Malnutrition prevalence in cancer patients in Belgium: The ONCOCARE study.

RATIONALE: Unintentional weight loss and malnutrition are common among cancer patients. Malnutrition has been associated with impaired health-related quality of life, less well-tolerated chemotherapy regimens and shorter life duration. In Belgium there is a lack of epidemiological data on malnutrition in oncology patients at advanced stages of the disease. METHODS: Malnutrition assessment data was collected through a prospective, observational study in 328 patients who started a neoadjuvant anticancer therapy regimen or who started 1st, 2nd or 3rd line anticancer therapy for a metastatic cancer via 3 visits according to regular clinical practice (baseline visit (BV) maximum 4 weeks before start therapy, 1st Follow up visit (FUV1) ± 6 weeks after start therapy, FUV2 ± 4 months after start therapy). Malnutrition screening was evaluated using the Nutritional Risk Screening score 2002 (NRS-2002)and the diagnosis of malnutrition by the GLIM criteria. In addition, SARC-F questionnaire and Fearon criteria were used respectively to screen for sarcopenia and cachexia. RESULTS: Prevalence of malnutrition risk at BV was high: 54.5% of the patients had a NRS ≥ 3 (NRS 2002) and increased during the study period (FUV1: 73.2%, FUV2: 70.1%). Prevalence of malnutrition based on physician subjective assessment (PSA) remained stable over the study period but was much lower compared to NRS results (14.0%-16.5%). At BV, only 10% of the patients got a nutrition plan and 43.9% received ≤ 70% of nutritional needs, percentage increased during FU period (FUV1: 68.4%, FUV2: 67.6%). Prevalence of sarcopenia and cachexia were respectively 12.4% and 38.1% at BV and without significant variation during the study period, but higher than assessed by PSA (11.6% and 6.7% respectively). Figures were also higher compared to PSA. There were modifications in cancer treatment at FUV1 (25.2%) and at FUV2 (50.8%). The main reasons for these modifications at FUV1 were adverse events and tolerability. Patient reported daily questionnaires of food intake showed early nutritional deficits, preceding clinical signs of malnutrition, and therefore can be very useful in the ambulatory setting. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of malnutrition and cachexia was high in advanced cancer patients and underestimated by physician assessment. Earlier and rigorous detection of nutritional deficit and adjusted nutritional intake could lead to improved clinical outcomes in cancer patients. Reporting of daily caloric intake by patients was also very helpful with regards to nutritional assessment.

Biomarkers of benefit from cetuximab-based therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: interaction of EGFR ligand expression with RAS/RAF, PIK3CA genotypes.

BACKGROUND: More than half of patients with KRAS-wild type advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) fail anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. We studied EGFR-axis messenger RNA (mRNA) expression and RAS, RAF, PIK3CA mutations in order to identify additional biomarkers of cetuximab efficacy. METHODS: Previously genotyped (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA mutations) formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour biopsies of 226 cetuximab-treated CRC patients (1st to 3rd line therapy) were assessed for mRNA expression of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and its ligands EGF, Transofrming Growth Factor-a (TGFA), Amphiregulin (AREG) and Epiregulin (EREG) with real time quantitative PCR. Mutations were detected in 72 (31.9%) tumours for KRAS, in 6 (2.65%) for BRAF, in 7 (3.1%) for NRAS and in 37 (16.4%) for PIK3CA. RESULTS: Only PIK3CA mutations occasionally coexisted with other gene mutations. In univariate analysis, prognostic significance for survival ( from metastases until death) was seen for BRAF mutations (Hazard Ratio HR 8.1, 95% CI 3.4-19), codon 12-only KRAS mutations (HR 1.62, 95% CI 1.1-2.4), high AREG mRNA expression only in KRAS wild type CRC (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.3-0.7) and high EREG mRNA expression irrespective of KRAS mutation status (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.28-0.7). EREG tumoural mRNA expression was significantly associated with a 2.26-fold increased likelihood of objective response to cetuximab therapy (RECIST 1.1). In multivariate analysis, favourable predictive factors were high AREG mRNA in KRAS wild type tumours, high EREG mRNA, low Ephrin A2 receptor mRNA. Cetuximab-treated patients with AREG-low KRAS wild type CRC fared very poorly, their survival being similar to KRAS mutant CRC. Patients with KRAS codon 13 or other non-codon 12 mutations had a median survival (30 months, 95% CI 20-35) similar to that of patients with KRAS wild-type (median survival 29 months, 95% CI 25-35), in contrast to patients with KRAS codon 12 mutations who fared worse (median survival 19 months, 95% CI 15-26). CONCLUSIONS: BRAF and codon 12 KRAS mutations predict for adverse outcome of CRC patients receiving cetuximab. AREG mRNA reflects EGFR signalling in KRAS wild type tumours, predicting for cetuximab efficacy when high and failure when low. EREG may have a prognostic role independent of KRAS mutation.

DUSP 4 expression identifies a subset of colorectal cancer tumors that differ in MAPK activation, regardless of the genotype.

As dual-specificity phosphatase (DUSP) expression has been correlated to sensitivity to MEK inhibitors, DUSP expression levels may indicate activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway in many tumor types. In this study, we investigate if DUSP levels can indicate different levels of MAPK activation within colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. In three different CRC patient microarray datasets, we analyzed the expression of DUSP1. DUSP4 and DUSP6 according to mutational status, their correlation with survival and their association with different clinical characteristics. DUSP4 was significantly differentially expressed between all mutational subgroups with the highest expression in BRAF mutated tumors. Moreover, high DUSP4 expression was associated with a worse overall survival and with clinical characteristics typical for BRAF mutant patients. The use of DUSP expression as a predictive biomarker towards MAPK targeted therapy in CRC patients needs further investigation.

KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, and PTEN mutations: implications for targeted therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer.

The discovery of mutant KRAS as a predictor of resistance to epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies brought a major change in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. This seminal finding also highlighted our sparse knowledge about key signalling pathways in colorectal tumours. Drugs that inhibit oncogenic alterations such as phospho-MAP2K (also called MEK), phospho-AKT, and mutant B-RAF seem promising as single treatment or when given with EGFR inhibitors. However, our understanding of the precise role these potential drug targets have in colorectal tumours, and the oncogenic dependence that tumours might have on these components, has not progressed at the same rate. As a result, patient selection and prediction of treatment effects remain problematic. We review the role of mutations in genes other than KRAS on the efficacy of anti-EGFR therapy, and discuss strategies to target these oncogenic alterations alone or in combination with receptor tyrosine-kinase inhibition.

Effects of KRAS, BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA mutations on the efficacy of cetuximab plus chemotherapy in chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective consortium analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following the discovery that mutant KRAS is associated with resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies, the tumours of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer are now profiled for seven KRAS mutations before receiving cetuximab or panitumumab. However, most patients with KRAS wild-type tumours still do not respond. We studied the effect of other downstream mutations on the efficacy of cetuximab in, to our knowledge, the largest cohort to date of patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab plus chemotherapy in the pre-KRAS selection era. METHODS: 1022 tumour DNA samples (73 from fresh-frozen and 949 from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue) from patients treated with cetuximab between 2001 and 2008 were gathered from 11 centres in seven European countries. 773 primary tumour samples had sufficient quality DNA and were included in mutation frequency analyses; mass spectrometry genotyping of tumour samples for KRAS, BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA was done centrally. We analysed objective response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival in molecularly defined subgroups of the 649 chemotherapy-refractory patients treated with cetuximab plus chemotherapy. FINDINGS: 40.0% (299/747) of the tumours harboured a KRAS mutation, 14.5% (108/743) harboured a PIK3CA mutation (of which 68.5% [74/108] were located in exon 9 and 20.4% [22/108] in exon 20), 4.7% (36/761) harboured a BRAF mutation, and 2.6% (17/644) harboured an NRAS mutation. KRAS mutants did not derive benefit compared with wild types, with a response rate of 6.7% (17/253) versus 35.8% (126/352; odds ratio [OR] 0.13, 95% CI 0.07-0.22; p<0.0001), a median PFS of 12 weeks versus 24 weeks (hazard ratio [HR] 1.98, 1.66-2.36; p<0.0001), and a median overall survival of 32 weeks versus 50 weeks (1.75, 1.47-2.09; p<0.0001). In KRAS wild types, carriers of BRAF and NRAS mutations had a significantly lower response rate than did BRAF and NRAS wild types, with a response rate of 8.3% (2/24) in carriers of BRAF mutations versus 38.0% in BRAF wild types (124/326; OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.02-0.51; p=0.0012); and 7.7% (1/13) in carriers of NRAS mutations versus 38.1% in NRAS wild types (110/289; OR 0.14, 0.007-0.70; p=0.013). PIK3CA exon 9 mutations had no effect, whereas exon 20 mutations were associated with a worse outcome compared with wild types, with a response rate of 0.0% (0/9) versus 36.8% (121/329; OR 0.00, 0.00-0.89; p=0.029), a median PFS of 11.5 weeks versus 24 weeks (HR 2.52, 1.33-4.78; p=0.013), and a median overall survival of 34 weeks versus 51 weeks (3.29, 1.60-6.74; p=0.0057). Multivariate analysis and conditional inference trees confirmed that, if KRAS is not mutated, assessing BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA exon 20 mutations (in that order) gives additional information about outcome. Objective response rates in our series were 24.4% in the unselected population, 36.3% in the KRAS wild-type selected population, and 41.2% in the KRAS, BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA exon 20 wild-type population. INTERPRETATION: While confirming the negative effect of KRAS mutations on outcome after cetuximab, we show that BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA exon 20 mutations are significantly associated with a low response rate. Objective response rates could be improved by additional genotyping of BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA exon 20 mutations in a KRAS wild-type population. FUNDING: Belgian Federation against Cancer (Stichting tegen Kanker).

PIK3CA mutations are not a major determinant of resistance to the epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: It has been reported that activating KRAS mutations negatively affect response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies in metastatic colorectal cancer. The mutation status of signaling molecules downstream of the EGFR target is thus crucial to predict clinical benefit to EGFR-targeted therapies. Other mechanisms of resistance to EGFR inhibitors could involve activating mutations of the other main EGFR effector pathway, i.e., the PI3K/PTEN/AKT pathway. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We analyzed the PIK3CA and KRAS mutation status in a large group (n = 200) of chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancers treated with cetuximab (Erbitux) in monotherapy or in combination with irinotecan, and correlated the mutation status with outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-three (12%) of the 200 samples carried 1 of the PIK3CA mutations included in our assay. We found no correlation between the presence of a PIK3CA mutation and impaired response to cetuximab. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings do not provide any evidence for a strong role of PIK3CA mutations as a single marker in determining response to cetuximab in chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

Association of KRAS p.G13D mutation with outcome in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab.

CONTEXT: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who have KRAS codon 12- or KRAS codon 13-mutated tumors are presently excluded from treatment with the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody cetuximab. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that KRAS codon 13 mutations are associated with a better outcome after treatment with cetuximab than observed with other KRAS mutations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: We studied the association between KRAS mutation status (p.G13D vs other KRAS mutations) and response and survival in a pooled data set of 579 patients with chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab between 2001 and 2008. Patients were included in the CO.17, BOND, MABEL, EMR202600, EVEREST, BABEL, or SALVAGE clinical trials or received off-study treatment. Univariate and multivariate analyses, adjusting for possible prognostic factors and data set, were performed. The effect of the different mutations was studied in vitro by constructing isogenic cell lines with wild-type KRAS, p.G12V, or p.G13D mutant alleles and treating them with cetuximab. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main efficacy end point was overall survival. Secondary efficacy end points were response rate and progression-free survival. RESULTS: In comparison with patients with other KRAS-mutated tumors, patients with p.G13D-mutated tumors (n = 32) treated with cetuximab had longer overall survival (median, 7.6 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 5.7-20.5] months vs 5.7 [95% CI, 4.9-6.8] months; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31-0.81; P = .005) and longer progression-free survival (median, 4.0 [95% CI, 1.9-6.2] months vs 1.9 [95% CI, 1.8-2.8] months; adjusted HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.32-0.81; P = .004). There was a significant interaction between KRAS mutation status (p.G13D vs other KRAS mutations) and overall survival benefit with cetuximab treatment (adjusted HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.14-0.67; P = .003). In vitro and mouse model analysis showed that although p.G12V-mutated colorectal cells were insensitive to cetuximab, p.G13D-mutated cells were sensitive, as were KRAS wild-type cells. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, use of cetuximab was associated with longer overall and progression-free survival among patients with chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer with p.G13D-mutated tumors than with other KRAS-mutated tumors. Evaluation of cetuximab therapy in these tumors in prospective randomized trials may be warranted.

Clinical usefulness of EGFR gene copy number as a predictive marker in colorectal cancer patients treated with cetuximab: a fluorescent in situ hybridization study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the usefulness and the pitfalls inherent to the assessment of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene copy number (GCN) by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for outcome prediction to cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer. The value of testing KRAS mutation status, in addition to EGFR GCN, was also explored. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: FISH analysis of 87 metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with cetuximab was done, recording individual GCN per cell and using different samples per tumor. Performances of published cutoff points and different summaries of EGFR GCN distribution were assessed for response prediction. RESULTS: In our data set, two published cutoff points performed less well than in their training set, yielding positive predictive values and negative predictive values between 40.0% and 48.3% and between 81.0% and 86.5%, respectively. Among summaries of GCN distribution explored, mean and right-tailed distribution of GCN yielded the highest performances. A mean EGFR GCN > or = 2.83 provided an area under the curve of 0.71. Important heterogeneity of repeated measures of mean EGFR GCN was observed within tumors (intraclass correlation, 0.61; within-class SD, 0.40), leading to potential misclassifications of FISH status in 7 of 18 (38.8%) patients if a cutoff point were used. In multivariable analysis, EGFR GCN testing provided significant information independent of the KRAS status to predict response (P = 0.016) and overall survival (P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: We confirm the association between increased EGFR GCN and outcome after cetuximab. However, because of reproducibility concerns, any decision making based on published cutoff points is not warranted.

A let-7 microRNA-binding site polymorphism in KRAS predicts improved outcome in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with salvage cetuximab/panitumumab monotherapy.

PURPOSE: An inherited mutation in KRAS (LCS6-variant or rs61764370) results in altered control of the KRAS oncogene. We studied this biomarker's correlation to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy response in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: LCS6-variant and KRAS/BRAF mutational status was determined in 512 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with salvage anti-EGFR mAb therapy, and findings correlated with outcome. Reporters were tested in colon cancer cell lines to evaluate the differential response of the LCS6-variant allele to therapy exposure. RESULTS: In this study, 21.2% (109 of 512) of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer had the LCS6-variant (TG/GG), which was found twice as frequently in the BRAF-mutated versus the wild-type (WT) group (P=0.03). LCS6-variant patients had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) with anti-EGFR mAb monotherapy treatment in the whole cohort (16.85 vs. 7.85 weeks; P=0.019) and in the double WT (KRAS and BRAF) patient population (18 vs. 10.4 weeks; P=0.039). Combination therapy (mAbs plus chemotherapy) led to improved PFS and overall survival (OS) for nonvariant patients, and brought their outcome to levels comparable with LCS6-variant patients receiving anti-EGFR mAb monotherapy. Combination therapy did not lead to improved PFS or OS for LCS6-variant patients. Cell line studies confirmed a unique response of the LCS6-variant allele to both anti-EGFR mAb monotherapy and chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: LCS6-variant patients with metastatic colorectal cancer have an excellent response to anti-EGFR mAb monotherapy, without any benefit from the addition of chemotherapy. These findings further confirm the importance of this mutation as a biomarker of anti-EGFR mAb response in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, and warrant further prospective confirmation.

EGFR gene gain and PTEN protein expression are favorable prognostic factors in patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab.

INTRODUCTION: Cetuximab is a monoclonal epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeting antibody, used in the treatment of colon cancer. KRAS mutation status is strongly predictive of cetuximab efficacy, but more predictive factors are needed for better patient selection. PTEN is a downstream inhibitor of the EGFR pathway and has been evaluated as a predictive factor of cetuximab efficacy in colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue samples were collected from 226 patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer that had been treated with cetuximab. Clinical information was collected retrospectively from the patients' medical records. After central evaluation, 147 cases with adequate material were eligible for further evaluation. EGFR and PTEN status was evaluated with immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Data were associated with cetuximab treatment outcome. Additional analysis was performed with previously published data on PIK3CA, BRAF and KRAS mutation status and EGFR ligand amphiregulin (AREG) and epiregulin intratumoral mRNA expression levels. PIK3CA mutation status and PTEN protein expression were also analyzed as a single complex parameter, to evaluate the predictive value of PI3K/PTEN axis dysfunction as one entity. RESULTS: Analysis showed a borderline association of overall response rate (ORR) and time to progression (TTP) with EGFR protein overexpression by IHC (p = 0.059 and p = 0.057, respectively) and a positive association of EGFR gain by FISH (found in only five cases) with longer TTP (p = 0.026). No association was found between ORR or TTP and PTEN IHC or FISH status. Comparative analysis with previously published data showed that PTEN protein expression is associated with longer TTP in patients with wild-type (WT) KRAS (p = 0.036) and especially in the ones with elevated AREG levels (p = 0.046), as well as in patients with both KRAS and BRAF WT (p = 0.019). Patients with both PIK3CA WT and PTEN protein expression had significantly longer TTP (p = 0.010) versus all others, in the absence of BRAF and KRAS mutations, a finding which persisted in the KRAS WT/AREG high subgroup (p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: In this cetuximab-treated colorectal cancer population, EGFR gain was associated with better outcome and PTEN protein expression with longer TTP in KRAS WT, KRAS WT/AREG high and KRAS/BRAF WT subpopulations. Cetuximab efficacy is greater with intact and activated EGFR signaling, without activating mutations of KRAS/BRAF and in the presence of preserved PTEN inhibitory activity upon the PI3K/AKT pathway. These results reflect a solid biological rationale and warrant further evaluation of the predictive role of PTEN in prospective studies.

The prognostic role of ephrin A2 and endothelial growth factor receptor pathway mediators in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab.

BACKGROUND: Patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) with wild-type KRAS mutations are often treated with the endothelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody cetuximab. Despite the presence of a specific molecular target, most patients still do not derive benefit from this biological treatment. Our study explores the role of ephrin A2 (EphA2) receptor expression and of EGFR pathway mediators as predictors of cetuximab benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor biopsy samples from 226 cetuximab-treated patients with CRC were studied for mRNA expression of insulin growth factor binding protein 2 (IGFBP2), insulin growth factor receptor 1 (IGF1R), cMET, EphA2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), HER3, and HER4 by means of TaqMan reverse-transcribed polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). RESULTS: Of the 226 patients evaluable for exploratory analysis, 222 had complete data from follow-up visits. The univariate analysis revealed the following significant adverse prognostic factors for risk of death: high EphA2 mRNA levels (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61; P = .015), high HER2 mRNA levels (HR, 1.51; P = .045), and high IGF1R mRNA levels (HR, 1.56; P = .021). Low EphA2 tumor expression was significantly associated with objective response to cetuximab therapy. In multivariate analysis of a broad biomarker panel, factors with independent prognostic value included EphA2 mRNA levels (HR, 1.67; P = .029), high amphiregulin (AREG) mRNA levels in KRAS wild-type tumors (HR, 0.17; P < .0001), and high epiregulin (EREG) mRNA levels (HR, 0.38; P = .006). CONCLUSION: High EphA2 receptor expression in CRC was associated with a worse outcome in patients treated with cetuximab-based therapy. Prospective validation in treated and control patients is required to dissect the predictive from prognostic role in advanced CRC.

Clinical biomarkers in oncology: focus on colorectal cancer.

Rapidly growing insight into the molecular biology of colorectal cancer has led to high hopes for the identification of molecular markers to be used in optimized and tailored treatment regimens. However, many of the published data on gene-specific biomarkers are contradictory in their findings, and no tests are currently used in clinical practice, with the exception of microsatellite instability (MSI) and guanylyl cyclase C (GCC) testing in the adjuvant setting, and in Europe KRAS mutation testing is used in the setting of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted therapy for metastatic disease. There are many reasons for the failure of the initial marker hypothesis-driven approach. Although supported by a good biologic rationale, single markers such as tumor protein p53 (TP53) gene mutations, when applied to a complex tumor type containing many synchronous alterations, do not perform well in predicting outcome. Many markers also suffer from technical shortcomings, resulting from the lack of quantitative techniques to capture the impact of the molecular alteration. The impact of markers obtained from microarray expression profiling needs to be further investigated in studies based on much larger cohorts, and cross-validation studies will be essential. Recently, mutations in the KRAS gene were shown to be strong negative predictors of response to EGFR inhibitors in metastatic disease. It has also been suggested that BRAF gene mutations may be predictive of EGFR inhibitor resistance, and there are some conflicting data regarding the role of the PIK3CA gene. Further studies are needed to help integrate the latest findings into clinically useful tools for personalized medicine.

Amphiregulin and epiregulin mRNA expression in primary tumors predicts outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab.

PURPOSE: To study the power of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) epiregulin (EREG) and amphiregulin (AREG) ligands' expression in primary tumors to predict the outcome in patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer (cmCRC) treated with the combination of cetuximab and irinotecan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Gene expression measurements and KRAS mutation analysis were performed on archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded primary tumors of 220 cmCRC patients. Response was measured using RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) criteria. The relation between ligand expression levels and outcome was evaluated using logistic regression for response and Cox regression for survival data. Receiver operating characteristics analysis was performed for response and survival data. CIs for the performance indices were obtained with a nonparametric bootstrap procedure. Findings were externally validated on a series of 67 samples treated in a similar setting. RESULTS: In KRAS wild type (WT) patients, there was a significant association between log-transformed ligand expression and response for EREG (odds ratio for objective response, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.83; P = .0005; concordance index [c-index], 0.681) and for AREG (odds ratio for objective response, 1.862; 95% CI, 1.22 to 2.72; P = .0017; c-index, 0.673). In a Cox regression model, dichotomized ligand expression was significantly associated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). EREG PFS hazard ratio (HR) was 0.41 (95% CI, 0.274 to 0.609; P < .001; time-dependent c-index [Ctau index], 0.640), and AREG PFS HR was 0.43 (95% CI, 0.29 to 0.64; P < .001; Ctau index, 0.627). EREG OS HR was 0.42 (95% CI, 0.28 to 0.63; P < .0001; Ctau index, 0.639), and AREG OS HR was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.64; P < .0001; Ctau index, 0.625). There was no predictive power of ligand expression in patients with KRAS mutation. CONCLUSION: Expression of EGFR ligands in primary tumors significantly predicts outcome in KRAS WT cmCRC treated with cetuximab and irinotecan.