Clinical challenges of consensus molecular subtype CMS4 colon cancer in the era of precision medicine.

Over the past decade, our understanding of the diversity of colorectal cancer (CRC) has expanded significantly, raising hopes of tailoring treatments more precisely for individual patients. A key achievement in this direction was the establishment of the consensus molecular classification, particularly identifying the challenging consensus molecular subtype (CMS) CMS4 associated with poor prognosis. Due to its aggressive nature, extensive research is dedicated to the CMS4 subgroup. Recent years have unveiled molecular and microenvironmental features at the tissue level specific to CMS4 CRC. This has paved the way for mechanistic studies and the development of preclinical models. Simultaneously, efforts have been made to easily identify patients with CMS4 CRC. Reassessing clinical trial results through the CMS classification lens has improved our understanding of the therapeutic challenges linked to this subtype. Exploration of the biology of CMS4 CRC is yielding potential biomarkers and novel treatment approaches. This overview aims to provide insights into the clinico-biological characteristics of the CMS4 subgroup, the molecular pathways driving this subtype, and available diagnostic options. We also emphasize the therapeutic challenges associated with this subtype, offering potential explanations. Finally, we summarize the current tailored treatments for CMS4-CRC emerging from fundamental and preclinical studies.

Wnt, glucocorticoid and cellular prion protein cooperate to drive a mesenchymal phenotype with poor prognosis in colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: The mesenchymal subtype of colorectal cancer (CRC), associated with poor prognosis, is characterized by abundant expression of the cellular prion protein PrPC, which represents a candidate therapeutic target. How PrPC is induced in CRC remains elusive. This study aims to elucidate the signaling pathways governing PrPC expression and to shed light on the gene regulatory networks linked to PrPC. METHODS: We performed in silico analyses on diverse datasets of in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo models of mouse CRC and patient cohorts. We mined ChIPseq studies and performed promoter analysis. CRC cell lines were manipulated through genetic and pharmacological approaches. We created mice combining conditional inactivation of Apc in intestinal epithelial cells and overexpression of the human prion protein gene PRNP. Bio-informatic analyses were carried out in two randomized control trials totalizing over 3000 CRC patients. RESULTS: In silico analyses combined with cell-based assays identified the Wnt-ß-catenin and glucocorticoid pathways as upstream regulators of PRNP expression, with subtle differences between mouse and human. We uncover multiple feedback loops between PrPC and these two pathways, which translate into an aggravation of CRC pathogenesis in mouse. In stage III CRC patients, the signature defined by PRNP-CTNNB1-NR3C1, encoding PrPC, ß-catenin and the glucocorticoid receptor respectively, is overrepresented in the poor-prognosis, mesenchymal subtype and associates with reduced time to recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: An unleashed PrPC-dependent vicious circle is pathognomonic of poor prognosis, mesenchymal CRC. Patients from this aggressive subtype of CRC may benefit from therapies targeting the PRNP-CTNNB1-NR3C1 axis.

Oxaliplatin-Based Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Older Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: An ACCENT/IDEA Pooled Analysis of 12 Trials.

PURPOSE: A number of studies suggest that older patients may have reduced or no benefit from the addition of oxaliplatin to fluoropyrimidines as adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer (CC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied the prognostic impact of age, as well as treatment adherence/toxicity patterns according to age, in patients with stage III CC who received 3 or 6 months of infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin/capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) on the basis of data collected from trials from the ACCENT and IDEA databases. Associations between age and time to recurrence (TTR), disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), survival after recurrence (SAR), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were assessed by a Cox model or a competing risk model, stratified by studies and adjusted for sex, performance status, T and N stage, and year of enrollment. RESULTS: A total of 17,909 patients were included; 24% of patients were age older than 70 years (n = 4,340). Patients age ≥70 years had higher rates of early treatment discontinuation. Rates of grade ≥3 adverse events were similar between those older and younger than 70 years, except for diarrhea and neutropenia that were more frequent in older patients treated with CAPOX (14.2% v 11.2%; P = .01 and 12.1% v 9.6%; P = .04, respectively). In multivariable analysis, TTR was not significantly different between patients <70 years and those ≥70 years, but DFS, OS, SAR, and CSS were significantly shorter in those patients ≥70 years. CONCLUSION: In patients ≥70 years with stage III CC fit enough to be enrolled in clinical trials, oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy was well tolerated and led to similar TTR compared with younger patients, suggesting similar efficacy. TTR may be a more appropriate end point for efficacy in this patient population.

A multicenter study evaluating efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-colorectal digestive cancers with microsatellite instability.

BACKGROUND: One randomized phase III trial comparing chemotherapy (CT) with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has demonstrated significant efficacy of ICI in deficient DNA mismatch repair system/microsatellite instability-high (dMMR/MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancer. However, few studies have compared ICI with CT in other advanced dMMR/MSI-H digestive tumors. METHODS: In this multicenter study, we included patients with advanced dMMR/MSI-H non-colorectal digestive tumors treated with chemotherapy and/or ICIs. Patients were divided retrospectively into two groups, a CT group and an immunotherapy (IO) group. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). A propensity score approach using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method was applied to deal with potential differences between the two groups. RESULTS: 133 patients (45.1/27.1/27.8% with gastric/small bowel/other carcinomas) were included. The majority of patients received ICI in 1st (29.1%) or 2nd line (44.4%). The 24-month PFS rates were 7.9% in the CT group and 71.2% in the IO group. Using the IPTW method, IO treatment was associated with better PFS (HR=0.227; 95% CI 0.147-0.351; p < 0.0001). The overall response rate was 26.3% in the CT group versus 60.7% in the IO group (p < 0.001) with prolonged duration of disease control in the IO group (p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, predictive factors of PFS for patients treated with IO were good performance status, absence of liver metastasis and prior primary tumor resection, whereas no association was found for the site of the primary tumor. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of randomized trials, our study highlights the superior efficacy of ICI compared with standard-of-care therapy in patients with unresectable or metastatic dMMR/MSI-H non-colorectal digestive cancer, regardless of tumor type, with acceptable toxicity.

Primary resistance to immunotherapy in patients with a dMMR/MSI metastatic gastrointestinal cancer: who is at risk? An AGEO real-world study.

BACKGROUND: The outstanding efficacy of immunotherapy in metastatic dMMR/MSI gastro-intestinal (GI) cancers has led to a rapid increase in the number of patients treated. However, 20-30% of patients experience primary resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIPR) and need better characterization. METHODS: This AGEO real-world study retrospectively analyzed the efficacy and safety of ICIs and identified clinical variables associated with ICIPR in patients with metastatic dMMR/MSI GI cancers treated with immunotherapy between 2015 and 2022. RESULTS: 399 patients were included, 284 with colorectal cancer (CRC) and 115 with non-CRC, mostly treated by an anti-PD(L)1 (88.0%). PFS at 24 months was 55.8% (95CI [50.8-61.2]) and OS at 48 months was 59.1% (95CI [53.0-65.9]). ORR was 51.0%, and 25.1% of patients were ICIPR. There was no statistical difference in ORR, DCR, PFS, or OS between CRC and non-CRC groups. In multivariable analysis, ICIPR was associated with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (OR = 3.36), liver metastases (OR = 2.19), peritoneal metastases (OR = 2.00), ≥1 previous line of treatment (OR = 1.83), and age≤50 years old (OR = 1.76). CONCLUSION: These five clinical factors associated with primary resistance to ICIs should be considered by physicians to guide treatment choice in GI dMMR/MSI metastatic cancer patients.

Avelumab vs Standard Second-Line Chemotherapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer and Microsatellite Instability: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Only 1 randomized clinical trial has shown the superiority of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with deficient mismatch repair and/or microsatellite instability (dMMR/MSI) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the first-line setting. Objectives: To determine whether avelumab (an anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 antibody) improves progression-free survival (PFS) compared with standard second-line chemotherapy in patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC. Design, Setting, and Participants: The SAMCO-PRODIGE 54 trial is a national open-label phase 2 randomized clinical trial that was conducted from April 24, 2018, to April 29, 2021, at 49 French sites. Patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC who experienced progression while receiving standard first-line therapy were included in the analysis. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive standard second-line therapy or avelumab every 2 weeks until progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or patient refusal. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary end point was PFS according to RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours), version 1.1, evaluated by investigators in patients with mCRC and confirmed dMMR and MSI status who received at least 1 dose of treatment (modified intention-to-treat [mITT] population). Results: A total of 122 patients were enrolled in the mITT population. Median age was 66 (IQR, 56-76) years, 65 patients (53.3%) were women, 100 (82.0%) had a right-sided tumor, and 52 (42.6%) had BRAF V600E-mutated tumors. There was no difference in patients and tumor characteristics between treatment groups. No new safety concerns in either group were detected, with fewer treatment-related adverse events of at least grade 3 in the avelumab group than in the chemotherapy group (20 [31.7%] vs 34 [53.1%]; P = .02). After a median follow-up of 33.3 (95% CI, 28.3-34.8) months, avelumab was superior to chemotherapy with or without targeted agents with respect to PFS (15 [24.6%] vs 5 [8.2%] among patients without progression; P = .03). Rates of PFS rates at 12 months were 31.2% (95% CI, 20.1%-42.9%) and 19.4% (95% CI, 10.6%-30.2%) in the avelumab and control groups, respectively, and 27.4% (95% CI, 16.8%-39.0%) and 9.1% (95% CI, 3.2%-18.8%) at 18 months. Objective response rates were similar in both groups (18 [29.5%] vs 16 [26.2%]; P = .45). Among patients with disease control, 18 (75.7%) in the avelumab group compared with 9 (19.1%) in the control group had ongoing disease control at 18 months. Conclusions: The SAMCO-PRODIGE 54 phase 2 randomized clinical trial showed, in patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC, better PFS and disease control duration with avelumab over standard second-line treatment, with a favorable safety profile. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03186326.

Transcriptomic Signatures of MSI-High Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Predict Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

PURPOSE: Microsatellite instability (MSI) is currently the only predictive biomarker of efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC). However, 10% to 40% of patients with MSI mCRC will experience a primary resistance to ICI. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In two cohorts of patients with MSI mCRC treated with ICI (exploratory, N = 103; validation, N = 35), 3' RNA sequencing was performed from primary tumors. Previously described single-cell transcriptomic signatures of tumor microenvironment (TME) were analyzed. RESULTS: In the exploratory cohort, the unsupervised clustering allowed the identification of three clusters of tumors with distinct transcriptional profiles: cluster A ("stromalHIGH-proliferationLOW"), cluster B ("stromalHIGH-proliferationMED"), and cluster C ("stromalLOW-proliferationHIGH"), with an enrichment of patients progressing at first disease assessment under ICI in cluster A (30% vs. 12% in cluster B and 8.1% in cluster C; P = 0.074). Progression-free survival (PFS) was also significantly shorter in patients belonging to cluster A, compared with clusters B or C (P < 0.001) with 2-year PFS rates of 33.5%, 80.5%, and 78.3%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, PFS was still significantly longer in patients belonging to cluster B [HR, 0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.08-0.45; P < 0.001] and cluster C (HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.10-0.59; P = 0.02), compared with patients belonging to cluster A. The association of this clustering with PFS under ICI was confirmed in the validation cohort. PFS related to non-ICI-based regimens was not significantly different according to cluster. CONCLUSIONS: This unsupervised transcriptomic classification identified three groups of MSI mCRCs with different compositions of TME cells and proliferative capacities of TME/tumor cells. The "stromalHIGH-proliferationLOW" cluster is associated with a poorer prognosis with ICI treatment.

Chemotherapy-induced ileitis associated or not with colitis in digestive oncology patients: An AGEO multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: The characteristics and management of ileitis induced by chemotherapy in cancer patients are poorly described in the literature. METHODS: This retrospective multicentre study enroled patients hospitalized in a digestive oncology unit for a symptomatic chemotherapy-induced ileitis. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were included, with a regimen based on fluoropyrimidine and/or irinotecan in 95% of cases. Five patients were excluded due to the diagnosis of infectious ileitis (Clostridium difficile in 3 patients, Campylobacter jejuni in 1 patient and cytomegalovirus in 1 patient). The most frequently described symptoms were diarrhoea (77% including 54% of grade 3-4 diarrhoea), abdominal pain (58%), fever (51%) and vomiting (56%). An ileo-colonoscopy was performed in 35% of patients and did not show any specific results or severity criteria. The ileitis was complicated by bowel perforation and/or obstruction in 3 patients. Disease progression was favourable in 1-2 weeks in the vast majority of cases, on symptomatic treatment, allowing resumption of the chemotherapy regimen involved in 67% of patients. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy-induced ileitis is a rare complication that most often involves fluoropyri-midine- and/or irinotecan-based regimens. In most cases, endoscopic examinations were not contributory and do not seem useful in the event of non-severe symptomatology which most often develops favourably on symptomatic therapy, allowing resumption of the chemotherapy involved.

Adverse Events Associated with Encorafenib Plus Cetuximab in Patients with BRAFV600E-mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An in-depth Analysis of the BEACON CRC Study.

BACKGROUND: The BRAF inhibitor encorafenib in combination with cetuximab was recently approved for patients with BRAFV600E-mutated (BRAFV600Emut) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Approval was based on positive results from the phase 3 BEACON CRC study in BRAFV600Emut mCRC patients who had progressed after 1-2 previous regimens. This analysis provides a detailed examination of the adverse events (AEs) of interest (AEIs) with encorafenib+cetuximab in the BEACON study to aid gastrointestinal oncologists, given the limited experience with this combination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: AEIs, including dermatological AEs, arthralgia/myalgia, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, fatigue/asthenia and nephrotoxicity, were examined in the doublet therapy group. Clinical characteristics associated with these AEs, AE grade, time to onset and time to resolution were also studied. RESULTS: Safety analysis included 216/220 patients randomized to doublet therapy. The most commonly occurring AEI was dermatological toxicity (75.5%), followed by arthralgia/myalgia (56.0%) and fatigue/asthenia (56.0%). Other than nephrotoxicity (7 patients; 5/7 with Grade 3 or 4), most AEs were Grade 1 or 2. Most AEs were more common in women than men (nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, dermatological AEs, and arthralgia/myalgia). Nausea/vomiting, abdominal pain and fatigue/asthenia were more common in patients aged ≥70 years. Most AEs developed early, within the first 1-2 months of treatment, and resolved within 1-2 weeks. In addition, survival outcomes were better in patients experiencing arthralgia/myalgia or dermatological toxicities. CONCLUSION: This analysis indicated that, except for rare cases of nephrotoxicity, encorafenib+cetuximab is well tolerated in most patients, with most AEIs being mild-to-moderate in severity, occurring early and resolving rapidly. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: the BEACON study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02928224; EudraCT, 2015-005805-35).

Prognostic Impact of Early Treatment and Oxaliplatin Discontinuation in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: An ACCENT/IDEA Pooled Analysis of 11 Adjuvant Trials.

PURPOSE: Oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer (CC) for 6 months remains a standard in high-risk stage III patients. Data are lacking as to whether early discontinuation of all treatment (ETD) or early discontinuation of oxaliplatin (EOD) could worsen the prognosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied the prognostic impact of ETD and EOD in patients with stage III CC from the ACCENT/IDEA databases, where patients were planned to receive 6 months of infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin or capecitabine plus oxaliplatin. ETD was defined as discontinuation of treatment and EOD as discontinuation of oxaliplatin only before patients had received a maximum of 75% of planned cycles. Association between ETD/EOD and overall survival and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed by Cox models adjusted for established prognostic factors. RESULTS: Analysis of ETD and EOD included 10,447 (20.9% with ETD) and 7,243 (18.8% with EOD) patients, respectively. Compared with patients without ETD or EOD, patients with ETD or EOD were statistically more likely to be women, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 1, and for ETD, older with a lower body mass index. In multivariable analyses, ETD was associated with a decrease in disease-free survival and overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61, P < .001 and HR, 1.73, P < .001), which was not the case for EOD (HR, 1.07, P = .3 and HR, 1.13, P = .1). However, patients who received < 50% of the planned cycles of oxaliplatin had poorer outcomes. CONCLUSION: In patients treated with 6 months of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for stage III CC, ETD was associated with poorer oncologic outcomes. However, this was not the case for EOD. These data favor discontinuing oxaliplatin while continuing fluoropyrimidine in individuals with significant neurotoxicity having received > 50% of the planned 6-month chemotherapy.

EUS-Guided Gastroenterostomy in Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction: A Comparative Study between First- and Second-Line Approaches after Enteral Stent Placement.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is increasingly used in the setting of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). However, little is known about the role of primary EUS-GE. The aim of the present study is to compare the outcomes of EUS-GE by using the freehand technique as a first- and second-line approach after enteral stenting (ES). METHODS: This is an observational single-center study using a prospectively collected database. All consecutive patients who underwent an EUS-GE using the freehand technique due to malignant GOO were included. Patients with previous gastric surgery, a wire-guided EUS-GE technique, or those presenting without GOO were excluded. The primary outcome was the clinical success, defined as a solid oral intake at 1 week after the procedure (GOO Score, GOOSS ≥ 2). The secondary outcomes were technical success and adverse event (AE) rates. The impact on nutritional parameters was also assessed. RESULTS: Forty-five patients underwent an EUS-GE for all indications. Finally, 28 patients (mean age: 63 ± 17.2 years, 57.1% male) with (n = 13, 46.4%) and without (n = 15, 53.6%) a previous ES were included. The technical success was achieved in 25 cases (89.3%), with no differences between the two groups (92.3% vs. 86.7%, p = 1). The median limb diameter and procedure time were 27 mm (range:15-48) and 37 min. Overall, clinical success was achieved in 22 cases (88%), with three failures due to AEs (n = 2) or peritoneal carcinomatosis (n = 1). The diet progression was quicker in patients with a previous ES (GOOSS at 48 h, 2 vs. 1, p = 0.023), but the GOOSS at 1 week (p = 0.299), albumin gain (p = 0.366), and BMI gain (0.257) were comparable in the two groups. The AE rate was 7.1%. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-GE achieves a high technical and clinical success in patients with GOO regardless of the presence of a previous ES. Patients with previous ES may have a quicker progression of their diet, but the GOOSS and nutritional status in the long term at 1 week or 1 month are comparable. Primary EUS-GE might require fewer procedures and less discontinuation of chemotherapy to achieve a comparable result.

Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy With Folfirinox or Oxaliplatin Alone in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Background: Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) of chemotherapy is an option for the treatment of patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer (LMCRC). Though HAI with oxaliplatin (HAI-Ox) is generally used, intravenous (IV) 5-fluoro-uracil (5FU)-oxaliplatin-irinotecan HAI (HAI-Folfirinox) is feasible and leads to curative-intent surgery in 30% of pretreated patients. We compared the efficacy and safety of HAI-Ox and HAI-Folfirinox. Methods: Patients who underwent HAI chemotherapy for LMCRC were retrospectively included from 2008 to 2019 from six French expert centers. Results: Data were collected from 273 previously treated patients with LMCRC. Patients received HAI-Folfirinox (n = 52) or HAI-Ox (n = 221) combined with IV chemotherapy. The objective response rate (ORR) was 43.2% in patients with HAI-Folfirinox and 45.9% (ns) in patients with HAI-Ox. Median overall survival (OS) was 17 months (95% CI: 15-32.3) with HAI-Folfirinox and 26.2 months (95% CI: 19.4-34.4; p = 0.1) with HAI-Ox. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months (95% CI: 4.9-10.3) with HAI-Folfirinox and 6.4 months (95% CI: 6.0-7.7; p = 0.6) with HAI-Ox. The secondary liver resection rate was 35.6% with HAI-Folfirinox and 16.7% with HAI-Ox (p = 0.007). Grade 2 and above toxicities were significantly more frequent with HAI-Folfirinox. In the global population, only 2 factors were prognostic for OS in multivariable analyses: liver-only disease [hazard ratio (HR): 0.4; 95% CI 0.20-0.83; p = 0.013] and local complications of the catheter (HR: 3.8; 95% CI 1.6-9.0; p = 0.002). Conclusion: Hepatic arterial infusion results in high response rates, secondary resections, and long survival in pretreated patients with LMCRC.

Safety and Efficacy of Bevacizumab in Cancer Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: The safety of bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and digestive and nondigestive cancers is poorly documented. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patient records of all adult cancer patients with IBD at our institution from April 2007 to May 2016 with an update in November 2019. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients with a history of IBD (Crohn's disease, n = 22; ulcerative colitis, n = 5) who were treated with bevacizumab and chemotherapy for metastatic solid tumors were identified. At the time of advanced cancer diagnosis, 18 patients had quiescent IBD, whereas 9 patients had moderately active IBD. Among those with moderately active IBD, five had received corticosteroids less than six months prior to cancer diagnosis and one had received infliximab. The treated cancers were colorectal cancer (n = 13), small bowel cancer (n = 4), non-small cell lung cancer (n = 3), breast cancer (n = 3), and other cancers (n = 4). Patients received bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy and/or as maintenance for a median of 6.7 months. Grade 2 or higher bevacizumab-related complications were proteinuria in two patients and hypertension, diarrhea, rectal bleeding, and intestinal perforation in one patient each. No clinical IBD flares were observed during bevacizumab treatment. CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy is safe in cancer patients with moderately active or quiescent IBD.

MSI colorectal cancer, all you need to know.

Colorectal cancer management has been dramatically impacted by molecular profiling these last years. Among these molecular subgroups, patients with microsatellite instability (MSI) are of particular interest, owing to the prognostic and predictive value of this tumor biomarker. This review article explains the molecular abnormalities underlying MSI phenotype and the consequences of such molecular abnormalities on carcinogenesis, genetic instability and immune infiltration. It details the diagnostic methods for identifying MSI colorectal cancer patients and describes how the prognostic and theranostic values of this marker are impacting treatment decision-making for these patients in 2022.

Encorafenib plus cetuximab treatment in BRAF V600E-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer patients pre-treated with an anti-EGFR: An AGEO-GONO case series.

BACKGROUND: Encorafenib plus cetuximab is efficient in anti-EGFR-naïve patients with BRAFV600E mutated (BRAFm) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). No data are available concerning the efficacy of BRAF inhibitors associated with anti-EGFRs (B + E) in patients previously treated with an anti-EGFR agent. METHODS: We retrospectively collected a series of patients with BRAFm mCRC treated with B + E after previous anti-EGFR treatment, in 14 centers. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the start of treatment, and we reported objective response and disease control rates (ORR, DCR; RECIST V1.1). RESULTS: Twenty-five BRAFm mCRC patients were enrolled. Prior to B + E treatment, 4/10/11 patients were treated with 1/2/> 2 previous treatment lines. Ten patients received previous panitumumab, 14 cetuximab, 1 both. Immediate progression with previous anti-EGFR was reported for 7 patients. Anti-BRAF was encorafenib for 21 patients, dabrafenib for 4 patients, with cetuximab for 24 patients and panitumumab for 1 patient. ORR was 40% (10 patients) and DCR was 80% (20 patients). Median PFS and OS were 4.8 months (95% CI, 4.01-7.95) and 10.1 months (95% CI, 7.75-NR). DCR amongst patients with previous primary resistance to anti-EGFR (N = 7) was 100%. Two patients discontinued B + E due to drug-related adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Though in a limited retrospective series of patients, these results show the efficacy of the combination of anti-BRAF and anti-EGFRs in BRAFm mCRC patients previously treated with an anti-EGFR. The use of this combination should thus not be ruled out in this population with limited therapeutic options.

Sequential Treatment With Trifluridine/Tipiracil and Regorafenib in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: An AGEO Prospective "Real-World Study".

INTRODUCTION: Regorafenib (R) and trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) are of proven efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patient's refractory to standard therapies. However, it remains unclear which drug should be administered first. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This French observational study was prospectively conducted in 11 centers between June 2017 and September 2019. All consecutive patients with chemorefractory mCRC and receiving FTD/TPI and/or R were eligible. The aim was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of FTD/TPI and/or R in real-world setting with adjusted analysis. RESULTS: A total of 237 mCRC patients (25% R and 75% FTD/TPI) were enrolled. As compared to R, FTD/TPI patients were significantly older and with more metastatic sites. Median OS and PFS were respectively 6.2 and 2.4 months in the FTD/TPI and 6.6 and 2.1 months in the R group. After matching 46 paired patients according to a propensity score, a trend to a longer OS (P = .58), and a significantly longer PFS (P = .048) were observed in the FTD/TPI group. In the 24% of patients receiving the R/T or T/R sequence, median OS from first treatment was similar. Tolerability profiles were similar to published data and dose reductions were more frequent in the R group. CONCLUSION: Efficacy and safety results in this real-world prospective study are in line with phase III trials. In a matched population, PFS was significantly longer in the FTD/TPI group. Despite a limited number of patients, clinical outcomes seemed similar in patients treated with the T/R or R/T sequence.

Phase III randomized trial comparing systemic versus intra-arterial oxaliplatin, combined with LV5FU2 +/- irinotecan and a targeted therapy, in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer restricted to the liver (OSCAR): PRODIGE 49.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer (CRCLM), systemic doublet or triplet chemotherapy and targeted therapy is considered a standard first-line treatment. Hepatic arterial infusion of oxaliplatin (HAI-ox) generates a high response rate, but this still needs to be confirmed in a randomized trial. We incorporated HAI-ox in doublet or triplet + targeted therapy to validate its efficacy. AIM: The OSCAR study is an ongoing randomized phase III trial comparing FOLFOX + targeted therapy according to RAS status, or FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab in patients eligible for triplet therapy, with the same regimen but with HAI-ox instead of IV-ox as the first-line treatment for CRCLM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Main eligibility criteria are colorectal cancer, unresectable liver metastasis, no extra-hepatic metastases except pulmonary nodules if ≤3 and <10 mm, ECOG performance status 0 or 1. ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS). A difference of 4 months for the median PFS in favor of HAI-ox is expected (HR = 0.73). Secondary endpoints include overall survival, overall response rate, secondary liver resection, safety, and quality of life. CONCLUSION: This study is planned to include 348 patients to demonstrate the superiority of HAI-ox over systemic oxaliplatin in first-line CRCLM treatment (NCT02885753).

Upfront progression under pembrolizumab followed by a complete response after encorafenib and cetuximab treatment in BRAF V600E-mutated and microsatellite unstable metastatic colorectal cancer patient: A case report.

Two new treatments have recently become standard care for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): encorafenib (BRAF inhibitor) associated with cetuximab (anti-EGFR) in the second or third line of chemotherapy for BRAF V600E tumors, and pembrolizumab (an anti PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor) for tumors harboring microsatellite instability (MSI)-high and/or deficient mismatch repair (dMMR). Furthermore, 30% of BRAF V600E mutated mCRC are MSI/dMMR through a sporadic hypermethylation of the promoter of hMLH1. We report here, for the first time, the case of a patient with BRAF V600E, PIK3CA, and SMAD4 mutated and dMMR/MSI mCRC, in whom we observed an atypical response pattern under the sequence of pembrolizumab followed by the doublet encorafenib and cetuximab treatment. The patient was progressive after a single cycle of pembrolizumab followed by a rapid complete response after only 2 months of treatment with encorafenib and cetuximab, discovered during R0 cytoreduction surgery for peritoneal carcinomatosis.