Dataset Information

Microsatellite instability (MSI-H) is associated with a high immunoscore but not with PD-L1 expression or increased survival in patients (pts.) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with oxaliplatin (ox) and fluoropyrimidine (FP) with and without bevacizumab (bev): a pooled analysis of the AIO KRK 0207 and RO91 trials.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

In a retrospective analysis of two randomized phase III trials in mCRC patients treated first line with oxaliplatin, fluoropyrimidine with and without Bevacizumab (the AIO KRK 0207 and R091 trials) we evaluated the association of high microsatellite instability (MSI-H), immunoscore (IS) and PD-L1 expression in relation to overall survival (OS).

Methods

In total, 550 samples were analysed. Immunohistochemical analysis of the MMR proteins and additionally fragment length analysis was performed, molecular examinations via allele-discriminating PCR in combination with DNA sequencing. Furthermore PD-L1 and IS were assessed.

Results

MSI-H tumors were more frequent in right sided tumors (13.66% vs. 4.14%) and were correlated with mutant BRAF (p = 0.0032), but not with KRAS nor NRAS mutations (MT). 3.1% samples were found to be PD-L1 positive, there was no correlation of PDL1 expression with MSI-H status, but in a subgroup analysis of MSI-H tumors the percentage of PD-L1 positive tumors was higher than in MSS tumors (9.75% vs. 2.55%). 8.5% of samples showed a positive IS, MSI-H was associated with a high IS. The mean IS of the pooled population was 0.57 (SD 0.97), while the IS of MSI-H tumors was significantly higher (mean of 2.4; SD 1.4; p =< 0.0001).

Discussion

Regarding OS in correlation with MSI-H, PD-L1 and IS status we did not find a significant difference. However, PD-L1 positive mCRC tended to exhibit a longer OS compared to PD-L1 negative cancers (28.9 vs. 22.1 months).

SUBMITTER: Noepel-Duennebacke S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8397637 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Several randomized trials have indicated that combination chemotherapy applied in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) does not significantly improve overall survival when compared to the sequential use of cytotoxic agents (CAIRO, MRC Focus, FFCD 2000-05). The present study investigates the question whether this statement holds true also for bevacizumab-based first-line treatment including escalation- and de-escalation strategies.The AIO KRK 0110/ML22011 trial is a two-arm, multicenter, open-label randomized phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus bevacizumab (Cape-Bev) versus capecitabine plus irinotecan plus bevacizumab (CAPIRI-Bev) in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1, will be assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) bid for 14d (d1-14) plus bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm A) or capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) BID for 14d (d1-14), irinotecan 200 mg/m(2) (d1) and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm B). Patients included into this trial are required to consent to the analysis of tumour tissue and blood for translational investigations. In Arm A, treatment escalation from Cape-Bev to CAPIRI-Bev is recommended in case of progressive disease (PD). In Arm B, de-escalation from CAPIRI-Bev to Cape-Bev is possible after 6 months of treatment or in case of irinotecan-associated toxicity. Re-escalation to CAPIRI-Bev after PD is possible. The primary endpoint is time to failure of strategy (TFS). Secondary endpoints are overall response rate (ORR), overall survival, progression-free survival, safety and quality of life.The AIO KRK 0110 trial is designed for patients with disseminated, but asymptomatic mCRC who are not potential candidates for surgical resection of metastasis. Two bevacizumab-based strategies are compared: one starting as single-agent chemotherapy (Cape-Bev) allowing escalation to CAPIRI-Bev and another starting with combination chemotherapy (CAPIRI-Bev) and allowing de-escalation to Cape-Bev and subsequent re-escalation if necessary.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01249638 EudraCT-No.: 2009-013099-38.

Project description:BACKGROUND:FIRE-3 compared first-line therapy with FOLFIRI plus either cetuximab or bevacizumab in 592 KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. The consensus molecular subgroups (CMS) are grouping CRC samples according to their gene-signature in four different subtypes. Relevance of CMS for the treatment of mCRC has yet to be defined. PATIENTS AND METHODS:In this exploratory analysis, patients were grouped according to the previously published tumor CRC-CMSs. Objective response rates (ORR) were compared using chi-square test. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) times were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimation, log-rank tests. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated according to the Cox proportional hazard method. RESULTS:CMS classification could be determined in 438 out of 514 specimens available from the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (n?=?592). Frequencies for the remaining 438 samples were as follows: CMS1 (14%), CMS2 (37%), CMS3 (15%), CMS4 (34%). For the 315 RAS wild-type tumors, frequencies were as follows: CMS1 (12%), CMS2 (41%), CMS3 (11%), CMS4 (34%). CMS distribution in right- versus (vs) left-sided primary tumors was as follows: CMS1 (27% versus 11%), CMS2 (28% versus 45%), CMS3 (10% versus 12%), CMS4 (35% versus 32%). Independent of the treatment, CMS was a strong prognostic factor for ORR (P?=?0.051), PFS (P?<?0.001), and OS (P?<?0.001). Within the RAS wild-type population, OS observed in CMS4 significantly favored FOLFIRI cetuximab over FOLFIRI bevacizumab. In CMS3, OS showed a trend in favor of the cetuximab arm, while OS was comparable in CMS1 and CMS2, independent of targeted therapy. CONCLUSIONS:CMS classification is prognostic for mCRC. Prolonged OS induced by FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the FIRE-3 study appears to be driven by CMS3 and CMS4. CMS classification provides deeper insights into the biology to CRC, but at present time has no direct impact on clinical decision-making.The FIRE-3 (AIO KRK-0306) study had been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00433927.