus antiepidermal growth factor receptors monoclonal antibodies (EGFRi) are widely considered the preferable first-line regimen in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), resulting superior in terms of activity and efficacy compared to doublets plus bevacizumab. However, data comparing doublet plus EGFRi and triplet plus bevacizumab are lacking, and the relative benefit of an intensive regimen plus an antiangiogenic backbone in this population is debated. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective study aimed at evaluating clinicians' attitude to triplet-bevacizumab and doublet-EGFRi as first-line regimen in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated in clinical practice at 22 Oncology Units from March 2012 to October 2020. A random case-control matching was performed to compare activity (ORR), and effectiveness (PFS, OS, secondary resection rate of metastases with curative intent) between triplet-bevacizumab and doublet-EGFRi, on the basis of ECOG-PS, age, gender, and burden of disease. RESULTS: A total of 718 patients were consecutively treated with doublet-EGFRi (686, 95.5%) or triplet-bevacizumab (32, 4.5%). After case-control matching, median PFS was 13.6 (95% CI, 8.9-31.7) and 16.1 (95% CI, 12.1-36.8) months (P= .621), while median OS was 30.2 (95% CI, 14.4-69.5) and 38.1 (95% CI, 33.1-101.1) months (P= .0283) in the doublet-EGFRi and the triplet-bevacizumab cohort, respectively. The ORR was 65.6% and 90.6% (P= .016), while the secondary resection rate was 18.8% and 46.9% (P= .016), in the doublet-EGFRi and the triplet-bevacizumab cohort, respectively. Triplet-bevacizumab was associated with a higher incidence of G3/G4 neutropenia (25.0% vs. 12.5%, P= .041). CONCLUSION: Although a doublet-EGFRi remains the recommended upfront regimen in patients with left-sided RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC, our real life data suggest a triplet-bevacizumab might be at least equally active and effective in properly selected cases.

Oncogene-Addicted Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Treatment Opportunities and Future Perspectives.

Before the introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for a particular subgroup of patients, despite platinum-based combination chemotherapy, the majority of patients affected by non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) did not live longer than one year. With deeper understanding of tumor molecular biology, treatment of NSCLC has progressively entered the era of treatment customization according to tumor molecular characteristics, as well as histology. All this information allowed the development of personalized molecular targeted therapies. A series of studies have shown that, in some cases, cancer cells can grow and survive as result of the presence of a single driver genomic abnormality. This phenomenon, called oncogene-addiction, more often occurs in adenocarcinoma histology, in non-smokers (except BRAF mutations, also frequent in smoking patients), young, and female patients. Several different driver mutations have been identified and many studies have clearly shown that upfront TKI monotherapy may improve the overall outcome of these patients. The greater efficacy of these drugs is also associated with a better tolerability and safety than chemotherapy, with fewer side effects and an extremely good compliance to treatment. The most frequent oncogene-addicted disease is represented by those tumors carrying a mutation of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). The development of first, second and third generation TKIs against EGFR mutations have dramatically changed the prognosis of these patients. Currently, osimertinib (which demonstrated to improve efficacy with a better tolerability in comparison with first-generation TKIs) is considered the best treatment option for patients affected by NSCLC harboring a common EGFR mutation. EML4-ALK-driven disease (which gene re-arrangement occurs in 3-7% of NSCLC), has demonstrated to be significantly targeted by specific TKIs, which have improved outcome in comparison with chemotherapy. To date, alectinib is considered the best treatment option for these patients, with other newer agents upcoming. Other additional driver abnormalities, such as ROS1, BRAF, MET, RET and NTRK, have been identified as a target mirroring peculiar vulnerability to specific agents. Oncogene-addicted disease typically has a low early resistance rate, but late acquired resistance always develops and therefore therapy needs to be changed when progression occurs. In this narrative review, the state of art of scientific literature about targeted therapy options in oncogene-addicted disease is summarized and critically discussed. We also aim to analyze future perspectives to maximize benefits for this subgroup of patients.