Four-year overall survival update from the phase III HIMALAYA study of tremelimumab plus durvalumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III HIMALAYA study (NCT03298451) in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus sorafenib; durvalumab monotherapy was noninferior to sorafenib for OS. Results reported herein are from a 4-year updated OS analysis of HIMALAYA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants with uHCC and no previous systemic treatment were randomized to STRIDE (n = 393), durvalumab (n = 389), or sorafenib (n = 389). The updated data cut-off was 23 January 2023. OS and serious adverse events (AEs) were assessed. Additionally, baseline characteristics and subsequent therapies were analyzed in long-term survivors (≥36 months beyond randomization). RESULTS: For STRIDE, durvalumab, and sorafenib, median [95% confidence interval (CI)] follow-up was 49.12 months (46.95-50.17 months), 48.46 months (46.82-49.81 months), and 47.31 months (45.08-49.15 months), respectively. OS hazard ratio (95% CI) for STRIDE versus sorafenib was 0.78 (0.67-0.92). The 36-month OS rate for STRIDE was 30.7% versus 19.8% for sorafenib. The 48-month OS rate remained higher for STRIDE at 25.2%, versus 15.1% for sorafenib. The long-term OS benefit of STRIDE was observed across clinically relevant subgroups and was further improved in participants who achieved disease control. Long-term survivors with STRIDE (n = 103) included participants across clinically relevant subgroups, and 57.3% (59/103) had no reported subsequent anticancer therapy. No new serious treatment-related AEs occurred with STRIDE from the primary analysis (17.5%; 68/388). Durvalumab maintained OS noninferiority to sorafenib and no late-onset safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: These data represent the longest follow-up to date in phase III studies in uHCC. The unprecedented 3- and 4-year OS rates reinforce the sustained long-term OS benefit of STRIDE versus sorafenib. STRIDE maintained a tolerable yet differentiated safety profile from other current uHCC therapies. Results continue to support the long-term benefits of STRIDE in a diverse population, reflective of uHCC globally.

Overall survival with 3 or 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy in Italian TOSCA phase 3 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy is the standard treatment of high-risk colon cancer (CC). A shorter duration (3 months) can achieve a similar outcome [in terms of relapse-free survival (RFS)] to a longer duration. This study reports the overall survival (OS) analysis of the three or six colon adjuvant (TOSCA) phase III study. It assessed different adjuvant chemotherapy durations in patients with resected high-risk stage II and stage III CC. MATERIAL AND METHODS: TOSCA was an open-label, phase III, multicentre, non-inferiority trial conducted in 130 Italian centres. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1 : 1 ratio, to receive 3 months of standard doses of FOLFOX/CAPOX, or 6 months of FOLFOX/CAPOX. Patients with histologically confirmed high-risk stage II and III CC were included, with RFS being the primary end point. OS was a secondary end point. RESULTS: From June 2007 to March 2013, 3759 patients were accrued. At a median follow-up of 7 years, the hazard ratio (HR) for RFS of the 3-month versus 6-month arms was 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99-1.29, P for non-inferiority = 0.380, P for superiority = 0.068, crossing the non-inferiority limit of 1.20. This result did not allow us to reject the null hypothesis of the inferiority of the 3-month arm. The HR for OS of the 3-month versus 6-month arms was 1.09 (95% CI 0.93-1.26, P for superiority = 0.288). At the last follow-up analysis, the absolute OS difference between arms was <1%. CONCLUSIONS: The present analysis of the TOSCA trial does not indicate any significant difference in OS between the treatment groups. The extra benefit provided by the longer treatment should be balanced against the extra toxicity of more prolonged therapy. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number: NCT0064660.

Long-term outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy for ampullary cancer: The influence of the histological subtypes and comparison with the other periampullary neoplasms.

BACKGROUND: Ampullary carcinoma (AC) is histologically classified as intestinal (In-AC), pancreaticobiliary (Pb-AC) or mixed-AC. The prognostic role of AC subtypes has been debated and remains unclear. The aims of this study were to evaluate outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for each subtype of AC and to compare these with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma [PDAC] and distal cholangiocarcinoma [DCC]. METHODS: PDs performed for AC between 2010 and 2018 were retrospectively evaluated. Histological subtype was obtained for all patients. One-year, 3-year and 5-year disease-free-survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were calculated. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to compare Pb-AC, In-AC and mixed-AC. Comparison with PDs performed for PDAC and DCC during the same period was also performed. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients undergoing PD for AC were evaluated: 34 (35.1%) In-AC, 54 (55.7%) Pb-AC and 9 mixed-AC (9.3%). DFS and OS rates for Pb-AC were significantly lower compared to In-AC (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01), but similar to mixed-AC (p = 0.3 and p = 0.4). Adjuvant therapy was not associated with increased survival, regardless of the histological subtype (p > 0.05). During the same period, 337 and 53 PDs for PDAC and DCC, respectively, were performed. In-AC was associated with significantly better outcomes compared to PDAC and DCC (p < 0.001); DFS and OS rates for Pb-AC and mixed AC were significantly higher compared to PDAC (p < 0.001), but similar to DCC (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Pb-AC has significantly worse survival compared to In-AC. Moreover, mixed-AC should be considered as Pb-AC. Pb-AC and mixed-AC seem to have better prognosis compared to PDAC, but similar to DCC.

Estimating 12-week death probability in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: the Colon Life nomogram.

Background: Regorafenib and TAS-102 have recently demonstrated statistically significant survival gains in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Life expectancy ≥12 weeks was an inclusion criterion in registrative trials, and the identification of proper clinical selection tools for the daily use of these drugs in heavily pre-treated patients is needed to improve the cost-benefit ratio. We aimed at building a nomogram able to predict death probability within 12 weeks from the date of assessment of refractory mCRC. Patients and methods: Four hundred eleven refractory mCRC patients with ECOG performance status (PS) ≤2 receiving regorafenib, TAS-102 or other treatments were used as developing set. Putative prognostic variables were selected using a random forest model and included in a binary logistic model from which the nomogram was developed. The nomogram was externally validated and its performance was evaluated by examining calibration (how close predictions were to the actual outcome) and discriminative ability (Harrell C index) both on developing (internal validation) and validating (external validation) sets. Results: Four variables were selected and included in the nomogram: PS (P < 0.0001), primary tumor resection (P = 0.027), LDH value (P = 0.0001) and peritoneal involvement (P = 0.081). In the developing set, the nomogram discriminative ability was high (C = 0.778), and was confirmed in the validating set (C = 0.778), where the overall outcome was better as a consequence of the enrichment in patients receiving regorafenib or TAS-102 (46% versus 34%; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Our nomogram may be a useful tool to predict the probability of death within 12 weeks in patients with refractory mCRC. Based on four easy-to-collect variables, the 'Colon Life' nomogram and free app for smartphones may improve mCRC patients' selection for later-line therapies and assist researchers for the enrollment in clinical trials in this setting.

Phase I study of PF-03446962, a fully human monoclonal antibody against activin receptor-like kinase-1, in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This expansion cohort of a multicenter, dose-escalation, phase I study (NCT00557856) evaluated safety, tolerability, antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamic effects of the anti-activin receptor-like kinase-1 (ALK-1) monoclonal antibody PF-03446962 in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with HCC and disease progression after prior antiangiogenic therapy or intolerance to treatment received PF-03446962 7 mg/kg intravenously biweekly, as recommended in the dose-escalation part of the study. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients received PF-03446962. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were thrombocytopenia (33.3%), asthenia (29.2), and chills (16.7%). Two patients experienced treatment-related telangiectasia, suggesting an in vivo knockout of ALK-1 function through ALK-1 pathway inhibition. Overall, treatment-related grade 3-4 AEs were reported in eight patients (33.3%). Treatment-related grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia was noted in four patients. No complete or partial responses were reported. Twelve (50%) patients achieved stable disease, which lasted ≥12 weeks in seven (29.2%) patients. The median time to progression was 3 months. Biomarker analyses showed higher mean tumor expression of c-tumor mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor and higher mean serum levels of bone morphogenetic protein-9 in patients with disease control (DC) for ≥12 weeks versus patients with disease progression. Conversely, lower mean serum transforming growth factor-ß and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-3 levels were detected in patients with DC versus patients with progression. CONCLUSIONS: The observed safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic profile, and clinical activity support further evaluation of PF-03446962 in patients with HCC and other solid malignancies, as single agent or in combination with other antiangiogenic, chemotherapeutic, or immunotherapeutic agents. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00557856.

Phase III trial comparing 3-6 months of adjuvant FOLFOX4/XELOX in stage II-III colon cancer: safety and compliance in the TOSCA trial.

BACKGROUND: Six months of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy is standard of care for radically resected stage III colon cancer and an accepted option for high-risk stage II. A shorter duration of therapy, if equally efficacious, would be advantageous for patients and Health-Care Systems. PATIENTS AND METHODS: TOSCA ['Randomized trial investigating the role of FOLFOX-4 or XELOX (3 versus 6 months) regimen duration and bevacizumab as adjuvant therapy for patients with stage II/III colon cancer] is an open-label, phase III, multicenter, noninferiority trial randomizing patients with high-risk stage II or stage III radically resected colon cancer to receive 3 months (arm 3 m) versus 6 months (arm 6 m) of FOLFOX4/XELOX. Primary end-point was relapse-free survival. We present here safety and compliance data. RESULTS: From June 2007 to March 2013, 3759 patients were accrued from 130 Italian sites, 64% receiving FOLFOX4 and 36% XELOX in either arm. Treatment completion rate without any modification was 35% versus 12% and with delays or dose reduction 52% versus 44% in arm 3 and 6 m. Treatment was permanently discontinued in 8% (arm 3 m) and 33% (arm 6 m). In arm 6 m, 50% of patients discontinuing treatment did so after completing 80% of planned program. Grade 3+ toxicities were higher in arm 6 m than that in 3 m. Grade 2+ neuropathy was 31.2% versus 8.8% (P < 0.0001) while grade 3+ was 8.4 versus 1.3 (P < 0.0001), in arm 3 and 6 m. Seven deaths within 30 days from last treatment administration in arm 6 m and three deaths in arm 3 m were observed (0.3% versus 0.1%, P = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: TOSCA is the first trial comparing 3 versus 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy completing accrual within the international initiative of treatment duration evaluation (International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant, IDEA). High compliance to treatment in control arm will allow a correct assessment of potential differences between the two treatment durations. CLINICALTRIALSGOV REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00646607.

Serum microRNAs as novel biomarkers for primary sclerosing cholangitis and cholangiocarcinoma.

The diagnosis of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is difficult due to the lack of sensitive and specific biomarkers, as is the early diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma (CC), a complication of PSC. The aim of this study was to identify specific serum miRNAs as diagnostic biomarkers for PSC and CC. The levels of 667 miRNAs were evaluated in 90 human serum samples (30 PSC, 30 CC and 30 control subjects) to identify disease-associated candidate miRNAs (discovery phase). The deregulated miRNAs were validated in an independent cohort of 140 samples [40 PSC, 40 CC, 20 primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) and 40 controls]. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were established and only miRNAs with an area under the curve (AUC) > 0·70 were considered useful as biomarkers. In the discovery phase we identified the following: 21 miRNAs expressed differentially in PSC, 33 in CC and 26 in both in comparison to control subjects as well as 24 miRNAs expressed differentially between PSC and CC. After the validation phase, miR-200c was found to be expressed differentially in PSC versus controls, whereas miR-483-5p and miR-194 showed deregulated expression in CC compared with controls. We also demonstrate a difference in the expression of miR-222 and miR-483-5p in CC versus PSC. Combination of these specific miRNAs further improved the specificity and accuracy of diagnosis. This study provides a basis for the use of miRNAs as biomarkers for the diagnosis of PSC and CC.

A randomized, multicenter, phase II study of vandetanib monotherapy versus vandetanib in combination with gemcitabine versus gemcitabine plus placebo in subjects with advanced biliary tract cancer: the VanGogh study.

BACKGROUND: The management of biliary tract cancers (BTCs) is complex due to limited data on the optimal therapeutic approach. This phase II multicenter study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of vandetanib monotherapy compared with vandetanib plus gemcitabine or gemcitabine plus placebo in patients with advanced BTC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized in a 1 : 1 : 1 ratio to three treatment groups: vandetanib 300 mg monotherapy (V), vandetanib 100 mg plus gemcitabine (V/G), gemcitabine plus placebo (G/P). Vandetanib (300 mg or 100 mg) or placebo was given in single oral daily doses. Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) was i.v. infused on day 1 and day 8 of each 21-day cycle. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were: objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, overall survival, duration of response, performance status and safety outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 173 patients (mean age 63.6 years) were recruited at 19 centers across Italy. Median (95% confidence intervals) PFS (days) were 105 (72-155), 114 (91-193) and 148 (71-225), respectively, for the V, V/G and G/P treatment groups, with no statistical difference among them (P = 0.18). No statistical difference between treatments was observed for secondary end points, except ORR, which slightly favored the V/G combination over other treatments. The proportion of patients reporting adverse events (AEs) was similar for the three groups (96.6% in V arm, 91.4% in the V/G arm and 89.3% in the G/P arm). CONCLUSIONS: Vandetanib treatment did not improve PFS in patients with advanced BTC. The safety profile of vandetanib did not show any additional AEs or worsening of already known AEs. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00753675.

A Phase-1b study of tivantinib (ARQ 197) in adult patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: The mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) receptor is dysregulated in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and tivantinib (ARQ 197) is an oral, selective, MET inhibitor. METHODS: This Phase-1b study assessed tivantinib safety as primary objective in patients with previously treated HCC and Child-Pugh A or B liver cirrhosis. Patients received oral tivantinib 360 mg twice daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Among 21 HCC patients, common drug-related adverse events (AEs) were neutropaenia, anaemia, asthenia, leucopaenia, anorexia, diarrhoea, and fatigue. No drug-related worsening of liver function or performance status occurred, but one Child-Pugh B patient experienced drug-related bilirubin increase. Four patients had drug-related serious AEs, including one neutropaenia-related death. Haematologic toxicities were more frequent than in previous tivantinib studies but were manageable with prompt therapy. Best response was stable disease (median, 5.3 months) in 9 of 16 evaluable patients (56%). Median time to progression was 3.3 months. CONCLUSION: Tivantinib demonstrated a manageable safety profile and preliminary antitumour activity in patients with HCC and Child-Pugh A or B cirrhosis.

Sorafenib in patients with Child-Pugh class A and B advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a prospective feasibility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib has shown survival benefits in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and Child-Pugh (CP) class A liver function. There are few prospective data on sorafenib in patients with HCC and CP class B. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A consecutive prospective series of 300 patients with CP class A or B HCC were enrolled in a dual-phase trial to determine survival and safety data according to liver function (class A or B) in patients receiving oral sorafenib 800 mg daily. [Results of this study were presented in part at the ASCO 2012 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium, 19-21 January 2012. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30 (Suppl 4): abstract 306.] RESULTS: Overall progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were 3.9, 4.1 and 9.1 months, respectively. For patients with CP class A versus B status, PFS was 4.3 versus 2.1 months, TTP was 4.2 versus 3.8 months and OS was 10.0 versus 3. 8 months. Extrahepatic spread was associated with worse outcomes but taken together with CP class, liver function played a greater role in reducing survival. Adverse events for the two CP groups were similar. CONCLUSION: Although patients with HCC and CP class B liver function have poorer outcomes than those with CP class A function, data suggest that patients with CP class B liver function can tolerate treatment and may still benefit from sorafenib.

Role of molecular genetics in the clinical management of cholangiocarcinoma.

The incidence of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) has steadily increased during the past 20 years, and mortality is increasing. The majority of patients with CCA have advanced or metastatic disease at diagnosis, and treatment options for unresectable disease are limited, resulting in poor prognosis. However, recent identification of targetable genomic alterations has expanded treatment options for eligible patients. Given the importance of early and accurate diagnosis in optimizing patient outcomes, this review discusses best practices in CCA diagnosis, with a focus on categorizing molecular genetics and available targeted therapies. Imaging and staging of CCAs are discussed, as well as recommended biopsy collection techniques, and molecular and genomic profiling methodologies, which have become increasingly important as molecular biomarker data accumulate. Approved agents targeting actionable genomic alterations specifically in patients with CCA include ivosidenib for tumors harboring IDH1 mutations, and infigratinib and pemigatinib for those with FGFR2 fusions. Other agents currently under development in this indication have shown promising results, which are presented here.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib or sorafenib in non-viral unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: an international propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: A growing body of evidence suggests that non-viral hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) might benefit less from immunotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients with non-viral advanced HCC, treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib, or sorafenib, in 36 centers in 4 countries (Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, and UK). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus lenvatinib, and OS and PFS with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib. For the primary and secondary endpoints, we carried out the analysis on the whole population first, and then we divided the cohort into two groups: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) population and non-NAFLD/NASH population. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety patients received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, 569 patients received lenvatinib, and 210 patients received sorafenib. In the whole population, multivariate analysis showed that treatment with lenvatinib was associated with a longer OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.95; P = 0.0268] and PFS (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.51-0.86; P = 0.002) compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the NAFLD/NASH population, multivariate analysis confirmed that lenvatinib treatment was associated with a longer OS (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.26-0.84; P = 0.0110) and PFS (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.38-0.82; P = 0.031) compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. In the subgroup of non-NAFLD/NASH patients, no difference in OS or PFS was observed between patients treated with lenvatinib and those treated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. All these results were confirmed following propensity score matching analysis. By comparing patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib, no statistically significant difference in survival was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The present analysis conducted on a large number of advanced non-viral HCC patients showed for the first time that treatment with lenvatinib is associated with a significant survival benefit compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, in particular in patients with NAFLD/NASH-related HCC.

Activity and safety of NGR-hTNF, a selective vascular-targeting agent, in previously treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a highly vascularised and poor-prognosis tumour. NGR-hTNF is a vascular-targeting agent consisting of human tumour necrosis factor-alpha fused to the tumour-homing peptide NGR, which is able to selectively bind an aminopeptidase N overexpressed on tumour blood vessels. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients with advanced-stage disease resistant to either locoregional (59%; range, 1-3), systemic treatments (52%; range, 1-3) or both (33%) received NGR-hTNF 0.8 microg m(-2) once every 3 weeks. The primary aim of the study was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: No grade 3-4 treatment-related toxicities were noted. Common toxicity included mild-to-moderate, short-lived chills (63%). Median PFS was 2.3 months (95% CI: 1.7-2.9). A complete response ongoing after 20 months was observed in a sorafenib-refractory patient and a partial response in a Child-Pugh class-B patient, yielding a response rate of 7%. Six patients (22%) experienced stable disease. The disease control rate (DCR) was 30% and was maintained for a median PFS time of 4.3 months. Median survival was 8.9 months (95% CI: 7.5-10.2). In a subset of 12 sorafenib-resistant patients, the response rate was 8% and the median survival was 9.5 months. CONCLUSION: NGR-hTNF was well tolerated and showed single-agent activity in HCC. Further investigation in HCC is of interest.

Primary resistance to cetuximab therapy in EGFR FISH-positive colorectal cancer patients.

The impact of KRAS mutations on cetuximab sensitivity in epidermal growth factor receptor fluorescence in situ hybridisation-positive (EGFR FISH+) metastatic colorectal cancer patients (mCRC) has not been previously investigated. In the present study, we analysed KRAS, BRAF, PI3KCA, MET, and IGF1R in 85 mCRC treated with cetuximab-based therapy in whom EGFR status was known. KRAS mutations (52.5%) negatively affected response only in EGFR FISH+ patients. EGFR FISH+/KRAS mutated had a significantly lower response rate (P=0.04) than EGFR FISH+/KRAS wild type patients. Four EGFR FISH+ patients with KRAS mutations responded to cetuximab therapy. BRAF was mutated in 5.0% of patients and none responded to the therapy. PI3KCA mutations (17.7%) were not associated to cetuximab sensitivity. Patients overexpressing IGF1R (74.3%) had significantly longer survival than patients with low IGF1R expression (P=0.006), with no difference in response rate. IGF1R gene amplification was not detected, and only two (2.6%) patients, both responders, had MET gene amplification. In conclusion, KRAS mutations are associated with cetuximab failure in EGFR FISH+ mCRC, even if it does not preclude response. The rarity of MET and IGF1R gene amplification suggests a marginal role in primary resistance. The potential prognostic implication of IGF1R expression merits further evaluation.

A phase II randomized multicenter trial of gefitinib plus FOLFIRI and FOLFIRI alone in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gefitinib inhibits the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase and preclinical studies indicate that it may enhance CPT-11 cytotoxicity. This randomized phase II trial investigates the feasibility and efficacy of gefitinib and 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, irinotecan (FOLFIRI) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to FOLFIRI +/- gefitinib 250 mg daily p.o. Patients randomized to FOLFIRI + gefitinib without disease progression after 6 months continued to receive gefitinib alone until disease progression. RESULTS: From October 2002 to September 2004, 100 patients were enrolled. Twenty-three patients (47.9%) in the FOLFIRI arm and 23 (45.1%) in the FOLFIRI + gefitinib arm experienced an objective response. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 8.3 and 18.6 months in the FOLFIRI arm, and 8.3 and 17.1 months in the FOLFIRI + gefitinib arm, respectively. In the combination arm, grades 3-4 adverse events were experienced by 35 (67.3%) patients versus 25 patients (52.1%) in the FOLFIRI arm; 12 patients (23.1%) withdrew for an adverse event in the FOLFIRI + gefitinib arm and 5 (10.4%) in the FOLFIRI arm. CONCLUSIONS: These data show that adding gefitinib to FOLFIRI does not improve the efficacy of FOLFIRI regimen. These disappointing results could be related to the high toxicity observed that led to significant dose reductions and delays.

Emergence of KRAS-mutation in liver metastases after an anti-EGFR treatment in patient with colorectal cancer: Are we aware of the therapeutic impact of intratumor heterogeneity?

Tumors represent a dynamic system where the genomic plasticity permits to adapt to the perturbation induced by environmental pressures, supporting the importance of longitudinal tumor sampling strategies to deciphering the temporal acquisition of driver event that could impact treatment outcome. We describe the case of a metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patient, RAS wild-type, who responded to anti-EGFR therapy and underwent liver surgery, revealing a KRAS mutations in the metastatic lesion, not detectable prior to initiation of therapy in the colonic biopsy. After liver surgery, the patient received chemotherapy alone, then underwent left colectomy and the final pathological report confirmed the KRAS wild-type status. We can speculate the existence of two distinct populations of KRAS wild-type and mutant CRC cells sharing the same genetic origin. The anti-EGFR treatment represented a selective pressure which allowed the selection of KRAS mutant subclones. The prognostic and /or predictive role of intratumor heterogeneity has not been assessed prospectively. Our case report is of clinical relevance because patients with mCRC who respond to anti-EGFR antibodies often develop resistance within several months of initiating therapy, thus outlining the importance to better ascertain the molecular landscape of tumors to design better therapeutic strategies.