Codon-specific KRAS mutations predict survival benefit of trifluridine/tipiracil in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Genomics has greatly improved how patients with cancer are being treated; however, clinical-grade genomic biomarkers for chemotherapies are currently lacking. Using whole-genome analysis of 37 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with the chemotherapy trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI), we identified KRAS codon G12 (KRASG12) mutations as a potential biomarker of resistance. Next, we collected real-world data of 960 patients with mCRC receiving FTD/TPI and validated that KRASG12 mutations were significantly associated with poor survival, also in analyses restricted to the RAS/RAF mutant subgroup. We next analyzed the data of the global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 RECOURSE trial (n = 800 patients) and found that KRASG12 mutations (n = 279) were predictive biomarkers for reduced overall survival (OS) benefit of FTD/TPI versus placebo (unadjusted interaction P = 0.0031, adjusted interaction P = 0.015). For patients with KRASG12 mutations in the RECOURSE trial, OS was not prolonged with FTD/TPI versus placebo (n = 279; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.73-1.20; P = 0.85). In contrast, patients with KRASG13 mutant tumors showed significantly improved OS with FTD/TPI versus placebo (n = 60; HR = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.15-0.55; P < 0.001). In isogenic cell lines and patient-derived organoids, KRASG12 mutations were associated with increased resistance to FTD-based genotoxicity. In conclusion, these data show that KRASG12 mutations are biomarkers for reduced OS benefit of FTD/TPI treatment, with potential implications for approximately 28% of patients with mCRC under consideration for treatment with FTD/TPI. Furthermore, our data suggest that genomics-based precision medicine may be possible for a subset of chemotherapies.

Heterogeneous disease and intermittent treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: A case report.

Background: Metastatic colorectal cancer is one of the most common causes of cancer death worldwide. RAS and BRAF mutational analyses are strongly recommended before beginning chemotherapy in the metastatic setting for their predictive role for the efficacy of anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. In most of cases, mutational status coincides between primary tumor and metastases. In RAS and BRAF wild-type patients treated with anti-EGFRs, after an induction treatment period, recent evidence supports the role of a maintenance treatment with fluoropyrimidines and anti-EGFRs. However, skin toxicity is the most described and limiting side-effect of maintenance. Moreover, it is described that the continuous administration of these monoclonal antibodies leads to an acquired resistance to anti-EGFRs, with subsequent treatment failure. Intermittent strategy with chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR may help maintain treatment efficacy, delaying resistance. Case presentation: In this case report, we describe the case of a RAS-BRAF wild-type elderly patient undergoing first-line chemotherapy with FOLFOX + panitumumab, reporting response of disease on all metastatic sites except for a node. This node, surgically removed, revealed host BRAF V600 mutant clones. After surgery, patient continued chemotherapy with a stop-and-go strategy continuing to benefit from the same drugs after 4 years since diagnosis, and continuing to achieve response when on treatment, avoiding unacceptable anti-EGFR toxicity. This patient, still alive after 6 years since the diagnosis, represents the case of a good synergy between molecular profiling of disease, surgery, and intermittent treatment.

Adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy and surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer. A systematic review of literature with a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

HIGHLIGHTS: Although no definitive data exist in literature, adjuvant chemotherapy is usually recommended in patients with radically resected stage III rectal cancer treated with neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy. We performed a systematic review of literature with direct and indirect comparisons to assess the role of adjuvant mono- or poli-chemotherapy in radically resected rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy. Neither chemotherapy (mono-or poli-chemotherapy) nor polichemotherapy with oxaliplatin-containing regimens seems to improve Overall Survival and Disease-Free Survival in patients with radically resected rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemo-adiotherapy. Neither the entire population of patients radically resected after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, nor high risk patients seem to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Our data seem to suggest the need of review the actual international guidelines that suggest the need of adjuvant chemotherapy at least in high risk rectal cancer treated with surgery and neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy.

A multicenter study of skin toxicity management in patients with left-sided, RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with first-line anti-EGFR-based doublet regimen: is there room for improvement?

BACKGROUND: Skin toxicity in patients affected by metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors is well known. However, ad hoc ESMO guidelines have only recently been published. AIM AND METHODS: To describe the management (pre-emptive or reactive) of anti-EGFR-related cutaneous adverse events (AEs), in a real-life clinical context, in a selected population of patients with left-sided, metastatic RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody (i.e., panitumumab or cetuximab) as first-line regimen at 22 Institutions. The measured clinical outcomes were treatment-related adverse events, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 515 patients included in the analysis, 173 (33.6%) received a pre-emptive and 342 (66.4%) a reactive treatment. The median follow-up period for the overall population was 30.0 months. A significantly lower incidence of any grade acneiform rash was found in the pre-emptive compared to the reactive cohort both in the overall population (78.6% vs 94.4%, p < 0.001) and in patients treated with panitumumab (76.1% vs 93.7%, p < 0.001) or cetuximab (83.3% vs 95.4%, p = 0.004), respectively. A lower incidence of any grade (41.6% vs 50.9%, p = 0.047) but a higher incidence of G3-G4 (9.2% vs 4.7%, p = 0.042) paronychia/nail disorders were found in the pre-emptive compared to the reactive cohort. Nevertheless, a lower rate of patients within the reactive compared to the pre-emptive cohort was referred to dermatological counseling (21.4% vs 15.3%, respectively, p = 0.001). A higher rate of anti-EGFR therapy modification was needed in the pre-emptive compared to the reactive cohort (35.9% vs 41.6%, respectively, p < 0.001). The pre-emptive approach did not reduce the efficacy of antineoplastic therapy compared to the reactive in terms of ORR (69.2% vs 72.8%), median PFS (12.3 vs 13.0 months), and median OS (28.8 vs 33.5 months). CONCLUSION: Although recommended by international guidelines, the pre-emptive approach of anti-EGFR-related skin toxicity in mCRC patients still appears less adopted in daily clinical practice, compared to the reactive one. A wider reception and application of this indication is desirable to improve patients' quality of life without compromising the continuity and efficacy of antineoplastic therapy.

Post-Induction Management in Patients With Left-Sided RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated With First-Line Anti-EGFR-Based Doublet Regimens: A Multicentre Study.

BACKGROUND: Few data regarding post-induction management following first-line anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-based doublet regimens in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are available. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective study aimed at evaluating clinicians' attitude, and the safety and effectiveness of post-induction strategies in consecutive patients affected by left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR as first-line regimen, who did not experience disease progression within 6 months from induction initiation, at 21 Italian and 1 Spanish Institutions. The measured clinical outcomes were: progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events, and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: At the data cutoff, among 686 consecutive patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with doublet plus anti-EGFR as first-line regimen from March 2012 to October 2020, 355 eligible patients have been included in the present analysis. Among these, 118 (33.2%), 66 (18.6%), and 11 (3.1%) received a maintenance with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5FU/LV)+anti-EGFR, anti-EGFR, and 5FU/LV, respectively, while 160 (45.1%) patients continued induction treatment (non-maintenance) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient decision, or completion of planned treatment. The median period of follow-up for the overall population was 33.7 months (95%CI = 28.9-35.6). The median PFS values of the 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR, anti-EGFR, 5FU/LV, and non-maintenance cohorts were 16.0 (95%CI = 14.3-17.7, 86 events), 13.0 (95%CI = 11.4-14.5, 56 events), 14.0 (95%CI = 8.1-20.0, 8 events), and 10.1 months (95%CI = 9.0-11.2, 136 events), respectively (p < 0.001). The median OS values were 39.6 (95%CI = 31.5-47.7, 43 events), 36.1 (95%CI = 31.6-40.7, 36 events), 39.5 (95%CI = 28.2-50.8, 4 events), and 25.1 months (95%CI = 22.6-27.6, 99 events), respectively (p < 0.001). After adjusting for key covariates, a statistically significant improvement in PFS in favor of 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR (HR = 0.59, 95%CI = 0.44-0.77, p < 0.001) and anti-EGFR (HR = 0.71, 95%CI = 0.51-0.98, p = 0.039) compared to the non-maintenance cohort was found. Compared to the non-maintenance cohort, OS was improved by 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR (HR = 0.55, 95%CI = 0.38-0.81, p = 0.002) and, with marginal significance, by anti-EGFR (HR = 0.67, 95%CI = 0.51-0.98, p = 0.051). No difference was found in ORR. Any grade non-hematological and hematological events were generally higher in the non-maintenance compared to the maintenance cohorts. CONCLUSION: Among the treatment strategies following an anti-EGFR-based doublet first-line induction regimen in patients affected by left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC treated in a "real-life" setting, 5FU/LV+anti-EGFR resulted the most adopted, effective, and relatively safe regimen.

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.

Cetuximab Rechallenge Plus Avelumab in Pretreated Patients With RAS Wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Phase 2 Single-Arm Clinical CAVE Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Rechallenge therapy with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) drugs has been suggested in patients with chemo-refractory RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after initial response to anti-EGFR-based first-line treatment. The association of treatment with cetuximab plus avelumab with overall survival (OS) may be worthy of investigation in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of cetuximab rechallenge therapy plus avelumab. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This single-arm, multicenter phase 2 trial enrolled patients from August 2018 to February 2020. Eligible patients with RAS WT mCRC had a complete or partial response to first-line chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR drugs, developed acquired resistance, and failed second-line therapy. Baseline circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, and EGFR-S492R mutation analysis was done. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received avelumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks) and cetuximab (400 mg/m2 and, subsequently, 250 mg/m2 weekly) until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was OS. Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and safety. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were enrolled (42 men, 35 women; median age, 63 years); 71 had microsatellite stable tumors (MSS), 3 microsatellite instability-high tumors (MSI-H), 3 unknown. The study met the primary end point, with median OS (mOS) of 11.6 months (95% CI, 8.4-14.8 months). Median PFS (mPFS) was 3.6 months (95% CI, 3.2-4.1 months). Common grade-3 adverse events were cutaneous eruption, 11 (14%), and diarrhea, 3 (4%). For 67 of 77 (87%) patients, baseline analysis of plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, and EGFR-S492R variations was feasible. Forty-eight patients had WT disease, whereas 19 had mutations. Patients with RAS/BRAF WT ctDNA had mOS of 17.3 months (95% CI, 12.5-22.0 months) compared with 10.4 months (95% CI, 7.2-13.6 months) in patients with mutated ctDNA (hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27-0.90; P = .02). The mPFS was 4.1 months (95% CI, 2.9-5.2 months) in RAS/BRAF WT patients compared with 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.6-3.5 months) in patients with mutated ctDNA (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.75; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings of this single-arm phase 2 trial suggest that cetuximab plus avelumab is an active, well tolerated rechallenge therapy in RAS WT mCRC. Plasma ctDNA analysis before treatment may allow selection of patients who could benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04561336.

Retrospective Study of Regorafenib Versus TAS-102 Efficacy and Safety in Chemorefractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC) Patients: A Multi-institution Real Life Clinical Data.

INTRODUCTION: There have been significant developments in colorectal cancer (CRC) research over the last few years, with the introduction of new agents that have been prolonged median overall survival of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). These therapies have improved patient outcomes; however, despite significant progress in strategies for cancer treatment, their use is limited by development of resistant mechanism. Almost 30% of patients with refractory mCRC will remain good candidates for further treatment. Regorafenib and TAS-102 are novel antitumor agents for patients with refractory mCRC. However, it is unclear which patients may derive a survival benefit from these drugs in real-life clinical practice. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis evaluating safety and efficacy of TAS-102 and regorafenib in a cohort of refractory mCRC patients, in 3 different centers between January 1 2018 and May 31 2020, with the aim of assessing the optimal sequence treatment for these 2 drugs. RESULTS: One hundred and forty mCRC patients were included in the analysis. Of these patients, 64 received regorafenib and 76 received TAS-102 as first treatment. After progression, in the regorafenib 24 (37%) patients switched to secondary treatment with TAS-102, instead, in the TAS-102 group, among 76 patients, 29 (45%) patients switched to secondary treatment with regorafenib. Disease control was achieved in 8 (12.5%) of 64 patients in the regorafenib group and 17 (22.4%) of 76 patients in the TAS-102 group. In terms of efficacy, the PFS and OS were similar in both treatment groups for primary and secondary treatments. AEs reported in this analysis were mostly consistent with the known safety profiles of regorafenib and TAS-102 in previous clinical trials. CONCLUSION: The present study is the first one to compare the activity of the two agents in a large cohort of chemo-refractory mCRC patients providing more details about the best sequence, to be incorporated in clinical practice.

Aflibercept or bevacizumab in combination with FOLFIRI as second-line treatment of mRAS metastatic colorectal cancer patients: the ARBITRATION study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The intensive study of predictive factors has strongly ameliorated the therapeutic flow-chart of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) by allowing the selection of patients who benefit from specific therapies. For instance, in mRAS (mutated RAS) mCRC patients, anti-EGFR drugs (cetuximab and panitumumab) are not recommended; in this group of patients, the use of anti-angiogenic drugs (bevacizumab and aflibercept) is predominant. However, at progression to standard bevacizumab-based first-line chemotherapy, still to date, there are no studies to guide oncologists in the choice of the best second-line anti-angiogenic drug (bevacizumab beyond progression versus aflibercept). METHODS: ARBITRATION is a prospective, observational study assessing efficacy differences between second-line fluorouracil/irinotecan (FOLFIRI)/bevacizumab versus FOLFIRI/aflibercept at progression to fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin and bevacizumab in mRAS mCRC patients. A test power of 80%, a median survival of 9 months from second-line treatment start and a hazard ratio of 0.67 between the two schedules were the basis for statistical design. The final sample will be 220 patients (110 per treatment). The significance will be verified with a two-tailed log-rank test with an alpha value of the I-type error of 5%. Time-to-outcome will be described by Kaplan-Meier curves and prognostic factors studied through multivariable analyses based on the Cox model. Secondary objectives include safety, responses' duration and progression-free survival. A translational research will be conducted to measure several angiogenic proteins in patients' serum before starting the therapy in order to evidence any angiogenic factor patterns related to outcome. DISCUSSION: We present a large, prospective, observational study aiming to answer two scientific questions: (1) outcome differences between second-line treatments with FOLFIRI/bevacizumab beyond progression versus FOLFIRI/aflibercept in mRAS mCRC patients, (2) angiogenic factors' patterns that could associate with efficacy and help oncologists to apply best the therapeutic anti-angiogenic strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ARBITRATION trial (version 0.0, 13 April 2020) has been registered into the clinicaltrials.gov registry on 20 May 2020 with identifier NCT04397601.

Immunotherapy may protect cancer patients from SARS-CoV-2 infection: a single-center retrospective analysis.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has created unique challenges to healthcare systems throughout the world. Ensuring subjects' safety is mandatory especially in oncology, in consideration of cancer patients' particular frailty. We examined the proportion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgM and/or IgG positive subjects in three different groups from Istituto Nazionale Tumori - IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" in Naples (Campania region, Italy): cancer patients treated with Innovative Immunotherapy (Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors, ICIs), cancer patients undergoing standard Chemotherapies (CHTs) and healthcare providers. 9 out of 287 (3.1%) ICIs patients resulted positive, with a significant lower percentage in respect to CHTs patients (39 positive subjects out of 598, 6.5%) (p = 0.04). There was no statistically significant difference between ICIs cohort and healthcare providers, 48 out of 1050 resulting positive (4.6%). Performing a Propensity Score Matching based on gender and tumor stage, the effect of treatment on seropositivity was analyzed through a regression logistic model and the ICIs treatment resulted to be the only protective factor significantly (p = 0.03) associated with positivity (odds ratio-OR: 0.41; 95% confidence interval-CI 0.18-0.91). According to these preliminary data, ICIs would appear to be a protective factor against the onset of COVID-19 infection.

Baseline IFN-γ and IL-10 expression in PBMCs could predict response to PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors in advanced melanoma patients.

Anti-PD-1 antibodies revolutionized the treatment of advanced melanoma patients. However, one out of three do not respond to this therapy, with an overall poor prognosis. Identification of predictive biomarkers in patients receiving immune-based therapies is necessary for minimizing risk of toxicity and optimizing patient benefit and is still an important unmet clinical need. Recently, many studies have evaluated peripheral blood markers as potential biomarkers, but none so far have been validated. We collected at baseline peripheral blood samples from 18 consecutive advanced melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1 therapy. Main pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines were studied in PBMCs from baseline blood samples both evaluating mRNA expression by qRT-PCR and identifying PBMCs subpopulations by FACS analysis. We found that IFN-γ mRNA expression levels were significantly higher in responder patients compared to non-responder ones. Moreover, to better validate its role, we evaluated the IFN-γ/IL-10 ratio. This value was higher in responder patients. FACS analysis confirmed that CD4 + IFN-γ + PBMCs percentage was higher in responders. Our data suggest an interesting correlation between IFN-γ/IL-10 ratio and response to anti-PD-1 therapy in advanced melanoma patients, suggesting a new biomarker that could be easily incorporated in clinical practice.

Evaluation of Second-line Anti-VEGF after First-line Anti-EGFR Based Therapy in RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Multicenter "SLAVE" Study.

: Background: The optimal anti-angiogenic strategy as second-line treatment in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with anti-EGFR (Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor) based first-line treatment is still debated. METHODS: This multicenter, real-world, retrospective study is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of second-line Bevacizumab- and Aflibercept-based treatments after an anti-EGFR based first-line regimen. Clinical outcomes measured were: objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs) profiles. RESULTS: From February 2011 to October 2019, 277 consecutive mCRC patients received Bevacizumab-based (228, 82.3%) or Aflibercept-based (49, 17.7%) regimen. No significant difference was found regarding ORR. The median follow-up was 27.7 months (95%CI: 24.7-34.4). Aflibercept-treated group had a significantly shorter PFS compared to Bevacizumab-treated group (5.6 vs. 7.1 months, respectively) (HR = 1.34 (95%CI: 0.95-1.89); p = 0.0932). The median OS of the Bevacizumab-treated group and Aflibercept-treated group was 16.2 (95%CI: 15.3-18.1) and 12.7 (95%CI: 8.8-17.5) months, respectively (HR= 1.31 (95%CI: 0.89-1.93) p = 0.16). After adjusting for the key covariates (age, gender, performance status, number of metastatic sites and primary tumor side) Bevacizumab-based regimens revealed to be significantly related with a prolonged PFS (HR = 1.44 (95%CI: 1.02-2.03); p = 0.0399) compared to Aflibercept-based regimens, but not with a prolonged OS (HR = 1.47 (95%CI: 0.99-2.17); p = 0.0503). The incidence of G3/G4 VEGF inhibitors class-specific AEs was 7.5% and 26.5% in the Bevacizumab-treated group and the Aflibercept-treated group, respectively (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our analysis seems to reveal that Bevacizumab-based regimens have a slightly better PFS and class-specific AEs profile compared to Aflibercept-based regimen as second-line treatment of RAS wild-type mCRC patients previously treated with anti-EGFR based treatments. These results have to be taken with caution and no conclusive considerations are allowed.

Feasibility of next-generation sequencing in clinical practice: results of a pilot study in the Department of Precision Medicine at the University of Campania 'Luigi Vanvitelli'.

BACKGROUND: The emerging role of next-generation sequencing (NGS) targeted panels is revolutionising our approach to cancer patients, providing information on gene alterations helpful for diagnosis and clinical decision, in a short time and with acceptable costs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this work, we evaluated the clinical application of FoundationOne CDx test, a hybrid capture-based NGS. This test identifies alterations in 324 genes, tumour mutational burden and genomic signatures as microsatellite instability. The decision to obtain the NGS assay for a particular patient was done according to investigator's choice. RESULTS: Overall, 122 tumour specimens were analysed, of which 84 (68.85%) succeeded. The success rate was influenced by type of specimen formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE block vs FFPE slides), by origin of the sample (surgery vs biopsy) and by time of fixation (<5 years vs ≥5 years). The most frequent subgroups of effective reports derived from colorectal cancer (25 samples), non-small-cell lung cancer (16 samples), ovarian cancer (10 samples), biliary tract cancer (9 samples), breast cancer (7 samples), gastric cancer (7 samples). The most frequent alterations found in whole population referred to TP53 (45.9%), KRAS (19.6%) and APC (13.9%). Furthermore, we performed an analysis of patients in whom this comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) had a relevance for the patient's disease. CONCLUSIONS: On our opinion, CGP could be proposed in clinical practice in order to select patients that could most benefit from the analysis proposed, like patients with good performance status without any available treatments or with unexpected resistance to a therapy.

Atypical haemolytic-uraemic syndrome in patient with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with fluorouracil and oxaliplatin: a case report and a review of literature.

Background. Thrombotic microangiopathies (TMA) are relatively rare but severe disorders characterised by non-immune haemolytic anaemia, thrombocytopaenia and organ failure. In patients with metastatic cancer, sporadic forms of TMA can be triggered by chemotherapeutic agents or can occur as complication of malignancy itself or of infections. Case report. Hereby, we report a case of a patient diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer who experienced an atypical haemolytic-uraemic syndrome (aHUS) during chemotherapy treatment with FOLFOX6 scheme. The use of eculizumab led to prompt recovery of laboratory parameters that was maintained despite treatment discontinuation due to appearance of pneumonia infectious. Additionally, genetic analyses revealed the presence in heterozygosis of CFH gene polymorphisms associated with aHUS. Conclusion. This case emphasises the importance of considering TMA as a possible diagnosis in patients with cancer presenting with haemolytic non-immune mediate anaemia and thrombocytopaenia associated with worsening of renal function. Prompt diagnosis is crucial for the requirement of its specific treatment that can impact on long-term outcome and prognosis.

Clinical Practice Use of Liquid Biopsy to Identify RAS/BRAF Mutations in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC): A Single Institution Experience.

Tumor heterogeneity represents a possible cause of error in detecting predictive genetic alterations on tumor tissue and can be overcome by testing alterations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) using liquid biopsy. We assessed 72 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) using Idylla™ Biocartis, a fully automated platform that evaluates the most frequent mutations of KRAS, NRAS and BRAF genes. We correlated the results of liquid biopsy and standard tissue-based next generation sequencing (NGS) analyses to patient clinical features. The overall agreement was 81.94%. Concordance was 85.71% and 96.15% in treatment-naïve patients and in the patient subgroup with liver metastases, respectively. In liver metastases positive, treatment-naïve patients, sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) were 92.31%, 100% and 100%, respectively. Circulating mutational fraction (CMF) was significantly higher in patients with liver metastases and high carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels. In a subgroup of patients pre-treated with anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) agents, emerging KRAS mutations were evidenced in 33% of cases. Testing RAS/BRAF mutations on plasma using the Idylla™ Biocartis platform is feasible and reliable in mCRC patients in clinical practice.

Diagnostic value/performance of radiological liver imaging during chemoterapy for gastrointestinal malignancy: a critical review.

This article reviews the main toxic effect, complications and relative imaging findings of the liver that may appear during the oncologic follow up among patients affected by gastrointestinal malignancy. Awareness of the causative chemotherapeutic agent and regimens, pathophysiology and relative characteristic imaging findings of hepatic injuries is critical in order to obtain an accurate diagnosis especially when these parenchymal lesions are focal. An accurate synergic radiological diagnosis with Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance (MR) techniques may induce a potential termination of ineffective/toxic chemotherapy during early phases of treatment, changing the therapeutic plan in order to avoid first unnecessary liver biopsy and then invasive treatment as hepatic resection if not required.

A case report of a severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity due to an uncommon DPYD variant.

INTRODUCTION: Fluoropyrimidines such as 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and its orally active prodrug, capecitabine, are widely used in the treatment of gastrointestinal cancer, including colorectal cancer. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) plays an important role in the 5-FU metabolism. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene (DPYD) is a highly polymorphic gene with several hundreds of reported genetic variants and DPD activity levels vary considerably among individuals, with different 5-FU-related efficacy and toxicity. About 5% of the population is deficient in DPD enzyme activity. The most well studied DPYD variant is the IVS14+1G>A, also known as DPYD *2A. In this report, we present a case of a patient with a double heterozygote DPYD variant (DPYD activity score: 0,5 according to Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium) who experienced a severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity resolved without any consequence. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 46-years-old Caucasian man with diagnosis of left colon adenocarcinoma underwent left hemicolectomy on July 2017: pT3 G3 N1c M0. According to the disease stage, he started an adjuvant therapy with XELOX using capecitabine at 50% of total dose, because of his DPYD IVS14+1G>A variant, detected before the treatment. DIAGNOSIS: After few days, despite of this dose reduction, he experienced life-threatening adverse events such as mucositis G3, diarrhea G3, neutropenia G4, thrombocytopenia G4, and hyperbilirubinemia G3 according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v 5.0. INTERVENTIONS: As first, we set up an intensive rehydration therapy, antibiotic and antifungal prophylaxis, Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factors, and supportive blood transfusions. Additional genetic tests revealed a double heterozygote variant of DPYD gene (DPYD IVS14+1G>A and 2846A>T) which is a very rare situation and only 3 cases are described in literature, all of them concluded with patient's death. OUTCOMES: After 3 weeks of intensive therapy, the patient was fully recovered. Furthermore, all the whole-body CT scans performed since discharge from the hospital until now, have confirmed no evidence of disease. CONCLUSIONS: Recent studies demonstrated that screening strategy for the most common DPYD variants allowed for avoiding toxicities and saving money. This report underlines the importance of genotyping DPYD before treatment and emphasizes the role of genotype-guided dose individualization.

Clinical outcome of patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer treated with trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102): a single Italian institution compassionate use programme.

BACKGROUND: TAS-102 improves overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory to standard treatments. However, predictive biomarkers of efficacy are currently lacking. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We treated a cohort of 43 chemorefractory mCRC patients treated with TAS-102, in a single institution expanded access, compassionate use programme. We stratified patients in two groups according to number of cycles received (<6 cycles and ≥6 cycles). OS, progression-free survival (PFS) and safety were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirteen out of 43 patients (30%) obtained a clinically relevant disease control with TAS-102 therapy. Eleven of them were treated for ≥6 cycles with TAS-102, reaching a median PFS of 7.5 months (95% CI 5.8 to 9.2 months) and a median OS of 11.2 months (95% CI range not reached yet). A trend towards significance (p=0.08) between a good performance status and response to TAS-102 was observed. Further, 7 out of the 11 TAS-102 long-treated patients achieved a clinical benefit from a previous treatment with regorafenib. A significant correlation between regorafenib and TAS-102 clinical efficacy was observed (p=0.008). Six out 13 regorafenib-naïve patients were treated with regorafenib after progression from TAS-102. All these patients achieved SD with a median duration of treatment with regorafenib of 6.1 months (range, 1.6-6.7). CONCLUSION: Patients with mCRC in good clinical conditions, even though having been heavily pretreated with all the available treatment options, could obtain a significant clinical benefit from treatment with TAS-102. Moreover, a previous clinical benefit obtained with regorafenib is potentially predictive of clinical efficacy of subsequent TAS-102 treatment.