Evaluation of Comparative Surveillance Strategies of Circulating Tumor DNA, Imaging, and Carcinoembryonic Antigen Levels in Patients With Resected Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: A circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assay (Signatera; Natera) has been marketed for use in the surveillance of resected colorectal cancer despite limited data supporting such practice. Objective: To compare a ctDNA assay with standard radiographic imaging and measurement of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels, per National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, in the surveillance of resected colorectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, single-center cohort study evaluated surveillance strategies of ctDNA, imaging, and measurement of CEA levels in patients with resected colorectal cancer from September 1, 2019, to November 30, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: The sensitivity and specificity of ctDNA, imaging, measurement of CEA levels, and combination of imaging plus measurement of CEA levels in detecting a confirmed recurrence of colorectal disease. A confirmed recurrence was defined as a positive ctDNA finding or a finding on imaging confirmed by biopsy, CEA level elevation, or subsequent tumor radiographic dynamics. Results: A total of 48 patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer satisfied the inclusion criteria for this study (28 men [58.3%]; median age, 60 [IQR, 34-85] years) and underwent surveillance by ctDNA, imaging, and measurement of CEA levels. Fifteen patients had disease recurrence during surveillance. Positive ctDNA findings confirmed disease recurrence in 8 patients; imaging, in 9 patients; CEA levels, in 3 patients; and combined imaging plus CEA levels, in 11 patients. Numerically, ctDNA did not perform better than imaging in detecting recurrence, with sensitivities of 53.3% (95% CI, 27.4%-77.7%) and 60.0% (95% CI, 32.9%-82.5%), respectively (P > .99). The combination of imaging plus measurement of CEA levels (sensitivity, 73.3% [95% CI, 44.8%-91.1%]) had a numerical advantage compared with ctDNA in identifying recurrence (P = .55). In addition, no significant difference was noted among ctDNA (median, 14.3 months), imaging (median, 15.0 months), or imaging plus measurement of CEA levels (median, 15.0 months) in the time to identify disease recurrence. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that ctDNA assay may not provide advantages as a surveillance strategy compared with standard imaging combined with CEA levels when performed per National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines.

MAP2K1 Mutations in Advanced Colorectal Cancer Predict Poor Response to Anti-EGFR Therapy and to Vertical Targeting of MAPK Pathway.

BACKGROUND: MAP2K1 mutations, otherwise known as MEK mutations, are rare oncogenic alterations that have been implicated in MAPK pathway activation. The impact of MAP2K1 mutations in colorectal cancer on EGFR antibody response has not been characterized. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Antitumor activity was assessed in mouse xenograft models with SW48 cell lines harboring MAP2K1 mutation, and protein expression of the RAS signaling pathway was studied by Western blot analysis. We retrospectively identified patients with MAP2K1-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated at City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center between 2015 and 2020 using next-generation sequencing. Patients' tumor characteristics, treatment response, and outcome are described. Additional patients with the MAP2K1 mutation were identified from The Cancer Genome Atlas and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center oncogenomic databases. RESULTS: Antitumor activity in mouse xenograft models demonstrated efficacy with combination therapy with EGFR and MEK inhibition with either BRAF or ERK inhibitors. Five patients treated at City of Hope between 2015 and 2020 harbored a MAP2K1 mutation at a frequency of 1%. APC and TP53 were common coalterations. All disease was RAS and BRAF wild type, except 1 case that harbored a concurrent KRAS mutation. Four RAS/BRAF wild-type MAP2K1-mutated patients was treated with anti-EGFR, anti-EGFR + MEK and BRAF inhibitors, and anti-EGFR + ERK inhibitors. All 4 patients experienced disease progression. CONCLUSION: MAP2K1 mutation in colorectal cancer is associated with poor response to EGFR inhibition. EGFR inhibition with or without MEK, BRAF, or ERK inhibitors did not result in any clinical benefit in our limited experience.