Quality of life with encorafenib plus cetuximab with or without binimetinib treatment in patients with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer: patient-reported outcomes from BEACON CRC.

BACKGROUND: In the BEACON CRC study (NCT02928224), encorafenib plus cetuximab with binimetinib {9.3 versus 5.9 months; hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.60 [0.47-0.75]} or without binimetinib [9.3 versus 5.9 months; HR (95% CI): 0.61 (0.48-0.77)] significantly improved overall survival (OS) compared with the previous standard of care (control) in patients with BRAF V600E metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Quality of life (QoL) was a secondary endpoint, assessed using validated instruments. PATIENTS AND METHODS: BEACON CRC was a randomized, open-label, phase III study comparing encorafenib plus cetuximab with or without binimetinib and the investigator's choice of irinotecan plus cetuximab or FOLFIRI plus cetuximab (chemotherapy control) in patients with previously treated BRAF V600E mCRC. Patient-reported QoL assessments included the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C). The primary outcome for these tools was time to definitive 10% deterioration. RESULTS: Encorafenib plus cetuximab, both with and without binimetinib, was associated with longer median times to definitive 10% deterioration versus the control group in the EORTC Global Health Status scale [HR (95% CI): 0.65 (0.52-0.80) versus 0.61 (0.49-0.75), respectively] and the FACT-C functional well-being subscale [HR (95% CI): 0.62 (0.50-0.76) versus 0.58 (0.47-0.72), respectively]. Consistent results were observed across all subscales of the EORTC and FACT-C instruments. QoL was generally maintained during treatment for the global EORTC and FACT-C scales. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to improving OS, encorafenib plus cetuximab with or without binimetinib delays QoL decline in previously treated patients with BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC.

Nivolumab plus low-dose ipilimumab in previously treated patients with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient metastatic colorectal cancer: 4-year follow-up from CheckMate 142.

BACKGROUND: In the phase II multicohort CheckMate 142 study, nivolumab plus low-dose (1 mg/kg) ipilimumab provided robust and durable clinical benefit with a manageable safety profile in previously treated patients with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) at 13.4- and 25.4-month median follow-up (Overman MJ, Lonardi S, Wong KYM et al. Durable clinical benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in DNA mismatch repair-deficient/microsatellite instability-high metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:773-779. Overman MJ, Lonardi S, Wong KYM, et al. Nivolumab plus low-dose ipilimumab in previously treated patients with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair deficient metastatic colorectal cancer: long-term follow-up. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37:635). Here, we present results from the 4-year follow-up of these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received nivolumab (3 mg/kg) plus low-dose (1 mg/kg) ipilimumab every 3 weeks (four doses) followed by nivolumab (3 mg/kg) every 2 weeks until disease progression. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR; as per RECIST version 1.1). RESULTS: A total of 119 patients were treated; 76% had ≥2 prior lines of therapy. Median follow-up was 50.9 months (range 46.9-62.7 months). Median duration of therapy was 24.9 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 15.8-33.2 months]. Investigator-assessed ORR increased from 55% (95% CI 45% to 64%) at 13.4 months to 65% (95% CI 55% to 73%) at 50.9 months with a disease control rate of 81% (95% CI 72% to 87%). The complete response rate increased from 3% at 13.4 months to 13% at 50.9 months. Partial responses were observed in 52% of patients; 21% had stable disease, and 12% had progressive disease. Median time to response was 2.8 months (range 1.1-37.1 months), and median duration of response was not reached (range 1.4+ to 58.0+ months). At data cut-off, 37 (48%) patients had ongoing responses. Median progression-free survival was not reached [95% CI 38.4 months-not estimable (NE)], and median overall survival was not reached (95% CI NE). Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were observed in 32% of patients; 13% of patients had any-grade TRAEs leading to discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm long-term benefit of nivolumab plus low-dose ipilimumab for previously treated patients with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. The safety profile was manageable with no new safety signals.

Cell membrane-anchored and tumor-targeted IL-12 (attIL12)-T cell therapy for eliminating large and heterogeneous solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Adoptive T-cell transfer has become an attractive therapeutic approach for hematological malignancies but shows poor activity against large and heterogeneous solid tumors. Interleukin-12 (IL-12) exhibits potent antitumor efficacy against solid tumors, but its clinical application has been stalled because of toxicity. Here, we aimed to develop a safe approach to IL-12 T-cell therapy for eliminating large solid tumors. METHODS: We generated a cell membrane-anchored IL-12 (aIL12), a tumor-targeted IL-12 (ttIL12), and a cell membrane-anchored and ttIL-12 (attIL12) and a cell membrane-anchored and tumor-targeted ttIL-12 (attIL12) armed T cells, chimeric antigen receptor-T cells, and T cell receptor-T (TCR-T) cells with each. We compared the safety and efficacy of these armed T cells in treating osteosarcoma patient-derived xenograft tumors and mouse melanoma tumors after intravenous infusions of the armed T cells. RESULTS: attIL12-T cell infusion showed remarkable antitumor efficacy in human and mouse large solid tumor models. Mechanistically, attIL12-T cells targeted tumor cells expressing cell-surface vimentin, enriching effector T cell and interferon γ production in tumors, which in turn stimulates dendritic cell maturation for activating secondary T-cell responses and tumor antigen spreading. Both attIL12- and aIL12-T-cell transfer eliminated peripheral cytokine release and the associated toxic effects. CONCLUSIONS: This novel approach sheds light on the safe application of IL-12-based T-cell therapy for large and heterogeneous solid tumors.

Management of adverse events from the treatment of encorafenib plus cetuximab for patients with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer: insights from the BEACON CRC study.

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, with a 5-year relative survival of 14% in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients with BRAF V600E mutations, which occur in ∼10%-15% of patients with mCRC, have a poorer prognosis compared with those with wild-type BRAF tumours. The combination of the BRAF inhibitor encorafenib with the epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor cetuximab currently represents the only chemotherapy-free targeted therapy approved in the USA and Europe for previously treated patients with BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC. As a class, BRAF inhibitors are associated with dermatologic, gastrointestinal, and renal events, as well as pyrexia and secondary skin malignancies. Adverse event (AE) profiles of specific BRAF inhibitors vary, however, and are affected by the specific agents given in combination. In patients with mCRC, commonly reported AEs of cetuximab monotherapy include infusion reactions and dermatologic toxicities. Data from the phase III BEACON CRC study indicate that the combination of encorafenib with cetuximab has a distinct safety profile. Here we review the most frequently reported AEs that occurred with this combination in BEACON CRC and best practices for managing and mitigating AEs that require more than standard supportive care.

Contour prognostic model for predicting survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases: development and multicentre validation study using largest diameter and number of metastases with RAS mutation status.

BACKGROUND: Most current models for predicting survival after resection of colorectal liver metastasis include largest diameter and number of colorectal liver metastases as dichotomous variables, resulting in underestimation of the extent of risk variation and substantial loss of statistical power. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a new prognostic model for patients undergoing liver resection including largest diameter and number of colorectal liver metastases as continuous variables. METHODS: A prognostic model was developed using data from patients who underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases at MD Anderson Cancer Center and had RAS mutational data. A Cox proportional hazards model analysis was used to develop a model based on largest colorectal liver metastasis diameter and number of metastases as continuous variables. The model results were shown using contour plots, and validated externally in an international multi-institutional cohort. RESULTS: A total of 810 patients met the inclusion criteria. Largest colorectal liver metastasis diameter (hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95 per cent confidence interval 1.06 to 1.16; P < 0.001), number of colorectal liver metastases (HR 1.06, 1.03 to 1.09; P < 0.001), and RAS mutation status (HR 1.76, 1.42 to 2.18; P < 0.001) were significantly associated with overall survival, together with age, primary lymph node metastasis, and prehepatectomy chemotherapy. The model performed well in the external validation cohort, with predicted overall survival values almost lying within 10 per cent of observed values. Wild-type RAS was associated with better overall survival than RAS mutation even when liver resection was performed for larger and/or multiple colorectal liver metastases. CONCLUSION: The contour prognostic model, based on diameter and number of lesions considered as continuous variables along with RAS mutation, predicts overall survival after resection of colorectal liver metastasis.

Triple blockade of EGFR, MEK and PD-L1 has antitumor activity in colorectal cancer models with constitutive activation of MAPK signaling and PD-L1 overexpression.

BACKGROUND: Molecular mechanisms driving acquired resistance to anti-EGFR therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are complex but generally involve the activation of the downstream RAS-RAF-MEK-MAPK pathway. Nevertheless, even if inhibition of EGFR and MEK could be a strategy for overcoming anti-EGFR resistance, its use is limited by the development of MEK inhibitor (MEKi) resistance. METHODS: We have generated in vitro and in vivo different CRC models in order to underline the mechanisms of MEKi resistance. RESULTS: The three different in vitro MEKi resistant models, two generated by human CRC cells quadruple wild type for KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, PI3KCA genes (SW48-MR and LIM1215-MR) and one by human CRC cells harboring KRAS mutation (HCT116-MR) showed features related to the gene signature of colorectal cancer CMS4 with up-regulation of immune pathway as confirmed by microarray and western blot analysis. In particular, the MEKi phenotype was associated with the loss of epithelial features and acquisition of mesenchymal markers and morphology. The change in morphology was accompanied by up-regulation of PD-L1 expression and activation of EGFR and its downstream pathway, independently to RAS mutation status. To extend these in vitro findings, we have obtained mouse colon cancer MC38- and CT26-MEKi resistant syngeneic models (MC38-MR and CT26-MR). Combined treatment with MEKi, EGFR inhibitor (EGFRi) and PD-L1 inhibitor (PD-L1i) resulted in a marked inhibition of tumor growth in both models. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest a strategy to potentially improve the efficacy of MEK inhibition by co-treatment with EGFR and PD-L1 inhibitors via modulation of host immune responses.

Expanded analysis of secondary germline findings from matched tumor/normal sequencing identifies additional clinically significant mutations.

BACKGROUND: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) for tumor molecular profiling can reveal secondary germline pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants (LPV/PV). The American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG) recommends return of secondary results for a subset of 59 genes, but other genes with evidence of clinical utility are emerging. We previously reported that 4.3% of patients who underwent NGS of a targeted panel of 201 genes had LPV/PV based on the ACMG list. Here we report the frequency of additional germline cancer-related gene variants and discuss their clinical utility. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Matched tumor and germline DNA NGS of a targeted panel of 201 genes was performed in a research laboratory on samples from 1000 patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors enrolled in a molecular testing protocol (NCT01772771). The frequency of germline LPV/PV in 54 cancer-related genes, beyond the genes in ACMG list, were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 1000 patients who underwent tumor/normal DNA sequencing, 46 (4.6%) were found to have a germline LPV/PV in the following genes: AR-(5), ATM-(4), BAP1-(1), CDH1-(1), CDKN2A-(1), CHEK1-(2), CHEK2-(10), EGFR-(1), ERCC3-(4), ERCC5-(1), HNF1B-(1), HRAS-(1), MITF-(4), MLL3-(1), NF1-(3), PKHD1-(4), PTCH1-(1), and SMARCA4-(1). Thus, a total 8.7% of patients had an LPV/PV with 2 patients having 2 concomitant germline LPV/PV. Five mutations in high-penetrance hereditary cancer predisposition genes were selected to be returned to patients or their representatives: BAP1, CDH1, CDKN2A, EGFR, and SMARCA4. CONCLUSIONS: Broader genomic testing is likely to identify additional secondary pathogenic germline alterations, some with potential clinical utility for return to patients and their relatives. The recommended genes for which germline results should be returned are continually changing, warranting continued study.

How liquid biopsies can change clinical practice in oncology.

Cell-free DNA fragments are shed into the bloodstream by tumor cells. The analysis of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), commonly known as liquid biopsy, can be exploited for a variety of clinical applications. ctDNA is being used to genotype solid cancers non-invasively, to track tumor dynamics and to detect the emergence of drug resistance. In a few settings, liquid biopsies have already entered clinical practice. For example, ctDNA is used to guide treatment in a subset of lung cancers. In this review, we discuss how recent improvements in the sensitivity and accuracy of ctDNA analyses have led to unprecedented advances in this research field. We further consider what is required for the routine deployment of liquid biopsies in the clinical diagnostic space. We pinpoint technical hurdles that liquid biopsies have yet to overcome, including preanalytical and analytical challenges. We foresee how liquid biopsies will transform clinical practice: by complementing (or replacing) imaging to monitor treatment response and by detecting minimal residual disease after surgery with curative intent.