Inactivation of NF1 Promotes Resistance to EGFR Inhibition in KRAS/NRAS/BRAFV600 -Wild-Type Colorectal Cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Georgiou A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7611272 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Previous findings suggest that metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) patients with KRAS/NRAS/BRAF/PIK3CA wild-type (quadruple-wt) tumors are highly sensitive to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs). However, additional molecular alterations might be involved in the de novo resistance to these drugs. We performed a comprehensive molecular profiling of 21 quadruple-wt tumors from mCRC patients enrolled in the "Cetuximab After Progression in KRAS wild-type colorectal cancer patients" (CAPRI-GOIM) trial of first line FOLFIRI plus cetuximab. Tumor samples were analyzed with a targeted sequencing panel covering single nucleotide variants (SNVs), insertions/deletions (Indels), copy number variations (CNVs), and gene fusions in 143 cancer-related genes. The analysis revealed in all 21 patients the presence of at least one SNV/Indel and in 10/21 cases (48%) the presence of at least one CNV. Furthermore, 17/21 (81%) patients had co-existing SNVs/Indels in different genes. Quadruple-wt mCRC from patients with the shorter progression free survival (PFS) were enriched with peculiar genetic alterations in KRAS, FBXW7, MAP2K1, and NF1 genes as compared with patients with longer PFS. These data suggest that a wide genetic profiling of quadruple-wt mCRC patients might help to identify novel markers of de novo resistance to anti-EGFR MoAbs.
| S-EPMC6627713 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Approximately 45% of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 are resistant to cetuximab treatment. We set out to identify additional genetic markers that might predict the response to cetuximab treatment. Fifty-three wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC patients were treated with cetuximab/irinotecan-based chemotherapy as a first- or third-line therapy. The mutational statuses of 10 EGFR pathway genes were analyzed in primary tumors using next-generation sequencing. BRAF, PIK3CA, KRAS (exons 3 and 4), NRAS, PTEN, and AKT1 mutations were detected in 6, 6, 5, 4, 1, and 1 patient, respectively. Four of the BRAF mutations were non-V600 variants. Four tumors harbored multiple co-existing (complex) mutations. All patients with BRAF mutations or complex mutation patterns were cetuximab non-responders. All patients but one harboring KRAS, NRAS, or BRAF mutations were non-responders. Mutations in any one of these three genes were associated with a poor response rate (7.1%) and reduced survival (PFS = 8.0 months) compared to wild-type patients (74.4% and 11.6 months). Our data suggest that KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations predict response to cetuximab treatment in mCRC patients.
| S-EPMC5008360 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA substantial change in trial methodology for solid tumours has taken place, in response to increased understanding of cancer biology. FOCUS4 is a phase 2-3 trial programme testing targeted agents in patients with advanced colorectal cancer in molecularly stratified cohorts. Here, we aimed to test the hypothesis that combined inhibition of EGFR, HER2, and HER3 signalling with the tyrosine kinase inhibitor AZD8931 will control growth of all wild-type tumours.MethodsIn FOCUS4-D, we included patients from 18 hospitals in the UK with newly diagnosed advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer whose tumour was wild-type for BRAF, PIK3CA, KRAS, and NRAS. After 16 weeks of first-line therapy, patients with stable or responding tumours were randomised to oral AZD8931 (40 mg twice a day) or placebo. Randomisation was done by minimisation with a random element of 20%, minimisation by hospital site, site of primary tumour, WHO performance status, 16-week CT scan result, number of metastatic sites, and first-line chemotherapy regimen. The primary outcome was progression-free-survival. CT scans were assessed by local radiologists according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1. Preplanned interim analyses were assessed per protocol and were agreed using multiarm multistage (MAMS) trial design methodology triggered by occurrence of progression-free survival events in the placebo group. The final analysis was assessed by intention to treat. This trial is registered at controlled-trials.com, ISRCTN 90061546.FindingsBetween July 7, 2014, and March 7, 2016, 32 patients were randomised to study treatment, 16 to AZD8931 and 16 to placebo. At the first preplanned interim analysis (March, 2016), the independent data monitoring committee (IDMC) recommended closure of FOCUS4-D because of a lack of activity. At the final analysis (Aug 1, 2016), 31 patients had had a progression-free survival event (15 with AZD8931 and 16 with placebo). Median progression-free survival was 3·48 months (95% CI 1·51-5·09) in the placebo group and 2·96 months (1·94-5·62) in the AZD8931 group. No progression-free survival benefit of AZD8931 compared with placebo was noted (hazard ratio [HR] 1·10, 95% CI 0·47-3·57; p=0·95). The most common grade 3 adverse event in the AZD8931 group was skin rash (three [20%] of 15 patients with available data vs none of 16 patients in the placebo group), and in the placebo group it was diarrhoea (one [7%] vs one [6%]). No grade 4 adverse events were recorded and no treatment-related deaths were reported.InterpretationThe MAMS trial design for FOCUS4 has shown efficiency and effectiveness in trial outcome delivery, informing the decision to proceed or stop clinical evaluation of a targeted treatment within a molecularly defined cohort of patients. The overarching FOCUS4 trial is now aiming to open a replacement arm in the cohort with all wild-type tumours.FundingMedical Research Council (MRC) and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, Cancer Research UK, NIHR Clinical Trials Research Network, Health and Care Research Wales, and AstraZeneca.
| S-EPMC6125825 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:While mutations in BRAF in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) most commonly occur at the V600 amino acid, with the advent of next-generation sequencing, non-V600 BRAF mutations are increasingly identified in clinical practice. It is unclear whether these mutants, like BRAF V600E, confer resistance to anti-EGFR therapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:We conducted a multicenter pooled analysis of consecutive patients with non-V600 BRAF-mutated mCRCs identified between 2010 and 2017. Non-V600 BRAF mutations were divided into functional classes based on signaling mechanism and kinase activity: activating and RAS-independent (class 2) or kinase-impaired and RAS-dependent (class 3). RESULTS:Forty patients with oncogenic non-V600 BRAF-mutant mCRC received anti-EGFR antibody treatment [n = 12 (30%) class 2 and n = 28 (70%) class 3]. No significant differences in clinical characteristics were observed by mutation class. In contrast, while only 1 of 12 patients with class 2 BRAF mCRC responded, 14 of 28 patients with class 3 BRAF responded to anti-EGFR therapy (response rate, 8% and 50%, respectively, P = 0.02). Specifically, in first- or second-line, 1 of 6 (17%) patients with class 2 and 7 of 9 (78%) patients with class 3 BRAF mutants responded (P = 0.04). In third- or later-line, none of 6 patients with class 2 and 7 of 19 (37%) patients with class 3 BRAF mutants responded (P = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS:Response to EGFR antibody treatment in mCRCs with class 2 BRAF mutants is rare, while a large portion of CRCs with class 3 BRAF mutants respond. Patients with colorectal cancer with class 3 BRAF mutations should be considered for anti-EGFR antibody treatment.See related commentary by Fontana and Valeri, p. 6896.
| S-EPMC6891165 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTargeted therapy represents an attractive alternative for rare tumors such as urachal carcinoma (UrC). The aim of this study was to assess the mutations of the most commonly affected 5 genes in the targetable EGFR-pathway in UrC and comapre their frequencies to those of found in urothelial and colorectal cancer.Materials and methodsMutational hot-spots of selected genes were tested in 22 UrC samples by pyrosequencing. Mutational patterns were compared to those published for colorectal and urothelial cancers. Furthermore, we sought correlations between mutations and clinicopathological and follow-up data.ResultsWe found 11 mutations in 10 of 22 (45%) patients. The most frequently mutated gene was KRAS (27%) followed by BRAF (18%) and NRAS (5%), while no mutations were detected in the EGFR and PIK3CA genes. No correlation was found between the mutation status and clinicopathological parameters (Sheldon/Mayo stage, tumor grade, metastases). Furthermore, none of the mutations correlated with progression-free or overall survival.ConclusionsThe mutation pattern of UrC is more similar to colorectal than to urothelial cancer. However, the mutation characteristics of UrC seems to be unique suggesting that clinical decision-making for UrC cannot be simply adopted from urothelial or colorectal carcinoma. The high occurence of EGFR-pathway mutations warrants the testing for KRAS and BRAF mutations when considering anti-EGFR therapy in UrC.
| S-EPMC5129933 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAn over-expression of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has been observed in colorectal cancer and is associated with aggressive disease and poor prognosis. SCT200 is a newly developed recombinant, fully humanized, anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody. This study aimed to evaluate its safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and efficacy in patients with wild-type KRAS/NRAS/BRAF metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: This phase I study comprising dose-escalation phase and dose-expansion phase. SCT200 was administrated intravenously to groups of three to six patients. An every 3-week dosing cycle (0.5-15.0 mg/kg) and multiple dosing schedule were evaluated. Blood samples were collected at preset intervals for PK assessment, radiological imaging was used for efficacy assessment, and continuous safety monitoring was performed in each group during the study. RESULTS: From December 16, 2014 to December 31, 2018, fifty-six patients with wild-type KRAS/NRAS/BRAF mCRC receiving ≥ 1 dose of SCT200 were evaluated. Among them, 44.6% (25/56) of the patients failed at least two prior lines of chemotherapy. No dose-limiting toxicities occurred in any group. All of the patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). 96.4% (54/56) of patients experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and 26.8% (15/56) of patients with Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs. No serious TRAEs were observed. The most common TRAEs were dermotoxicity and hypomagnesemia. PK analysis showed non-linear PK in the range of 0.5 - 8.0 mg/kg of single dose SCT200, the clearance decreased, and the elimination half-life (T1/2) prolonged following dose increase. In the multiple-dose period, the clearance decreased, peak concentration increased, and T1/2 prolonged during prolonged drug administration, and a steady state was reached after five consecutive dose of 6.0 mg/kg quaque week (QW). The objective response rate (ORR) was 30.4% (17/56, 95% confidence interval [CI], 18.8%-44.1%). The ORR in the dose-expansion group (6.0 mg/kg QW) was 48.0% (12/25, 95% CI, 27.8%-68.7%), the median progression-free survival was 5.2 months (95%CI, 3.6-5.5), and the median overall survival was 20.2 months (95%CI, 12.1-not reached).ConclusionsSCT200 showed favorable safety, PK profile, and preliminary efficacy for patients with wild-type KRAS/NRAS/BRAF mCRC.Trial registrationThis study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02211443 ).
| S-EPMC9617324 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Treatment decision-making in colorectal cancer is often guided by tumour tissue molecular analysis. The aim of this study was the development and validation of a high-resolution melting (HRM) method for the detection of KRAS, NRAS and BRAF mutations in Greek and Romanian patients with colorectal cancer and determination of the frequency of these mutations in the respective populations.Diagnostic molecular laboratory located in Athens, Greece.2425 patients with colorectal cancer participated in the study.2071 patients with colorectal cancer (1699 of Greek and 372 of Romanian origin) were analysed for KRAS exon 2 mutations. In addition, 354 tumours from consecutive patients (196 Greek and 161 Romanian) were subjected to full KRAS (exons 2, 3 and 4), NRAS (exons 2, 3 and 4) and BRAF (exon 15) analysis. KRAS, NRAS and BRAF mutation detection was performed by a newly designed HRM analysis protocol, followed by Sanger sequencing.KRAS exon 2 mutations (codons 12/13) were detected in 702 of the 1699 Greek patients with colorectal carcinoma analysed (41.3%) and in 39.2% (146/372) of the Romanian patients. Among the 354 patients who were subjected to full KRAS, NRAS and BRAF analysis, 40.96% had KRAS exon 2 mutations (codons 12/13). Among the KRAS exon 2 wild-type patients 15.31% harboured additional RAS mutations and 12.44% BRAF mutations. The newly designed HRM method used showed a higher sensitivity compared with the sequencing method.The HRM method developed was shown to be a reliable method for KRAS, NRAS and BRAF mutation detection. Furthermore, no difference in the mutation frequency of KRAS, NRAS and BRAF was observed between Greek and Romanian patients with colorectal cancer.
| S-EPMC4039802 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mutations in KRAS exon 2, BRAF and PIK3CA are commonly present in colorectal cancer (CRC) worldwide, but few data about RAS mutations outside KRAS exon 2 are available for Chinese CRCs. We, therefore, determined the mutation frequencies and prognostic values of KRAS exon 2, 3 and 4, NRAS exon 2 and 3, PIK3CA exon 9 and 20, and BRAF exon 15 by PCR and direct sequencing in 353 CRC patients from two Chinese clinical centers. KRAS exon 2, BRAF, PIK3CA mutations were identified in 42.2%, 4.5%, 12.3% of the cases, respectively. We found "rare mutations" in RAS genes in nearly 14% of CRCs-i.e., in almost a quarter (24.0%) of KRAS exon 2 wild type CRCs, including 2.3% in KRAS exon 3, 8.2% in KRAS exon 4 and 3.4% in NRAS. Stage I-III patients with PIK3CA or NRAS mutations developed more distant metastases (3-year risk in PIK3CA mutated and wild type patients: 23.3% vs 11.5%, P?=?0.03; multivariate Hazard ratio (HR)?=?3.129, P?=?0.003; 3-year risk in NRAS mutated and wild type patients: 40.0% vs 12.2%, P?=?0.012; multivariate HR?=?5.152, P?=?0.003). Our data emphasizes the importance of these novel molecular features in CRCs.
| S-EPMC5904111 | biostudies-literature
Project description:KRAS is an EGFR effector in the RAS/RAF/ERK cascade that is mutated in about 40% of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Activating mutations in codons 12 and 13 of the KRAS gene are the only established negative predictors of response to anti-EGFR therapy and patients whose tumors harbor such mutations are not candidates for therapy. However, 40 to 60% of wild-type cases do not respond to anti-EGFR therapy, suggesting the involvement of other genes that act downstream of EGFR in the RAS-RAF-MAPK and PI3K-AKT pathways or activating KRAS mutations at other locations of the gene.DNA was obtained from a consecutive series of 201 mCRC cases (FFPE tissue), wild-type for KRAS exon 2 (codons 12 and 13). Mutational analysis of KRAS (exons 3 and 4), BRAF (exons 11 and 15), and PIK3CA (exons 9 and 20) was performed by high resolution melting (HRM) and positive cases were then sequenced.One mutation was present in 23.4% (47/201) of the cases and 3.0% additional cases (6/201) had two concomitant mutations. A total of 53 cases showed 59 mutations, with the following distribution: 44.1% (26/59) in KRAS (13 in exon 3 and 13 in exon 4), 18.6% (11/59) in BRAF (two in exon 11 and nine in exon 15) and 37.3% (22/59) in PIK3CA (16 in exon 9 and six in exon 20). In total, 26.4% (53/201) of the cases had at least one mutation and the remaining 73.6% (148/201) were wild-type for all regions studied. Five of the mutations we report, four in KRAS and one in BRAF, have not previously been described in CRC. BRAF and PIK3CA mutations were more frequent in the colon than in the sigmoid or rectum: 20.8% vs. 1.6% vs. 0.0% (P=0.000) for BRAF and 23.4% vs. 12.1% vs. 5.4% (P=0.011) for PIK3CA mutations.About one fourth of mCRC cases wild-type for KRAS codons 12 and 13 present other mutations either in KRAS, BRAF, or PIK3CA, many of which may explain the lack of response to anti-EGFR therapy observed in a significant proportion of these patients.
| S-EPMC3623853 | biostudies-other
Project description:Most patients with KRAS G12C-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) experience clinical benefit from selective KRASG12C inhibition, whereas patients with colorectal cancer bearing the same mutation rarely respond. To investigate the cause of the limited efficacy of KRASG12C inhibitors in colorectal cancer, we examined the effects of AMG510 in KRAS G12C colorectal cancer cell lines. Unlike NSCLC cell lines, KRAS G12C colorectal cancer models have high basal receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) activation and are responsive to growth factor stimulation. In colorectal cancer lines, KRASG12C inhibition induces higher phospho-ERK rebound than in NSCLC cells. Although upstream activation of several RTKs interferes with KRASG12C blockade, we identify EGFR signaling as the dominant mechanism of colorectal cancer resistance to KRASG12C inhibitors. The combinatorial targeting of EGFR and KRASG12C is highly effective in colorectal cancer cells and patient-derived organoids and xenografts, suggesting a novel therapeutic strategy to treat patients with KRAS G12C colorectal cancer. SIGNIFICANCE: The efficacy of KRASG12C inhibitors in NSCLC and colorectal cancer is lineage-specific. RTK dependency and signaling rebound kinetics are responsible for sensitivity or resistance to KRASG12C inhibition in colorectal cancer. EGFR and KRASG12C should be concomitantly inhibited to overcome resistance to KRASG12C blockade in colorectal tumors.See related commentary by Koleilat and Kwong, p. 1094.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1079.
| S-EPMC7416460 | biostudies-literature