The Inherited KRAS-variant as a Biomarker of Cetuximab Response in NSCLC.

PURPOSE: RTOG 0617 was a phase III randomized trial for patients with unresectable stage IIIA/IIIB non-small cell lung cancer comparing standard-dose (60 Gy) versus high-dose (74 Gy) radiotherapy and chemotherapy, plus or minus cetuximab. Although the study was negative, based on prior evidence that patients with the KRAS-variant, an inherited germline mutation, benefit from cetuximab, we evaluated KRAS-variant patients in RTOG 0617. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: From RTOG 0617, 328 of 496 (66%) of patients were included in this analysis. For time-to-event outcomes, stratified log-rank tests and multivariable Cox regression models were used. For binary outcomes, Cochran-Mantel-Haenzel tests and multivariable logistic regression models were used. All statistical tests were two sided, and a P value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 17.1% (56/328) of patients had the KRAS-variant, and overall survival rates were similar between KRAS-variant and non-variant patients. However, there was a time-dependent effect of cetuximab seen only in KRAS-variant patients-while the hazard of death was higher in cetuximab-treated patients within year 1 [HR = 3.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13-10.10, P = 0.030], death was lower from year 1 to 4 (HR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.11-0.97, P = 0.043). In contrast, in non-variant patients, the addition of cetuximab significantly increased local failure (HR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.11-2.28, P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSION: Although an overall survival advantage was not achieved in KRAS-variant patients, there is potential impact of cetuximab for this genetic subset of patients. In contrast, cetuximab seems to harm non-variant patients. These findings further support the importance of genetic patient selection in trials studying the addition of systemic agents to radiotherapy. SIGNIFICANCE: The KRAS-variant is the first functional, inherited miRNA-disrupting variant identified in cancer. Our findings support that cetuximab has a potentially beneficial impact on KRAS-variant patients treated with radiation. The work confirms prior evidence that KRAS-variant patients are a subgroup who are especially sensitive to radiation. These findings further support the potential of this class of variants to enable true treatment personalization, considering the equally important endpoints of response and toxicity.

Long-Term Results of NRG Oncology RTOG 0617: Standard- Versus High-Dose Chemoradiotherapy With or Without Cetuximab for Unresectable Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: RTOG 0617 compared standard-dose (SD; 60 Gy) versus high-dose (HD; 74 Gy) radiation with concurrent chemotherapy and determined the efficacy of cetuximab for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: The study used a 2 × 2 factorial design with radiation dose as 1 factor and cetuximab as the other, with a primary end point of overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 5.1 years. There were 3 grade 5 adverse events (AEs) in the SD arm and 9 in the HD arm. Treatment-related grade ≥3 dysphagia and esophagitis occurred in 3.2% and 5.0% of patients in the SD arm v 12.1% and 17.4% in the HD arm, respectively (P = .0005 and < .0001). There was no difference in pulmonary toxicity, with grade ≥3 AEs in 20.6% and 19.3%. Median OS was 28.7 v 20.3 months (P = .0072) in the SD and HD arms, respectively, 5-year OS and progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 32.1% and 23% and 18.3% and 13% (P = .055), respectively. Factors associated with improved OS on multivariable analysis were standard radiation dose, tumor location, institution accrual volume, esophagitis/dysphagia, planning target volume and heart V5. The use of cetuximab conferred no survival benefit at the expense of increased toxicity. The prior signal of benefit in patients with higher H scores was no longer apparent. The progression rate within 1 month of treatment completion in the SD arm was 4.6%. For comparison purposes, the resultant 2-year OS and PFS rates allowing for that dropout rate were 59.6% and 30.7%, respectively, in the SD arms. CONCLUSION: A 60-Gy radiation dose with concurrent chemotherapy should remain the standard of care, with the OS rate being among the highest reported in the literature for stage III NSCLC. Cetuximab had no effect on OS. The 2-year OS rates in the control arm are similar to the PACIFIC trial.

Partial vs. whole breast irradiation in a community hospital: a retrospective cohort analysis of 200 patients.

PURPOSE: We compared patients undergoing partial breast irradiation (PBI) with the MammoSite applicator (Cytyc Corp., Marlborough, MA) to a similar group of patients who underwent whole breast irradiation with external beam radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Stage 0-IIA breast cancer patients satisfying American Brachytherapy Society selection criteria and receiving accelerated PBI with the MammoSite system (n=100) were compared for toxicities with similarly staged patients receiving whole breast irradiation using tangential portals (n=100). The MammoSite applicator treatment was prescribed to a total dose of 34 Gy. External beam doses generally ranged from 60 to 66 Gy. RESULTS: Based on common toxicity criteria scores for acute toxicities, MammoSite patients experienced less cutaneous toxicity, fatigue, and breast pain and had higher Karnofsky performance status scores during the acute period than external beam patients but experienced more seroma pain during followup. These results were both statistically significant and clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: In our institutional experience, PBI using the MammoSite applicator produces less acute toxicity than external beam radiotherapy of the whole breast but is associated with an increased incidence of seroma pain. The rate of disease recurrence in both cohorts was low.