KRAS Allelic Variants in Biliary Tract Cancers.

Importance: Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) contain several actionable molecular alterations, including FGFR2, IDH1, ERBB2 (formerly HER2), and KRAS. KRAS allelic variants are found in 20% to 30% of BTCs, and multiple KRAS inhibitors are currently under clinical investigation. Objectives: To describe the genomic landscape, co-sequence variations, immunophenotype, genomic ancestry, and survival outcomes of KRAS-mutated BTCs and to calculate the median overall survival (mOS) for the most common allelic variants. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, multicenter, pooled cohort study obtained clinical and next-generation sequencing data from multiple databases between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2022. These databases included Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Foundation Medicine, American Association for Cancer Research Project GENIE, and cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics. The cohort comprised patients with BTCs who underwent genomic testing. Main Outcome and Measure: The main outcome was mOS, defined as date of diagnosis to date of death, which was measured in months. Results: A total of 7457 patients (n = 3773 males [50.6%]; mean [SD] age, 63 [5] years) with BTCs and genomic testing were included. Of these patients, 5813 had clinical outcome data available, in whom 1000 KRAS-mutated BTCs were identified. KRAS allelic variants were highly prevalent in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (28.6%) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (36.1%). Thirty-six KRAS allelic variants were identified, and the prevalence rates in descending order were G12D (41%), G12V (23%), and Q61H (8%). The variant G12D had the highest mOS of 25.1 (95% CI, 22.0-33.0) months compared with 22.8 (95% CI, 19.6-31.4) months for Q61H and 17.8 (95% CI, 16.3-23.1) months for G12V variants. The majority of KRAS-mutated BTCs (98.9%) were not microsatellite instability-high and had low tumor mutational burden (ranging from a median [IQR] of 1.2 (1.2-2.5) to a mean [SD] of 3.3 [1.3]). Immune profiling through RNA sequencing of KRAS and NRAS-mutated samples showed a pattern toward a more immune-inflamed microenvironment with higher M1 macrophage activation (0.16 vs 0.12; P = .047) and interferon-γ expression compared with wild-type tumors. The G12D variant remained the most common KRAS allelic variant in all patient ancestries. Patients with admixed American ancestry had the highest proportion of G12D variant (45.0%). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that KRAS allelic variants were relatively common and may be potentially actionable genomic alterations in patients with BTCs, especially perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. The findings add to the growing data on genomic and immune landscapes of KRAS allelic variants in BTCs and are potentially of value to the planning of specific therapies for this heterogeneous patient group.

Methylthioadenosine Phosphorylase Genomic Loss in Advanced Gastrointestinal Cancers.

BACKGROUND: One of the most common sporadic homozygous deletions in cancers is 9p21 loss, which includes the genes methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP), CDKN2A, and CDKN2B, and has been correlated with worsened outcomes and immunotherapy resistance. MTAP-loss is a developing drug target through synthetic lethality with MAT2A and PMRT5 inhibitors. The purpose of this study is to investigate the prevalence and genomic landscape of MTAP-loss in advanced gastrointestinal (GI) tumors and investigate its role as a prognostic biomarker. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed next-generation sequencing and comparative genomic and clinical analysis on an extensive cohort of 64 860 tumors comprising 5 GI cancers. We compared the clinical outcomes of patients with GI cancer harboring MTAP-loss and MTAP-intact tumors in a retrospective study. RESULTS: The prevalence of MTAP-loss in GI cancers is 8.30%. MTAP-loss was most prevalent in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) at 21.7% and least in colorectal carcinoma (CRC) at 1.1%. MTAP-loss tumors were more prevalent in East Asian patients with PDAC (4.4% vs 3.2%, P = .005) or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC; 6.4% vs 4.3%, P = .036). Significant differences in the prevalence of potentially targetable genomic alterations (ATM, BRAF, BRCA2, ERBB2, IDH1, PIK3CA, and PTEN) were observed in MTAP-loss tumors and varied according to tumor type. MTAP-loss PDAC, IHCC, and CRC had a lower prevalence of microsatellite instability or elevated tumor mutational burden. Positive PD-L1 tumor cell expression was less frequent among MTAP-loss versus MTAP-intact IHCC tumors (23.2% vs 31.2%, P = .017). CONCLUSION: In GI cancers, MTAP-loss occurs as part of 9p21 loss and has an overall prevalence of 8%. MTAP-loss occurs in 22% of PDAC, 15% of IHCC, 8.7% of gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, 2.4% of hepatocellular carcinoma, and 1.1% of CRC and is not mutually exclusive with other targetable mutations.

The Cholangiocarcinoma in the Young (CITY) Study: Tumor Biology, Treatment Patterns, and Survival Outcomes in Adolescent Young Adults With Cholangiocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Increased awareness of the distinct tumor biology for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer has led to improvement in outcomes for this population. However, in cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), a paucity of data exist on the AYA population. To our knowledge, we present the largest study to date on AYA disease biology, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes in CCA. METHODS: A multi-institutional cohort of patients with CCA diagnosed with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) was used for analysis. Retrospective chart review was conducted on patients who were 50 years old and younger (young; n = 124) and older than 50 years (older; n = 723). RESULTS: Among 1,039 patients screened, 847 patients met eligibility (72% ICC, 28% ECC). Young patients had a larger median tumor size at resection compared with older patients (4.2 v 3.6 cm; P = .048), more commonly had N1 disease (65% v 43%; P = .040), and were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy (odds ratio, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.64 to 9.74). Tumors of young patients were more likely to harbor an FGFR2 fusion, BRAF mutation, or ATM mutation (P < .05 for each). Young patients were more likely to receive palliative systemic therapy (96% v 69%; P < .001), targeted therapy (23% v 8%; P < .001), and treatment on a clinical trial (31% v 19%; P = .004). Among patients who presented with advanced disease, young patients had a higher median overall survival compared with their older counterparts (17.7 v 13.5 months; 95% CI, 12.6 to 22.6 v 11.4 to 14.8; P = .049). CONCLUSION: Young patients with CCA had more advanced disease at resection, more commonly received both adjuvant and palliative therapies, and demonstrated improved survival compared with older patients. Given the low clinical trial enrollment and poor outcomes among some AYA cancer populations, data to the contrary in CCA are highly encouraging.

Molecular profiling and treatment pattern differences between intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Treatment patterns for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) differ, but limited studies exist comparing them. This study examines differences in molecular profiling rates and treatment patterns in these populations, focusing on use of adjuvant, liver-directed, targeted, and investigational therapies. METHODS: This multicenter collaboration included patients with ICC or ECC treated at 1 of 8 participating institutions. Retrospective data were collected on risk factors, pathology, treatments, and survival. Comparative statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Among 1039 patients screened, 847 patients met eligibility (ICC = 611, ECC = 236). Patients with ECC were more likely than those with ICC to present with early stage disease (53.8% vs 28.0%), undergo surgical resection (55.1% vs 29.8%), and receive adjuvant chemoradiation (36.5% vs 4.2%) (all P < .00001). However, they were less likely to undergo molecular profiling (50.3% vs 64.3%) or receive liver-directed therapy (17.9% vs 35.7%), targeted therapy (4.7% vs 18.9%), and clinical trial therapy (10.6% vs 24.8%) (all P < .001). In patients with recurrent ECC after surgery, the molecular profiling rate was 64.5%. Patients with advanced ECC had a shorter median overall survival than those with advanced ICC (11.8 vs 15.1 months; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced ECC have low rates of molecular profiling, possibly in part because of insufficient tissue. They also have low rates of targeted therapy use and clinical trial enrollment. While these rates are higher in advanced ICC, the prognosis for both subtypes of cholangiocarcinoma remains poor, and a pressing need exists for new effective targeted therapies and broader access to clinical trials.