Circulating tumor DNA dynamics on front-line chemotherapy with bevacizumab or cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer: A biomarker analysis for acquired genomic alterations in CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance) randomized trial.

Authors

Kanwal Raghav

Kanwal Pratap Singh Raghav

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX

Kanwal Pratap Singh Raghav , Fang-Shu Ou , Alan P. Venook , Federico Innocenti , Ryan Sun , Heinz-Josef Lenz , Scott Kopetz

Organizations

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, University of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX

Research Funding

U.S. National Institutes of Health

Background: Enhanced understanding of the evolving clonal architecture under treatment stress is crucial to optimizing care and developing effective therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Emergence of genomic alterations (GAs) [mutations (muts) and amplifications (amps)] in RAS, BRAF, EGFR, ERBB2, and MET have been recognized as key resistance mechanisms to anti-EGFR therapy in later lines in mCRC. Data regarding occurrence of these GAs under selective pressure in the first line setting is lacking. Methods: CALGB/SWOG 80405 was a randomized trial of bevacizumab (bev) vs cetuximab (cet) in first line mCRC. Patients (pts) with paired plasma samples (pre-treatment and post-progression) available for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing were included in this substudy. Sequencing of ctDNA was performed by Guardant360 assay in a CLIA-certified environment to detect GAs in 73 genes. RAS/BRAF status [mut vs. wild type (wt)] was based on clonal muts [pre-defined cutoff of relative MAF (rMAF) ≥ 25%] in ctDNA. Only samples with ≥1 GA were analyzed to minimize false negatives. The primary objective was to determine and compare prevalence of acquired GAs between study arms: bev (anti-VEGF) and cet (anti-EGFR). Descriptive statistics and Fisher’s exact test were used. Results: Baseline characteristics of ctDNA cohort were similar to the 80405 population. Among 133 randomized RAS/BRAF wt pts, 11 (15.3%) and 5 (8.2%) developed acquired GAs (OR 2.0, P = 0.29), in bev and cet arm, respectively. Key comparative data for pts with regard to acquired pathogenic GAs are shown in the table. Conclusions: In this randomized mCRC cohort, the ctDNA profile of acquired GAs with front line anti-EGFR chemotherapy appears to be strikingly distinct from that seen with later lines of therapy. Acquisition of GAs, classically associated with EGFR resistance in later line, was not only rare with upfront cet-chemotherapy but also comparable to bev-containing (anti-VEGF) regimen. The mechanisms of acquired resistance appear to differ when anti-EGFR therapy is administered in combination with highly active first line chemotherapy. Our findings have critical translational relevance to the timing and value of ctDNA-guided anti-EGFR rechallenge in mCRC pts, especially in those treated with anti-EGFR therapy upfront.

Treatment Arm
Bev

(N = 72)
Cet

(N = 61)
P
Any acquired mutations
26 (36.1)
20 (32.8)
0.72
Any acquired amplifications
9 (12.5)
5 (8.2)
0.57
Anti-EGFR Resistance GAs
11 (15.3)
5 (8.2)
0.29
Mutations
9 (12.5)
5 (8.2)
0.57
RAS
4 (5.6)
3 (4.9)
0.99
BRAF
2 (2.8)
2 (3.3)
0.99
EGFR
4 (5.6)
1 (1.6)
0.37
Amplifications
3 (4.2)
1 (1.6)
0.62
ERBB2
2 (2.8)
1 (1.6)
0.99
MET
1 (1.4)
-
0.99

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 Details

Meeting

2022 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session C: Cancers of the Colon, Rectum, and Anus

Track

Colorectal Cancer,Anal Cancer

Sub Track

Tumor Biology, Biomarkers, and Pathology

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2022.40.4_suppl.193

Abstract #

193

Poster Bd #

K2

Abstract Disclosures