Biomarker Testing Trends in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Who Live in Rural Areas and Urban Clusters in the US.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on biomarker testing rates in rural populations with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). To assess biomarker testing practices, oncologists in rural areas and urban clusters in the US were surveyed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A web-based survey was administered to oncologists spending ≥40% of their time practicing in rural areas or urban clusters and who had treated ≥2 patients with stage IV mCRC in the prior month. RESULTS: Ninety-nine oncologists completed the quantitative survey and 17 the qualitative interview. Among respondents, 97% reported ordering biomarker tests. Oncologists reported testing for KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, HER2, and mismatch repair deficiency/microsatellite instability in 72%, 65%, 63%, 56%, and 66% of patients with metastatic disease, respectively. Forty-one percent reported performing reflex testing. The most cited testing barriers were lack of insurance coverage, insufficient tissue samples, and long turnaround times. CONCLUSION: Further assessment of rural testing practices is needed.

Rectal Cancer: Clinical and Molecular Predictors of a Complete Response to Total Neoadjuvant Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Total neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer may increase pathological complete response rates, potentially allowing for a nonoperative approach. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify patient and tumor characteristics that predict a complete response following total neoadjuvant therapy. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a university-based National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. PATIENTS: The patients include those with stage 2 or 3 rectal adenocarcinoma. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions included total neoadjuvant therapy, total mesorectal excision, and nonoperative management. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Complete response was defined as either patients with a clinical complete response undergoing nonoperative management who remained cancer-free or patients undergoing surgery with a pathological complete response. RESULTS: Among 102 patients, median age was 54 years, 69% were male, median carcinoembryonic antigen level was 3.0 ng/mL, and the median distance of the tumor above the anorectal ring was 3 cm. Thirty-eight (37%) patients had a complete response, including 15 of 18 (83%) nonoperative patients who remained cancer free at a median of 22 months (range, 7-48 months) and 23 of 84 (27%) patients who underwent surgery and had a pathological complete response. The incomplete response group consisted of 61 patients who underwent initial surgery and 3 nonoperative patients with regrowth. There were no differences in gender, T-stage, or tumor location between groups. Younger age (median, 49 vs 55 years), normal carcinoembryonic antigen (71% vs 41%), clinical node-negative (24% vs 9%), smaller tumors (median 3.9 vs 5.4 cm), and wild-type p53 (79% vs 47%) and SMAD4 (100% vs 81%) were more likely to have a complete response (all p < 0.05). LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study with a small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with rectal cancer treated with total neoadjuvant therapy, more than one-third will achieve a pathological complete response or sustained clinical complete response with nonoperative management, making oncological resection superfluous in these patients. Smaller, wild-type p53 and SMAD4, and clinically node-negative cancers are predictive features of a complete response. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B889 . CNCER DE RECTO PREDICTORES CLNICOS Y MOLECULARES DE UNA RESPUESTA COMPLETA A LA TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE TOTAL: ANTECEDENTES:La terapia neoadyuvante total en el cáncer de recto puede aumentar las tasas de respuesta patológica completa y permitir potencialmente un enfoque no quirúrgico.OBJETIVO:El objetivo fue identificar las características tanto del paciente y del tumor que logren predecir una respuesta completa después de la terapia neoadyuvante total.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Este estudio se realizó en un Centro Integral de Cáncer designado por el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer con sede universitaria.PACIENTES:Los pacientes incluyen aquellos con adenocarcinoma de recto en estadio 2 o 3.INTERVENCIONES:Terapia neoadyuvante total, escisión total del mesorrecto, manejo conservador no quirúrgico.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La respuesta completa se definió como pacientes con una respuesta clínica completa sometidos a tratamiento no quirúrgico que permanecieron libres de cáncer o pacientes sometidos a cirugía con una respuesta patológica completa.RESULTADOS:Entre 102 pacientes, la mediana de edad fue de 54 años, el 69% fueron hombres, la mediana del nivel de antígeno carcinoembrionario fue de 3.0 ng/ml y la mediana de la distancia del tumor por encima del anillo anorrectal fue de 3 cm. Thirty-eight (37%) pacientes tuvieron una respuesta completa que incluyó a 15 de 18 (83%) pacientes con manejo no operatorio y que permanecieron libres de cáncer en una mediana de 22 meses (rango 7- 48 meses) y 23 de 84 (27%) pacientes que fueron sometidos a cirugía y tuvieron una respuesta patológica completa. El grupo de respuesta incompleta consistió en 61 pacientes que fueron sometidos inicialmente a cirugía y 3 pacientes no quirúrgicos con recrecimiento. No se encontró diferencias de género, estadio T o ubicación del tumor entre los grupos. Edad más joven (mediana 49 frente a 55), antígeno carcinoembrionario normal (71% frente a 41%), ganglios clínicos negativos (24% frente a 9%), tumores más pequeños (mediana de 3,9 frente a 5,4 cm) y p53 de tipo salvaje (79 % vs 47%) y SMAD4 (100% vs 81%) tenían más probabilidades de tener una respuesta completa (todos p < 0,05).LIMITACIONES:Este fue un estudio retrospectivo y con un tamaño de muestra pequeño.CONCLUSIONES:En pacientes con cáncer de recto tratados con terapia neoadyuvante total, más de un tercio logrará una respuesta patológica completa o una respuesta clínica completa sostenida con manejo no operatorio, logrando que la resección oncológica sea superflua en estos pacientes. Los cánceres más pequeños, clínicamente con ganglios negativos, con p53 de tipo salvaje y SMAD4, son características predictoras de una respuesta completa. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B889 . (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto ).

Informational Needs of Surgical Oncology Patients: A Cross-Sectional Patient Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Patients newly diagnosed with cancer often seek information prior to being seen by a specialist. Little is known about the type of information desired and the sources used. We asked how patients find information about their new cancer diagnoses to improve information provision. METHODS: An anonymous seven-question survey was provided to new patients in the surgical and medical oncology clinics at a comprehensive cancer center from February 2021 to June 2021. RESULTS: Of 503 consecutive patients, 405 (81%) returned surveys; 49% female, 57% aged 51-75 y, and 71% Caucasian. Many (74%) sought information before their visit. Most (57%) relied on prior medical providers and 77% reported them as a trusted source. Nearly 80% of patients used at least one nonvalidated resource; 21% friends and relatives, 20% nongovernment or hospital resources, and 12% social media. Importantly, 23% found conflicting information. Respondents desired information on cancer treatment (58%), alternative therapies (35%), and nutrition and supplements (31%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer trust information from medical providers but seek information from a variety of sources that can provide conflicting information. These data support encouraging patients to use validated sources, providing robust organization-based resources, and engaging patients on topics such as alternative therapies and nutrition.

Podcast article: Biomarker testing in colorectal cancer.

Christopher Lieu, co-director of gastrointestinal medical oncology and the associate director for clinical research at the University of Colorado Cancer Center (CO, USA) discusses the importance of biomarker testing in metastatic colorectal cancer to inform personalized patient care.

A comprehensive framework for early-onset colorectal cancer research.

Sporadic colorectal cancer has traditionally been viewed as a malignancy of older individuals. However, as the global prevalence of the disease diagnosed in younger individuals (<50 years) is expected to increase within the next decade, greater recognition is now being given to early-onset colorectal cancer. The cause of the predicted rise in prevalence is largely unknown and probably multifactorial. In this Series paper, we discuss the potential underlying causes of early-onset colorectal cancer, the role of energy balance, biological and genomic mechanisms (including microbiome aspects), and the treatment of early-onset colorectal cancer. We have specifically considered the psychosocial challenges of being diagnosed with colorectal cancer at younger age and the potential financial toxicity that might ensue. This Series paper brings a comprehensive review based on the existing data in the hopes of optimising the overall outcomes for patients with early-onset colorectal cancer.

ATM kinase inhibitor AZD0156 in combination with irinotecan and 5-fluorouracil in preclinical models of colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: AZD0156 is an oral inhibitor of ATM, a serine threonine kinase that plays a key role in DNA damage response (DDR) associated with double-strand breaks. Topoisomerase-I inhibitor irinotecan is used clinically to treat colorectal cancer (CRC), often in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5FU). AZD0156 in combination with irinotecan and 5FU was evaluated in preclinical models of CRC to determine whether low doses of AZD0156 enhance the cytotoxicity of irinotecan in chemotherapy regimens used in the clinic. METHODS: Anti-proliferative effects of single-agent AZD0156, the active metabolite of irinotecan (SN38), and combination therapy were evaluated in 12 CRC cell lines. Additional assessment with clonogenic assay, cell cycle analysis, and immunoblotting were performed in 4 selected cell lines. Four colorectal cancer patient derived xenograft (PDX) models were treated with AZD0156, irinotecan, or 5FU alone and in combination for assessment of tumor growth inhibition (TGI). Immunofluorescence was performed on tumor tissues. The DDR mutation profile was compared across in vitro and in vivo models. RESULTS: Enhanced effects on cellular proliferation and regrowth were observed with the combination of AZD0156 and SN38 in select models. In cell cycle analysis of these models, increased G2/M arrest was observed with combination treatment over either single agent. Immunoblotting results suggest an increase in DDR associated with irinotecan therapy, with a reduced effect noted when combined with AZD0156, which is more pronounced in some models. Increased TGI was observed with the combination of AZD0156 and irinotecan as compared to single-agent therapy in some PDX models. The DDR mutation profile was variable across models. CONCLUSIONS: AZD0156 and irinotecan provide a rational and active combination in preclinical colorectal cancer models. Variability across in vivo and in vitro results may be related to the variable DDR mutation profiles of the models evaluated. Further understanding of the implications of individual DDR mutation profiles may help better identify patients more likely to benefit from treatment with the combination of AZD0156 and irinotecan in the clinical setting.

Minimal Residual Disease-Directed Adjuvant Therapy for Patients With Early-Stage Colon Cancer: CIRCULATE-US.

BACKGROUND: The ability to detect circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), a novel surrogate for minimal residual disease (MRD) for patients with solid tumors, has significantly evolved over the past decade. Several studies have shown that ctDNA may provide clinical insight into the biological dynamics of MRD. The CIRCULATE-US (NRG-GI008; NCT05174169) trial will aim to address the role of ctDNA for risk stratification to intensify and deintensify adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with early-stage colon cancer. METHODS: CIRCULATE-US, a prospective phase 2/3 randomized trial, is investigating the molecular dynamics and prognostic role of ctDNA (evaluated by Natera's Signatera assay) for patients with resected colon cancer. Patients with negative postoperative ctDNA will be enrolled in cohort A and randomized to receive either immediate treatment with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX6 or CAPEOX; Arm 1) or serial ctDNA surveillance with delayed adjuvant therapy (Arm 2). Patients randomized to Arm 2 with subsequent positive ctDNA results will be enrolled in cohort B for a second randomization to receive either FOLFOX6/CAPEOX (Arm 3) or 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRINOX; Arm 4) for 6 months. Patients with positive postoperative ctDNA results will be directly enrolled in cohort B and randomized to receive either FOLFOX6/CAPEOX (Arm 3) or FOLFIRINOX (Arm 4). Patients with stage II or stage IIIC colon cancer with positive ctDNA results (tested as standard of care with commercial testing) will be eligible for enrollment in cohort B. The primary end point for cohort A is time to positive ctDNA status for phase 2 and disease-free survival for phase 3 with a noninferiority design. The primary end point for cohort B is disease-free survival for both phase 2 and phase 3 with a superiority design. DISCUSSION: CIRCULATE-US will aim to understand postoperative ctDNA dynamics in early-stage colon cancer and will investigate escalation and de-escalation approaches by using ctDNA status as a surrogate for MRD status.

The Volume-Outcome Effect Calls for Centralization of Care in Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: Results From a Large National Cancer Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Using the National Cancer Database, we assessed the relationship between facility overall esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) case volume and survival. METHODS: We categorized facilities into volume quintiles based on annual EAC patient volume and performed a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression between facility patient volume and survival. RESULTS: In a cohort of 116,675 patients, facilities with higher vs lower (≥25 vs 1-4 cases) annual EAC patient volume demonstrated improved survival (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.80. 95% confidence interval: 0.70-0.91). DISCUSSION: This robust volume-outcome effect calls for centralization of care for EAC patients at high annual case volume facilities.

A Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of Linsitinib (OSI-906), a Small-Molecule Dual Insulin-Like Growth Factor-1 Receptor/Insulin Receptor Kinase Inhibitor, in Combination with Irinotecan in Patients with Advanced Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: The maximum tolerated dose of the combination of linsitinib and irinotecan is linsitinib 450 mg daily on days 1-3 every 7 days and irinotecan 125 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle.The adverse effects associated with the combination are not significantly increased beyond what is expected of each drug as a single agent.Multiple negative trials of insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor inhibitors performed in unselected patient populations led to the early discontinuation of linistinib development and this trial.Earlier integration of assessment of potential predictive biomarkers into clinical trials, as was planned in this study, is vital to the development of targeted therapies in oncology. BACKGROUND: This phase I dose-escalation study was designed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of the combination of irinotecan and insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor (IGF-1R) inhibitor linsitinib in patients with advanced cancer refractory to standard therapy. METHODS: Dose escalation in three specified dose levels was performed according to a standard 3 + 3 design. Dose levels were as follows: (a) linsitinib 400 mg and irinotecan 100 mg/m2, (b) linsitinib 450 mg and irinotecan 100 mg/m2, and (c) linsitinib 450 mg and irinotecan 125 mg/m2. Linisitinib was administered once daily on days 1-3, 8-10, and 15-17, and irinotecan on days 1 and 8. Assessment of a candidate predictive biomarker was planned in all patients, with further evaluation in an expansion cohort of advanced colorectal cancer. RESULTS: A total of 17 patients were treated, with 1 patient in both cohort 2 and 3 experiencing dose-limiting toxicity. Linsitinib 450 mg and irinotecan 125 mg/m2 was the maximum tolerated dose. Sixteen (94%) patients experienced at least one treatment-related adverse event. Neutropenia was the only grade >3 toxicity (4%). No significant hyperglycemia or QT interval prolongation was noted. No objective responses were observed; 47% (n = 8) had stable disease with median duration of 5.25 months. CONCLUSION: Although the combination was determined safe, the study was halted due to termination of linsitinib development, and biomarker testing was not performed.

Adjuvant radiotherapy improves overall survival in patients with resected gastric adenocarcinoma: A National Cancer Data Base analysis.

BACKGROUND: For patients with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma, perioperative chemotherapy and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) are considered standard options. In the current study, the authors used the National Cancer Data Base to compare overall survival (OS) between these regimens. METHODS: Patients who underwent gastrectomy for nonmetastatic gastric adenocarcinoma from 2004 through 2012 were divided into those treated with perioperative chemotherapy without RT versus those treated with adjuvant CRT. Survival was estimated and compared using univariate and multivariate models adjusted for patient and tumor characteristics, surgical margin status, and the number of lymph nodes examined. Subset analyses were performed for factors chosen a priori, and potential interactions between treatment and covariates were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 3656 eligible patients were identified, 52% of whom underwent perioperative chemotherapy and 48% of whom received postoperative CRT. The median follow-up was 47 months, and the median age of the patients was 62 years. Analysis of the entire cohort demonstrated improved OS with adjuvant RT on both univariate (median of 51 months vs 42 months; P = .013) and multivariate (hazard ratio, 0.874; 95% confidence interval, 0.790-0.967 [P = .009]) analyses. Propensity score-matched analysis also demonstrated improved OS with adjuvant RT (median of 49 months vs 39 months; P = .033). On subset analysis, a significant interaction was observed between the survival impact of adjuvant RT and surgical margins, with a greater benefit of RT noted among patients with surgical margin-positive disease (hazard ratio with RT: 0.650 vs 0.952; P for interaction <.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this National Cancer Data Base analysis, the use of adjuvant RT in addition to chemotherapy was associated with a significant OS advantage for patients with resected gastric cancer. The survival advantage observed with adjuvant CRT was most pronounced among patients with positive surgical margins. Cancer 2017;123:3402-9. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

A Phase Ib Dose-Escalation Study of the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Cobimetinib and Duligotuzumab in Patients with Previously Treated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cancers with Mutant KRAS.

LESSONS LEARNED: Cobimetinib and duligotuzumab were well tolerated as single agents and in combination with other agents.The cobimetinib and duligotuzumab combination was associated with increased toxicity, most notably gastrointestinal, and limited efficacy in the patient population tested. BACKGROUND: KRAS-mutant tumors possess abnormal mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPK) pathway signaling, leading to dysregulated cell proliferation. Cobimetinib blocks MAPK signaling. The dual-action antibody duligotuzumab (MEHD7945A) inhibits ligand binding to both epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3). Blockade of EGFR/HER3 and inhibition of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MEK) in KRAS-mutant tumors may provide additive benefit. METHODS: Patients with KRAS-mutant solid tumors were eligible for this phase Ib dose-escalation study with a planned expansion phase. Duligotuzumab was given intravenously (IV) at 1,100 mg every 2 weeks (q2w), while cobimetinib was given orally in a standard 3 + 3 design to identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of this combination. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were enrolled. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) included grade 4 hypokalemia and grade 3 mucosal inflammation, asthenia, and dermatitis acneiform. Seventy percent of patients experienced grade 3 or worse adverse events (AEs). Five (22%) and 12 (52%) patients missed at least 1 dose of duligotuzumab and cobimetinib, respectively, and 9 (39%) patients required a cobimetinib dose reduction. Three (13%) patients discontinued due to an AE. Best response was limited to 9 patients with stable disease and 13 patients with progressive disease. CONCLUSION: Given the limited tolerability and efficacy of this combination, the study did not proceed to expansion stage and closed for enrollment.

The Multidisciplinary Approach to GI Cancer Results in Change of Diagnosis and Management of Patients. Multidisciplinary Care Impacts Diagnosis and Management of Patients.

BACKGROUND: The multidisciplinary approach to GI cancer is becoming more widespread as a result of multimodality therapy. At the University of Colorado Hospital (UCH), we utilize a formal multidisciplinary approach through specialized clinics across a variety of settings, including pancreas and biliary cancer, esophageal and gastric cancer, liver cancer and neuroendocrine tumors (NET), and colorectal cancer. Patients with these suspected diagnoses are seen in a multidisciplinary clinic. We evaluated whether implementation of disease-specific multidisciplinary programs resulted in a change in diagnosis and/or change in management for these patients. METHODS: Data from 1747 patients were prospectively collected from inception of each multidisciplinary program through December 31, 2015. Change in diagnosis was defined as a change in radiographic or endoscopic findings that resulted in a change in cancer stage or clinical diagnosis and/or a change in pathologic diagnosis. Reports of incidental findings unrelated to primary diagnosis on radiographic evaluation were also assessed, but not included in overall change in diagnosis findings. We further evaluated if patients had a change in the management of their disease compared with outside recommendations. RESULTS: Of 1747 patients evaluated, change occurred in 38 % (pancreas and biliary), 13 % (esophageal and gastric); 22 % (liver and NET), and 16 % (colorectal). Change in management for each multidisciplinary program occurred in 35 % (pancreas and biliary), 20 % (esophageal and gastric), 27 % (liver and NET), and 13 % (colorectal). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a multidisciplinary clinic to manage GI cancer has a substantial impact in change in diagnosis and/or management in more than one-third of patients evaluated.

Phase I trial of vandetanib in combination with gemcitabine and capecitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors with an expanded cohort in pancreatic and biliary cancers.

BACKGROUND: Vandetanib is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that affects vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGF), epidermal growth factor (EGF), and rearranged during transfection (RET) mediated receptors which are important for growth and invasion of biliary and pancreatic cancers. This phase I study evaluated the safety profile of vandetanib in combination with standard doses of gemcitabine and capecitabine in order to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). METHODS: In this single center phase I trial, patients received gemcitabine intravenously (i.v.) at 1000 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15 in a 28 day cycle, capecitabine orally at 850 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-21, and escalating doses of vandetanib (200 or 300 mg orally daily). Once the MTD was defined, an expansion cohort of patients with advanced biliary cancers and locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer was enrolled. Blood samples were also collected at predetermined time points for biomarker analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were enrolled: 9 in the dose escalation and 14 in the dose expansion cohort. One dose limiting toxicity (DLT), of grade 4 neutropenia, occurred in the 200 mg vandetanib cohort. The most common adverse effects were diarrhea (39 %), nausea and vomiting (34%), and rash (33%). There were 3 partial responses and stable disease of >2 months (range 2-45, median 5) was observed in 15/23 patients. There was no association between changes in biomarker analytes and disease response. CONCLUSION: The combination of gemcitabine, capecitabine and vandetanib is well tolerated at the recommended phase II dose of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 weekly for three consecutive weeks, capecitabine 850 mg/m2 BID days 1-21, and vandetanib 300 mg daily, every 28 days. This combination demonstrated promising activity in pancreaticobiliary cancers and further evaluation is warranted in these diseases. NCT00551096.

Targeting the WNT Signaling Pathway in Cancer Therapeutics.

The WNT signaling cascade is integral in numerous biological processes including embryonic development, cell cycle regulation, inflammation, and cancer. Hyperactivation of WNT signaling secondary to alterations to varying nodes of the pathway have been identified in multiple tumor types. These alterations converge into increased tumorigenicity, sustained proliferation, and enhanced metastatic potential. This review seeks to evaluate the evidence supporting the WNT pathway in cancer, the therapeutic strategies in modulating this pathway, and potential challenges in drug development.

Prolonged Response to Dabrafenib/Trametinib in Grade 3 Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor (NET G3) with BRAF V600E Mutation.

PURPOSE: Treatment of metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pancNETs), particularly grade 2 (G2) and grade 3 (G3), often presents a dilemma in choosing from multiple similarly efficacious therapies. Data on targeted therapies for these tumor types is limited, and this report presents BRAF-targeted therapy as a therapeutic option for metastatic pancNET G3. METHODS: This is a case report of a patient with G3 pancNET metastatic to the liver, lung, lymph node, and scalp (soft tissue) treated with dabrafenib/trametinib (D/T) in the presence of a BRAF V600E mutation detected in tumor tissue. RESULTS: This patient has demonstrated an ongoing partial response to therapy at all involved sites for nearly 15 months with minimal side effects attributable to D/T. CONCLUSION: Dabrafenib/trametinib therapy for BRAF-mutated metastatic pancNETs provides a novel treatment option and, especially in the G3 setting, should be considered a first-line option. Tumor testing for actionable mutations should be undertaken at the time of diagnosis and/or progression to identify novel therapeutic avenues in these rare tumors.

Population-level comparisons of gene regulatory networks modeled on high-throughput single-cell transcriptomics data.

Single-cell technologies enable high-resolution studies of phenotype-defining molecular mechanisms. However, data sparsity and cellular heterogeneity make modeling biological variability across single-cell samples difficult. Here we present SCORPION, a tool that uses a message-passing algorithm to reconstruct comparable gene regulatory networks from single-cell/nuclei RNA-sequencing data that are suitable for population-level comparisons by leveraging the same baseline priors. Using synthetic data, we found that SCORPION outperformed 12 existing gene regulatory network reconstruction techniques. Using supervised experiments, we show that SCORPION can accurately identify differences in regulatory networks between wild-type and transcription factor-perturbed cells. We demonstrate SCORPION's scalability to population-level analyses using a single-cell RNA-sequencing atlas containing 200,436 cells from colorectal cancer and adjacent healthy tissues. The differences between tumor regions detected by SCORPION are consistent across multiple cohorts as well as with our understanding of disease progression, and elucidate phenotypic regulators that may impact patient survival.

Pembrolizumab Plus mFOLFOX7 or FOLFIRI for Microsatellite Stable/Mismatch Repair-Proficient Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: KEYNOTE-651 Cohorts B and D.

BACKGROUND: The phase 1b KEYNOTE-651 study evaluated pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in microsatellite stable or mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with microsatellite stable or mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (previously untreated; cohort B) or 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (previously treated with fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin; cohort D) every 2 weeks. Primary end point was safety; investigator-assessed objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 was secondary and biomarker analysis was exploratory. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were enrolled in cohort B and 32 in cohort D; median follow-up was 30.2 and 33.5 months, respectively. One dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 small intestine obstruction) occurred in cohort D. In cohort B, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 18 patients (58%), most commonly neutropenia and decreased neutrophil count (n = 5 each). In cohort D, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 17 patients (53%), most commonly neutropenia (n = 7). No grade 5 treatment-related AEs occurred. Objective response rate was 61% in cohort B (KRAS wildtype: 71%; KRAS mutant: 53%) and 25% in cohort D (KRAS wildtype: 47%; KRAS mutant: 6%). In both cohorts, PD-L1 combined positive score and T-cell-inflamed gene expression profiles were higher and HER2 expression was lower in responders than nonresponders. No association between tumor mutational burden and response was observed. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin/5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan demonstrated an acceptable AE profile. Efficacy data appeared comparable with current standard of care (including by KRAS mutation status). Biomarker analyses were hypothesis-generating, warranting further exploration. GOV IDENTIFIER: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03374254.

Pembrolizumab Plus Binimetinib With or Without Chemotherapy for MSS/pMMR Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Outcomes From KEYNOTE-651 Cohorts A, C, and E.

BACKGROUND: Cohorts A, C, and E of the phase Ib KEYNOTE-651 study evaluated pembrolizumab + binimetinib ± chemotherapy in microsatellite stable/mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus binimetinib 30 mg twice daily alone (cohort A; previously treated with any chemotherapy) or with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (cohort C; previously untreated) or 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (cohort E; previously treated with 1 line of therapy including fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin-based regimen) every 2 weeks. Binimetinib dose-escalation to 45 mg twice daily was planned in all cohorts using a modified toxicity probability interval design (target dose-limiting toxicity [DLT], 30%). The primary endpoint was safety; investigator-assessed objective response rate was secondary. RESULTS: In cohort A, 1/6 patients (17%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; none occurred in 14 patients with 45 mg. In cohort C, 3/9 patients (33%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; dose was not escalated to 45 mg. In cohort E, 1/5 patients (20%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; 5/10 patients (50%) had DLTs with 45 mg. Enrollment was stopped in cohort E binimetinib 45 mg and deescalated to 30 mg; 2/4 additional patients (50%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg (total 3/9 [33%] had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg). Objective response rate was 0% in cohort A, 9% in cohort C, and 15% in cohort E. CONCLUSION: Per DLT criteria, binimetinib + pembrolizumab (cohort A) was tolerable, binimetinib + pembrolizumab + 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (cohort C) did not qualify for binimetinib dose escalation to 45 mg, and binimetinib + pembrolizumab + 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (cohort E) required binimetinib dose reduction from 45 to 30 mg. No new safety findings were observed across cohorts. There was no apparent additive efficacy when binimetinib + pembrolizumab was added to chemotherapy. Data did not support continued enrollment in cohorts C and E.