Gliosarcoma vs. glioblastoma: a retrospective case series using molecular profiling.

BACKGROUND: Gliosarcoma (GS) refers to the presence of mesenchymal differentiation (as seen using light microscopy) in the setting of glioblastoma (GB, an astrocytoma, WHO Grade 4). Although the same approach to treatment is typically adopted for GS and GB, there remains some debate as to whether GS should be considered a discrete pathological entity. Differences between these tumors have not been clearly established at the molecular level. METHODS: Patients with GS (n=48) or GB (n=1229) underwent molecular profiling (MP) with a pan-cancer panel of tests as part of their clinical care. The methods employed included next-generation sequencing (NGS) of DNA and RNA, copy number variation (CNV) of DNA and immunohistochemistry (IHC). The MP comprised 1153 tests in total, although results for each test were not available for every tumor profiled. We analyzed this data retrospectively in order to determine if our results were in keeping with what is known about the pathogenesis of GS by contrast with GB. We also sought novel associations between the MP and GS vs. GB which might improve our understanding of pathogenesis of GS. RESULTS: Potentially meaningful associations (p<0.1, Fisher's exact test (FET)) were found for 14 of these tests in GS vs. GB. A novel finding was higher levels of proteins mediating immuno-evasion (PD-1, PD-L1) in GS. All of the differences we observed have been associated with epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) in other tumor types. Many of the changes we saw in GS are novel in the setting of glial tumors, including copy number amplification in LYL1 and mutations in PTPN11. CONCLUSIONS: GS shows certain characteristics of EMT, by contrast with GB. Treatments targeting immuno-evasion may be of greater therapeutic value in GS relative to GB.

FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab in patients with early-onset metastatic colorectal cancer. A pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies.

BACKGROUND: We performed a pooled analysis of TRIBE and TRIBE2 studies to assess the efficacy and safety of the intensification of upfront chemotherapy backbone - from doublets to the triplet FOLFOXIRI - in combination with bevacizumab (bev) in patients with early-onset metastatic colorectal cancer (EO-mCRC; aged <50 years) and to explore whether EO-mCRCs have a peculiar tumour genomic profiling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subgroup analyses according to age (<50 versus ≥50 years) and treatment (FOLFOXIRI/bev versus doublets/bev) were carried out for rates of any grade and grade ≥3 (≥G3) overall and singular adverse events, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR). Tumour genomic profiling was obtained using a DNA-based next-generation sequencing platform. RESULTS: Of 1187 patients included, 194 (16%) patients were aged <50 years. Females were more frequently diagnosed with EO-mCRC (P = 0.04). Patients aged <50 years showed a lower risk of ≥G3 neutropenia (P = 0.07), diarrhoea (P = 0.04), asthenia (P = 0.008) and a higher risk of any grade nausea (P < 0.01) and vomiting (P < 0.01). Patients receiving FOLFOXIRI/bev more frequently experienced ≥G3 chemotherapy-related adverse events respect to doublets/bev, regardless of age (Pinteraction = 0.60). FOLFOXIRI/bev was associated to a lower incidence of neutropenia (P = 0.04) and asthenia (P = 0.01) in patients <50 years old, than those aged ≥50 years. PFS, OS and ORR did not differ according to age (PFS P = 0.81, OS P = 0.44, ORR P = 0.50) and no interaction between age and the benefit from the intensification of upfront chemotherapy was observed (PFS Pinteraction = 0.72, OS Pinteraction = 0.54, ORR Pinteraction = 0.65). Genomic profiling was assessed in 296 patients, showing an enrichment of FBXW7 and POLE mutations in EO-mCRC. CONCLUSIONS: Upfront FOLFOXIRI/bev shows a favourable efficacy/safety balance in EO-mCRC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers NCT00719797, NCT0233-9116.