Search

BackgroundRechallenge with EGFR inhibitors represents a promising strategy for patients with RAS wild type (WT) colorectal cancer (CRC) but definitive selection criteria are lacking. Recently, the RAS WT status on circulating tumor DNA (ct-DNA) emerged as a potential watershed for this strategy. Our study explored the liquid biopsy-driven cetuximab rechallenge in a RAS and BRAF WT selected population.MethodsCRC patients with RAS and BRAF WT both on tumor tissue and on ct-DNA at baseline receiving rechallenge with cetuximab were eligible for our analysis. Ct-DNA was analyzed for RAS-BRAF mutations with pyro-sequencing and nucleotide sequencing assays. Real-time PCR and droplet digital PCR were performed to confirm the RAS-BRAF mutational status.ResultsA total of 26 patients were included in our analysis. In the global population, RR was 25.0%, median overall survival (mOS) was 5.0 months, and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 3.5 months. Previous response to anti-EGFR was associated with improved mPFS (5.0 vs. 2.0 months, HR: 0.26, p = 0.048); anti-EGFR free interval > 14 months and anti-EGFR free interval > 16 months were associated with improved mPFS (respectively 7.0 vs. 3.0 months, HR: 0.27, p = 0.013 and not reached vs. 3.0 months, HR: 0.20, p = 0.002) and with improved mOS (respectively 13.0 vs. 5.0 months, HR: 0.27, p = 0.013 and 13.0 vs. 5.0 months, HR: 0.20, p = 0.002). Previous lines >2 were correlated with improved mPFS (4.0 vs. 1.0 month, HR: 0.05, p = 0.041) and with improved mOS (7.0 vs. 1.0 month, HR: 0.045, p = 0.034). In a multiple logistic regression model, only the anti-EGFR free interval was confirmed to be a significant predictor for mOS and mPFS.ConclusionsLiquid biopsy-driven cetuximab rechallenge was confirmed to be effective. The clinical outcome was consistent with available results from phase II studies. In addition to the molecular selection through the analysis of ct-DNA for RAS, the long anti-EGFR free interval is confirmed as a prospective selection criterion for this therapeutic option.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the typical inflammation-induced neoplasia. It often prospers where a chronic liver disease persists, thus leading a strong rationale for immune therapy. Several immune-based treatments, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), cytokines, adoptive cell transfer, and vaccines, have been tested in the treatment of HCC. In this review, we summarize the role of the ICI in HCC patients in various sets of treatment. As for advanced HCC, the anti-Programmed cell Death protein 1 (PD1) antibodies and the anti-Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen 4 (CTLA-4) antibodies have been examined in patients with enthusiastic results in phase I-II-III studies. Overall, this led the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to approve pembrolizumab, nivolumab, and nivolumab + ipilimumab in the second-line setting. The anti- Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PDL-1) antibodies have also been evaluated. Thanks to the results obtained from phase III IMbrave study, atezolizumab + bevacizumab is now the standard of care in the first-line advanced setting of HCC. As for localized HCC, the putative immunological effect of locoregional therapies led to evaluate the combination strategy with ICI. This way, chemoembolization, ablation with radiofrequency, and radioembolization combined with ICI are currently under study. Likewise, the study of adjuvant immunotherapy following surgical resection is underway. In addition, the different ICI has been studied in combination with other ICI as well as with multikinase inhibitors and anti-angiogenesis monoclonal antibody. The evidence available suggests that combining systemic therapies and locoregional treatments with ICI may represent an effective strategy in this context.