Impact of Emergent Circulating Tumor DNA RAS Mutation in Panitumumab-Treated Chemoresistant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Purpose: The accumulation of emergent RAS mutations during anti-EGFR therapy is of interest as a mechanism for acquired resistance to anti-EGFR treatment. Plasma analysis of circulating tumor (ct) DNA is a minimally invasive and highly sensitive method to determine RAS mutational status. Experimental Design: This biomarker analysis of the global phase III ASPECCT study used next-generation sequencing to detect expanded RAS ctDNA mutations in panitumumab-treated patients. Plasma samples collected at baseline and posttreatment were analyzed categorically for the presence of RAS mutations by the PlasmaSelect-R 64-gene panel at 0.1% sensitivity. Results: Among panitumumab-treated patients with evaluable plasma samples at baseline (n = 238), 188 (79%) were wild-type (WT) RAS, and 50 (21%) were mutant RAS. Of the 188 patients with baseline ctDNA WT RAS status, 164 had evaluable posttreatment results with a 32% rate of emergent RAS mutations. The median overall survival for WT and RAS mutant status by ctDNA at baseline was 13.7 (95% confidence interval, 11.5–15.4) and 7.9 months (6.4–9.6), respectively (P < 0.0001). Clinical outcomes were not significantly different between patients with and without emergent ctDNA RAS mutations. Conclusions: Although patients with baseline ctDNA RAS mutations had worse outcomes than patients who were WT RAS before initiating treatment, emergent ctDNA RAS mutations were not associated with less favorable patient outcomes in panitumumab-treated patients. Further research is needed to determine a clinically relevant threshold for baseline and emergent ctDNA RAS mutations. Clin Cancer Res; 24(22); 5602–9. ©2018 AACR.

[1]  A. Bardelli,et al.  Dynamic molecular analysis and clinical correlates of tumor evolution within a phase II trial of panitumumab-based therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer , 2017, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[2]  Sam Angiuoli,et al.  Direct detection of early-stage cancers using circulating tumor DNA , 2017, Science Translational Medicine.

[3]  Michael R. Speicher,et al.  Emerging concepts in liquid biopsies , 2017, BMC Medicine.

[4]  A. Bardelli,et al.  Acquired RAS or EGFR mutations and duration of response to EGFR blockade in colorectal cancer , 2016, Nature Communications.

[5]  A. Bardelli,et al.  Heterogeneity of Acquired Resistance to Anti-EGFR Monoclonal Antibodies in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer , 2016, Clinical Cancer Research.

[6]  G. Prager,et al.  Challenging chemoresistant metastatic colorectal cancer: therapeutic strategies from the clinic and from the laboratory. , 2016, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[7]  G. Botti,et al.  Limits and potential of targeted sequencing analysis of liquid biopsy in patients with lung and colon carcinoma , 2016, Oncotarget.

[8]  R. Strausberg,et al.  Circulating tumor DNA analysis detects minimal residual disease and predicts recurrence in patients with stage II colon cancer , 2016, Science Translational Medicine.

[9]  A. Bardelli,et al.  Blood circulating tumor DNA for non‐invasive genotyping of colon cancer patients , 2016, Molecular oncology.

[10]  Marc Peeters,et al.  Analysis of KRAS/NRAS Mutations in a Phase III Study of Panitumumab with FOLFIRI Compared with FOLFIRI Alone as Second-line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer , 2015, Clinical Cancer Research.

[11]  J. Hecht,et al.  Extended RAS analysis for anti-epidermal growth factor therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. , 2015, Cancer treatment reviews.

[12]  Nobhojit Roy,et al.  The Global Burden of Cancer 2013. , 2015, JAMA oncology.

[13]  Beatriz Bellosillo,et al.  Clonal evolution and resistance to EGFR blockade in the blood of colorectal cancer patients , 2015, Nature Medicine.

[14]  R. Wolff,et al.  Extended RAS testing in metastatic colorectal cancer-Refining the predictive molecular biomarkers. , 2015, Journal of gastrointestinal oncology.

[15]  P. Angenendt,et al.  Characterizing the patterns of clonal selection in circulating tumor DNA from patients with colorectal cancer refractory to anti-EGFR treatment. , 2015, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[16]  J. Hecht,et al.  PEAK: a randomized, multicenter phase II study of panitumumab plus modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) or bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with previously untreated, unresectable, wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  Bert Vogelstein,et al.  DETECTION OF CIRCULATING TUMOR DNA IN EARLY AND LATE STAGE HUMAN MALIGNANCIES , 2014 .

[18]  Marc Peeters,et al.  Panitumumab versus cetuximab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (ASPECCT): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study. , 2014, The Lancet. Oncology.

[19]  J. Tabernero,et al.  Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  W. Scheithauer,et al.  FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer-subgroup analysis of patients with KRAS: mutated tumours in the randomised German AIO study KRK-0306. , 2012, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[21]  F. Mouliere,et al.  The importance of examining the proportion of circulating DNA originating from tumor, microenvironment and normal cells in colorectal cancer patients , 2012, Expert opinion on biological therapy.

[22]  Josep Tabernero,et al.  Randomized, phase III trial of panitumumab with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) versus FOLFOX4 alone as first-line treatment in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: the PRIME study. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[23]  Dongsheng Tu,et al.  K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  Daniel J. Freeman,et al.  Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[25]  S. Goodman,et al.  Circulating mutant DNA to assess tumor dynamics , 2008, Nature Medicine.

[26]  W. Scheithauer,et al.  An open-label, single-arm study assessing safety and efficacy of panitumumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapy. , 2008, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[27]  Marc Peeters,et al.  Open-label phase III trial of panitumumab plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[28]  Xiaomei Ma,et al.  Global Burden of Cancer , 2006, The Yale journal of biology and medicine.

[29]  Richard L Schilsky,et al.  Cetuximab in the treatment of colorectal cancer. , 2004, Clinical advances in hematology & oncology : H&O.