Flinders Medical Centre, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia
Christos Stelios Karapetis , Heshan Liu , Michael Sorich , Jack Fiskum , Axel Grothey , Eric Van Cutsem , Tim Maughan , Jean-Yves Douillard , Derek J. Jonker , Carsten Bokemeyer , Alberto F. Sobrero , Benoist Chibaudel , John Raymond Zalcberg , Richard Adams , Marc E. Buyse , Aimery De Gramont , Qian Shi
Background: EGFR mAbs have become incorporated into clinical practice for the management of mCRC over the last decade. KRAS and NRAS mutations are used as predictive biomarkers and BRAF V600E mutations are associated with an adverse prognosis. The observed TE within biomarker subpopulations has varied between studies. Methods: IPD from randomized trials with head-to-head comparison between EGFR mAb versus no EGFR mAb (chemotherapy alone or BSC) in mCRC, across all lines of therapy (first, second and later), were pooled. Biomarker subpopulations are defined in the table. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between groups by Cox model, stratified by studies and adjusted by age, gender, and performance status. TEs were estimated by adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Within each biomarker subgroup, EGFR mAb efficacy was explored according to multiple exploratory factors, including line of therapy, type of backbone chemo, gender, sidedness and site of metastasis. Interaction tests were performed. P-values < 0.01 were considered statistically significant to account for multiple comparisons. Results: 5729 pts from 8 studies with data available for ≥ 1 biomarker were analysed. PFS benefits (median 9.2 mos in EGFR mAbs, 8.0 mos in no EGFR mAbs) were confirmed in triple-WT pts, but not for OS (refer to table). No OS/PFS benefits were observed for pts with any of the MT tumors. Exploratory analyses showed a potential detrimental TE of EGFR mAbs in KRAS MT mCRC with liver metastasis (OS: HRadj 1.22, p = .003, pinteraction .0056; PFS: HRadj 1.24, p = .0009, pinteraction .0008). These results were confirmed within the subgroup of pts with all 3 biomarkers available. Conclusions: This is the largest IPD analysis to explore the predictive value of RAS/BRAF biomarkers in mCRC. Our findings demonstrate that there is no evidence of efficacy of EGFR mAbs in KRAS, BRAF and/or NRAS MT mCRC. EGFR mAbs might have a detrimental effect in KRAS MT mCRC with liver metastases.
N of trials (N of pts) | OS | PFS | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
HRadj (95% CI) | p | HRadj (95% CI) | p | ||
KRAS MT | 8 (2397) | 1.07 (.98, 1.16) | .13 | 1.05 (.96, 1.14) | .30 |
NRAS MT | 3 (88) | 1.35 (.81, 2.24) | .24 | 1.61 (.97, 2.65) | .062 |
BRAF MT | 6 (232) | .94 (.70, 1.25) | .65 | .90 (.67, 1.21) | .49 |
Triple WT | 3 (1039) | .93 (.81, 1.07) | .30 | .75 (.66, .85) | < .0001 |
Disclaimer
This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org
Abstract Disclosures
2021 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Tanja Mesti
2019 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium
First Author: Kimberly Lowe
2024 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium
First Author: Takeshi Yamada
2024 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium
First Author: Hannah Ruth Robinson