Search

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors are valuable therapeutics in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs), such as cetuximab or panitumumab, in combination with chemotherapy are effective treatment options for patients with RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC. Nevertheless, several issues are still open concerning the optimal use of anti-EGFR drugs in the continuum of care of mCRC. Novel approaches for increasing the efficacy of anti-EGFR therapies include better molecular selection of EGFR-dependent mCRC, intensification of chemotherapy, combination of anti-EGFR MoAbs and immune checkpoint inhibitors, and reintroduction of EGFR blockade or 'rechallenge' in selected patients who have previously responded to anti-EGFR MoAb therapy. An extensive translational research program was conducted in the Cetuximab After Progression in KRAS wIld-type colorectal cancer patients-Gruppo Oncologico dell' Italia Meridionale (CAPRI-GOIM) study with the aims of determining which subgroups of patients could benefit from the continuous inhibition of EGFR, from evaluating the role of liquid biopsy-based and its concordance with tissue-based molecular testing, and from investigating novel potential mechanisms of resistance to anti-EGFR therapies. In this review, we summarize the translational and clinical findings of the CAPRI-GOIM program in the context of the current knowledge of therapeutic strategies and of ongoing research on more appropriate uses of anti-EGFR therapies in RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC patients., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The objective response rate and progression-free survival observed with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKIs) in patients with metastatic epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) wild-type non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are modest. The adverse events associated with EGFR TKIs are manageable but they must be considered in the context of the limited efficacy. The development of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy as second-line therapy has reduced the role of EGFR TKIs in EGFR wild-type NSCLC. Recently, there has been increased recognition of the benefit of the earlier integration of palliative care and symptom management, and this is reasonable alternative to treatment with an EGFR TKI for many patients. My practice pattern for patients with EGFR wild-type NSCLC is platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy, immunotherapy as second-line therapy, and single-agent chemotherapy as third-line therapy for patients with preserved performance status who want to pursue further therapy. Only a small proportion of patients are eligible for fourth-line therapy, and I prefer to enroll them in clinical trials rather than use EGFR TKIs. I suspect that the use of EGFR TKIs in clinical use and as a comparator arm for clinical trials will continue to decline over the next several years.