Search

Background: There have been conflicting reports on the predictive impact of metastatic disease sites on the response to checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) in microsatellite instability (MSI) metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC). Recent studies have highlighted peritoneal metastases, ascites, and liver metastases as possible indicators of resistance to CPI., Methods: We performed a detailed analysis of high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) mCRC treated with programmed cell death (PD-1) or PD-1/cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 CPI in a single center. Overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and stable disease but with complete pathological response upon resection (SDcPR) were analyzed by the presence of liver metastases, peritoneal metastases, or absence of either. The impact of number and size of liver metastases on clinical outcomes were also interrogated., Results: Thirty-five patients with MSI mCRC were included in the analysis. Patients with peritoneal metastatic disease had lower ORR and shorter PFS compared to patients without liver and peritoneal metastases. Contrary to recent reports, ORR and ORR + SDcPR rates were high in patients with liver metastases, at 58% and 66%, respectively. In the liver metastases category, a better response rate was noted for patients with<5 lesions compared to patients with more than 5 lesions. Patients who responded had a higher median tumor mutation burden than patients with progressive disease., Conclusions: In MSI mCRC, no single clinical characteristic was sufficient to preclude CPI response. Peritoneal metastatic disease was associated with numerically lower ORR and shorter PFS. In contrast, liver metastases do not predict poor outcome., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Importance: Serial circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as a routine surveillance strategy for patients with resected colorectal cancer, but how serial ctDNA monitoring is associated with potential curative outcomes has not been formally assessed., Objective: To examine whether there is a benefit of adding serial ctDNA assays to standard-of-care imaging surveillance for potential curative outcomes in patients with resected colorectal cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this single-center (City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California), retrospective, case cohort study, patients with stage II to IV colorectal cancer underwent curative resection and were monitored with serial ctDNA assay and National Cancer Center Network (NCCN)-guided imaging surveillance from September 20, 2019, to April 3, 2024. The median duration of follow-up was 26 months (range, 2-54 months)., Interventions: Serial ctDNA assays were performed every 3 months for 2 years and every 6 months for the 3 following years in conjunction with NCCN-guided radiographic surveillance., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with clinical benefit from ctDNA testing, defined as the proportion of patients with a newly positive ctDNA assay and negative scheduled imaging (most recent or concurrent) that subsequently led to early imaging confirmation of recurrence, followed by curative-intent intervention with no evidence of recurrence at the time of data cutoff. Recurrence was categorized by ctDNA recurrence, radiographic recurrence, or concurrent ctDNA and imaging recurrence. Salvage resections and associated durable remissions were described within each of the 3 categories. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the patient population., Results: In total, 184 patients (median age, 59 years [range, 32-88 years]; 97 female [52.7%]) were included in this study, and 129 (70.1%) had stage II to III disease. Forty-five patients (24.5%) had ctDNA or imaging-confirmed recurrence. Of these 45 patients, 14 had radiographic recurrence with negative ctDNA, and 11 had concurrent ctDNA and imaging recurrence. Twenty of 45 patients had ctDNA positivity with negative imaging at first ctDNA positivity; 6 had reflex imaging that was positive for recurrence, and 14 continued with serial imaging and ctDNA monitoring. Ten of 14 patients had subsequent recurrent disease, 3 patients had a spontaneous clearance of ctDNA, and 1 patient remained imaging negative 7 months after positive ctDNA, after which she was lost to follow-up. Altogether, 11 of 20 patients with ctDNA recurrence without initial concurrent imaging recurrence had subsequent metastasectomy, and only 3 were disease-free at the cutoff date in April 2024, representing 1.6% of the surveilled population., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients with stage II to IV colorectal cancer who underwent curative-intent resection, the addition of serial tumor-informed ctDNA assay to the standard NCCN-recommended surveillance had limited clinical benefits. Additional prospective research is needed to clarify the value of ctDNA testing in the surveillance setting.

Background: Combination regorafenib, ipilimumab, and nivolumab (RIN) was evaluated in a phase 1 nonrandomized study (NCT04362839) of refractory microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer. Promising antitumor activity was previously reported in the non-liver metastatic (NLM) population. This updated analysis describes long-term survival outcomes in the NLM cohort and highlights durable remissions with potential cure following completion of RIN therapy., Methods: Between May 2020 and January 2022, 39 patients with refractory MSS metastatic colorectal cancer were enrolled. Patients received RIN until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or completion at two years. The primary endpoint was recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) selection. Secondary endpoints were safety, overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at the RP2D level., Results: 22 patients with refractory non-liver metastatic MSS colorectal cancer were treated at the RP2D of RIN. ORR was 36.4 % (8/22 patients), and median PFS was 5.0 months (95 % CI: 3-9). After a median follow-up of 42 months, the 1-, 2-, and 3-year PFS rates were 24.1 %, 24.1 %, and 19.3 % by RECIST. The median OS was 27.5 months (95 % CI: 14.0 to NE). At data cutoff, 6 patients had ongoing clinical benefit, including 3 responders who remain disease-free > 18 months after treatment completion., Conclusion: With extended follow-up, RIN combination therapy demonstrated durable clinical benefit in a subset of patients with NLM MSS metastatic colorectal cancer, including potential cure in 3 responders who remain disease-free > 18 months after treatment completion., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests. MF reports research funding from AgenusBio (institution), Bristol-Myers Squibb (institution), Genentech (institution), and Verastem (institution); consulting/advisory relationships with AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Incyte Corporation, Janssen, Pfizer, and Taiho Oncology; and scientific advisory board for Bayer Corporation, Eisai, Entos, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Mirati Therapeutics, Inc., Nouscom, and Roche/Genentech. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a novel, minimally invasive, safe, and repeatable method to treat carcinomatosis. Evidence regarding the clinical benefit (quality of life and survival) of PIPAC compared with that of conventional standard therapy (ST) is lacking., Methods: This is the secondary analysis of the phase 1 US-PIPAC trial for refractory colorectal and appendiceal carcinomatosis. A PIPAC cohort was compared with a retrospective cohort of consecutive patients receiving ST. The primary outcome was number of good days (number of days alive and out of the hospital). The secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and objective functional recovery (daily step count)., Results: The study included 32 patients (PIPAC, 12; ST, 20) with similar baseline characteristics. Compared with the ST cohort, the PIPAC cohort had lower median inpatient hospital stays (> 24 h) within 6 months (0 vs 1; p = 0.015) and 1 year (1 vs 2; p = 0.052) and higher median good days at 6 months (181 vs 131 days; p = 0.042) and 1 year (323 vs 131 days; p = 0.032). There was no worsening of HRQoL after repeated PIPACs. Step counts diminished immediately after PIPAC but returned to baseline within 2-4 weeks. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a favorable association between receipt of PIPAC and OS (median, 11.3 vs 5.1 months; p = 0.036)., Conclusion: Compared with ST, PIPAC was associated with higher number of good days, reduced hospitalization burden, and longer OS without a negative impact on HRQoL with repeated PIPACs. These findings are foundational for evaluation of PIPAC in a randomized clinical trial., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Opinion Statement: Recommended first and second line treatments for unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include fluorouracil-based chemotherapy, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-based therapy, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted therapies. In third line, the SUNLIGHT trial showed that trifluridine/tipiracil + bevacizumab (FTD/TPI + BEV) provided significant survival benefits and as such is now a recommended third line regimen in patients with refractory mCRC, irrespective of RAS mutational status and previous anti-VEGF treatment. Some patients are not candidates for intensive combination chemotherapy as first-line therapy due to age, low tumor burden, performance status and/or comorbidities. Capecitabine (CAP) + BEV is recommended in these patients. In the SOLSTICE trial, FTD/TPI + BEV as a first line regimen in patients not eligible for intensive therapy was not superior to CAP + BEV in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). However, in SOLSTICE, FTD/TPI + BEV resulted in similar PFS, overall survival, and maintenance of quality of life as CAP + BEV, with a different safety profile. FTD/TPI + BEV offers a possible first line alternative in patients for whom CAP + BEV is an unsuitable treatment. This narrative review explores and summarizes the clinical trial data on FTD/TPI + BEV., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

KRAS mutations contribute substantially to the overall colorectal cancer burden and have long been a focus of drug development efforts. After a lengthy preclinical road, KRAS inhibition via the G12C allele has finally become a therapeutic reality. Unlike in NSCLC, early studies of KRAS inhibitors in CRC struggled to demonstrate single agent activity. Investigation into these tissue-specific treatment differences has led to a deeper understanding of the complexities of MAPK signaling and the diverse adaptive feedback responses to KRAS inhibition. EGFR reactivation has emerged as a principal resistance mechanism to KRAS inhibitor monotherapy. Thus, the field has pivoted to dual EGFR/KRAS blockade with promising efficacy. Despite significant strides in the treatment of KRAS G12C mutated CRC, new challenges are on the horizon. Alternative RTK reactivation and countless acquired molecular resistance mechanisms have shifted the treatment goalpost. This review focuses on the historical and contemporary clinical strategies of targeting KRAS G12C alterations in CRC and highlights future directions to overcome treatment challenges., Competing Interests: Disclosure MF reports research funding from AgenusBio (institution), Bristol-Myers Squibb (institution), Genentech (institution), and Verastem (institution); consulting/advisory relationships with AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Incyte Corporation, Janssen, Pfizer, and Taiho Oncology; and scientific advisory board for Bayer Corporation, Eisai, Entos, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Mirati Therapeutics, Inc., Nouscom, and Roche/Genentech. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer (MSS mCRC; mismatch repair proficient) has previously responded poorly to immune checkpoint blockade. Botensilimab (BOT) is an Fc-enhanced multifunctional anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) antibody designed to expand therapy to cold/poorly immunogenic solid tumors, such as MSS mCRC. BOT with or without balstilimab (BAL; anti-PD-1 antibody) is being evaluated in an ongoing expanded phase 1 study. The primary endpoint is safety and tolerability, which was evaluated separately in the dose-escalation portion of the study and in patients with MSS mCRC (using combined dose-escalation/dose-expansion data). Secondary endpoints include investigator-assessed RECIST version 1.1-confirmed objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Here we present outcomes in 148 heavily pre-treated patients with MSS mCRC (six from the dose-escalation cohort; 142 from the dose-expansion cohort) treated with BOT and BAL, 101 of whom were considered response evaluable with at least 6 months of follow-up. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 89% of patients with MSS mCRC (131/148), most commonly fatigue (35%, 52/148), diarrhea (32%, 47/148) and pyrexia (24%, 36/148), with no grade 5 TRAEs reported and a 12% discontinuation rate due to a TRAE (18/148; data fully mature). In the response-evaluable population (n = 101), ORR was 17% (17/101; 95% confidence interval (CI), 10-26%), and DCR was 61% (62/101; 95% CI, 51-71%). Median DOR was not reached (NR; 95% CI, 5.7 months-NR), and median PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 2.7-4.1 months), at a median follow-up of 10.3 months (range, 0.5-42.6 months; data continuing to mature). The combination of BOT plus BAL demonstrated a manageable safety profile with no new immune-mediated safety signals and encouraging clinical activity with durable responses. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03860272 ., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Cohorts A, C, and E of the phase Ib KEYNOTE-651 study evaluated pembrolizumab + binimetinib ± chemotherapy in microsatellite stable/mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus binimetinib 30 mg twice daily alone (cohort A; previously treated with any chemotherapy) or with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (cohort C; previously untreated) or 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (cohort E; previously treated with 1 line of therapy including fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin-based regimen) every 2 weeks. Binimetinib dose-escalation to 45 mg twice daily was planned in all cohorts using a modified toxicity probability interval design (target dose-limiting toxicity [DLT], 30%). The primary endpoint was safety; investigator-assessed objective response rate was secondary., Results: In cohort A, 1/6 patients (17%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; none occurred in 14 patients with 45 mg. In cohort C, 3/9 patients (33%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; dose was not escalated to 45 mg. In cohort E, 1/5 patients (20%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; 5/10 patients (50%) had DLTs with 45 mg. Enrollment was stopped in cohort E binimetinib 45 mg and deescalated to 30 mg; 2/4 additional patients (50%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg (total 3/9 [33%] had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg). Objective response rate was 0% in cohort A, 9% in cohort C, and 15% in cohort E., Conclusion: Per DLT criteria, binimetinib + pembrolizumab (cohort A) was tolerable, binimetinib + pembrolizumab + 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (cohort C) did not qualify for binimetinib dose escalation to 45 mg, and binimetinib + pembrolizumab + 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (cohort E) required binimetinib dose reduction from 45 to 30 mg. No new safety findings were observed across cohorts. There was no apparent additive efficacy when binimetinib + pembrolizumab was added to chemotherapy. Data did not support continued enrollment in cohorts C and E., Competing Interests: Disclosure E. X. Chen reports advisory/consultancy roles from AstraZeneca, Eisai, and GSK; research funding to their institution from AstraZeneca, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, BMS, Novartis, Roche, Zymeworks, and 1Globe. P. Kavan reports advisory/consultancy role with Merck; Expert Testimony for Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA; and an institutional educational grant to their institution. M. Tehfe reports advisory/consultancy roles with Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, BMS, Taiho, and Pfizer; and speaker bureau for BMS and Taiho. J. S. Kortmansky reports research funding to their institution from Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA and Genentech. M. B. Sawyer reports honoraria from Ipsen, BMS, Mylan, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Eisai, Sandoz, Celgene, Servier, Novartis, Leo, Taiho, and Shire; advisory/consultancy roles with AstraZeneca, Leo, and Immuneering; expert testimony for AstraZeneca; research funding to their institution from AstraZeneca and BMS; and travel/accommodation expenses from Ipsen. E. G. Chiorean reports advisory/consultancy roles with Astellas, Bayer, Cardiff, Foundation, G1 Therapeutics, Ipsen, Noxxon, Novartis, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, Pfizer, and Stemline; research funding to their institution from Aadi, Biosplice, BioMed Valley, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Clovis, Corcept, Erasca, Fibrogen, Lona, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, Novartis, Rafael, and Stemline; and travel/accommodation from G1 Therapeutics. C. H. Lieu reports research funding to their institution from Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. M. Fakih reports advisory/consultancy roles with AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Mirati, Nouscom, PsiOxus, Roche/Genentech, and Taiho. K. Spencer reports advisory/consultancy roles from QED Therapeutics, Helsinn, Lynx Group, and Caris. C. Li, P. Leconte, and D. Adelberg report employment with Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA; P. Leconte and D. Adelberg report stock ownership at Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. R. Kim reports honoraria from Taiho; advisory/consultancy roles with Bayer Servier, Ipsen and Roche; and speaker bureau for Eisai, Pfizer, and Incyte. B. Polite, L. Wong, and J. Chaves report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background and Methods: We characterized colorectal liver metastasis recurrence and survival patterns after surgical resection and intraoperative ablation ± hepatic arterial infusion pump (HAIP) placement. We estimated patterns of recurrence and survival in patients undergoing contemporary multimodal treatments. Between 2017 and 2021, patient, tumor characteristics, and recurrence data were collected. Primary outcomes included recurrence patterns and survival data based on operative intervention., Results: There were 184 patients who underwent hepatectomy and intraoperative ablation. Sixty patients (32.6%) underwent HAIP placement. A total of 513 metastases were ablated, median total of 2 ablations per patient. Median time to recurrence was 31 [22-40] months. Recurrence patterns included tumor at ablative margin on first scheduled postoperative imaging (8, 4.3%), local tumor recurrence at ablative site (69, 37.5%), and non-ablated liver tumor recurrence (38, 20.6%). In patients who underwent HAIP placement, the rate of liver recurrence was reduced (45% vs 70.9%, p = 0.0001). Median overall survival was 64 [41-58] months and prolonged survival was associated with HAIP treatment (85 [66-109] vs 60 [51-70] months., Conclusions and Discussion: Hepatic recurrence is common and combination of intraoperative ablation and HAIP treatments were associated with prolonged survival. These data may reflect patient selection however, future work will clarify preoperative tumor and patient characteristics that may better predict recurrence expectations., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The phase 1b KEYNOTE-651 study evaluated pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in microsatellite stable or mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer., Patients and Methods: Patients with microsatellite stable or mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (previously untreated; cohort B) or 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (previously treated with fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin; cohort D) every 2 weeks. Primary end point was safety; investigator-assessed objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 was secondary and biomarker analysis was exploratory., Results: Thirty-one patients were enrolled in cohort B and 32 in cohort D; median follow-up was 30.2 and 33.5 months, respectively. One dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 small intestine obstruction) occurred in cohort D. In cohort B, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 18 patients (58%), most commonly neutropenia and decreased neutrophil count (n = 5 each). In cohort D, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 17 patients (53%), most commonly neutropenia (n = 7). No grade 5 treatment-related AEs occurred. Objective response rate was 61% in cohort B (KRAS wildtype: 71%; KRAS mutant: 53%) and 25% in cohort D (KRAS wildtype: 47%; KRAS mutant: 6%). In both cohorts, PD-L1 combined positive score and T-cell-inflamed gene expression profiles were higher and HER2 expression was lower in responders than nonresponders. No association between tumor mutational burden and response was observed., Conclusion: Pembrolizumab plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin/5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan demonstrated an acceptable AE profile. Efficacy data appeared comparable with current standard of care (including by KRAS mutation status). Biomarker analyses were hypothesis-generating, warranting further exploration., Gov Identifier: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03374254., Competing Interests: Disclosure R. Kim reports honoraria from Taiho; advisory/consultancy roles with Bayer Servier, Ipsen, and Roche; and speakers bureau for Eisai, Pfizer, and Incyte. M. Tehfe reports advisory/consultancy roles with Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, BMS, Taiho, and Pfizer; and speakers bureau for BMS and Taiho. P. Kavan reports advisory/consultancy role with Merck; expert testimony for Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA; and an institutional educational grant to their institution. J. S. Kortmansky reports research funding to their institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, and Genentech. E. X. Chen reports advisory/consultancy roles from AstraZeneca, Eisai, and GSK and research funding to their institution from AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, BMS, Novartis, Roche, Zymeworks, and 1Globe. C. H. Lieu reports advisory/consultancy roles with Natera; and research funding to their institution from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. M. Fakih reports advisory/consultancy roles with AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Mirati, Nouscom, PsiOxus, Roche/Genentech, and Taiho. K. Spencer reports advisory/consultancy roles with QED Therapeutics, Helsinn, Lynx Group, and Caris. Q. Zhao reports stock ownership at Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. R. Predoiu, C. Li, P. Leconte, and D. Adelberg report employment with Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. P. Leconte and D. Adelberg report stock ownership at Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. E. G. Chiorean reports advisory/consultancy roles with Astellas, Bayer, Cardiff, Foundation, G1 Therapeutics, Ipsen, Noxxon, Novartis, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, Pfizer, and Stemline; research funding to their institution from Aadi, Biosplice, BioMed Valley, Boehringer Ingelheim, Clovis, Corcept, Erasca, Fibrogen, Lona, Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, Novartis, Rafael, and Stemline; and travel/accommodations from G1 Therapeutics. J. Chaves and L. Wong report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We performed a systematic literature review to identify and summarize data from studies reporting clinical efficacy and safety outcomes for trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) combined with other antineoplastic agents in advanced cancers, including metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a systematic search on May 29, 2021, for studies reporting one or more efficacy or safety outcome with FTD/TPI-containing combinations. Our search yielded 1378 publications, with 38 records meeting selection criteria: 35 studies of FTD/TPI-containing combinations in mCRC (31 studies second line or later) and 3 studies in other tumor types. FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was extensively studied, including 19 studies in chemorefractory mCRC. Median overall survival ranged 8.6-14.4 months and median progression-free survival 3.7-6.8 months with FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab in refractory mCRC. Based on one randomized and several retrospective studies, FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was associated with improved outcomes compared with FTD/TPI monotherapy. FTD/TPI combinations with chemotherapy or other targeted agents were reported in small early-phase studies; preliminary data indicated higher antitumor activity for certain combinations. Overall, no safety concerns existed with FTD/TPI combinations; most common grade ≥ 3 adverse event was neutropenia, ranging 5%-100% across all studies. In studies comparing FTD/TPI combinations with monotherapy, grade ≥ 3 neutropenia appeared more frequently with combinations (29%-67%) vs. monotherapy (5%-41%). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events ranged 0%-11% for FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab and 0%-17% with other combinations. This systematic review supports feasibility and safety of FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab in refractory mCRC. Data on non-bevacizumab FTD/TPI combinations remain preliminary and need further validation., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Nintedanib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor with efficacy in bevacizumab-resistant colorectal cancer models. This phase I/II study evaluated the recommended phase II dose and efficacy of nintedanib and capecitabine in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer., Methods: Key eligibility criteria included refractory metastatic colorectal cancer and ECOG performance status of 1 or lower. The primary endpoint was 18-week progression-free survival (PFS). A 1-sided binomial test (at α = .1) compared the observed 18-week PFS with a historic control of .25., Results: Forty-two patients were enrolled, including 39 at the recommended phase II dose. The recommended phase II dose was established to be nintedanib 200 mg by mouth twice daily and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 by mouth twice daily. The protocol was evaluated for efficacy in 36 patients. The 18-week PFS was 42% (15/36 patients; P = .0209). Median PFS was 3.4 mo. Median overall survival was 8.9 mo. Sixteen (44%) patients experienced a grade 3/4 adverse event, most commonly fatigue (8%), palmoplantar erythrodysesthesia (8%), aspartate aminotransferase elevation (6%), asthenia (6%), pulmonary embolus (6%), and dehydration (6%). Osteopontin levels at cycle 1, day 1 and cycle 3, day 1 as well as ΔCCL2 levels correlated to disease control at 18 weeks., Conclusions: The combination of nintedanib and capecitabine is well tolerated. Clinical efficacy appears to be superior to regorafenib or tipiracil hydrochloride monotherapy. Further investigation of similar combinations is warranted., Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02393755., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

What Is This Summary About?: This is a summary describing the results from a phase 3 clinical trial called SUNLIGHT. The study looked at treatment with orally administered trifluridine/tipiracil plus intravenously administered bevacizumab in people with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that is refractory to treatment.This study included people whose cancer had grown or spread beyond its original location after no more than two previous treatments. People in the study received either the combination of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab or they received trifluridine/tipiracil alone. The aims of the study were to see how long people lived after treatment with trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab compared with trifluridine/tipiracil alone and to find out how well the combination of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab worked at slowing down the spread of the cancer. Researchers also looked at side effects from taking the medicines and at how treatment affected people's physical functioning., What Are the Key Takeaways?: People in the combination group lived longer (a median of 10.8 months) than people who received trifluridine/tipiracil alone (7.5 months). In addition, the time it took for the cancer to worsen was longer for those who received the combination treatment (a median of 5.6 months) compared with those who received trifluridine/tipiracil alone (2.4 months). People's physical functioning took longer to worsen with combination therapy (a median of 9.3 months) than it did with trifluridine/tipiracil alone (6.3 months), as measured by the impact of treatment on people's ability to carry out daily living activities. The most common side effects in both treatment groups were low levels of white blood cells, known as neutrophils (neutropenia), nausea, and low levels of healthy red blood cells (anemia)., What Were the Main Conclusions Reported by the Researchers?: The results from the study suggest that treatment with oral trifluridine/tipiracil plus intravenous (IV) bevacizumab could help people with refractory mCRC live longer and maintain good physical functioning, and it could slow the worsening of their cancer. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04737187 (SUNLIGHT) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Background: Prior studies indicate that colorectal cancer patients with liver metastases did not benefit from regorafenib, nivolumab (REGONIVO) or regorafenib, ipilimumab, nivolumab (RIN) treatments, while those without liver metastases showed significant response. This study explores the impact of metastatic sites on treatment outcomes., Methods: Chemotherapy-refractory colorectal cancer patients treated with REGONIVO or RIN were evaluated, focusing on 2-month organ-specific response, ORR, PFS and OS based on metastatic sites., Results: Of the 96 patients analyzed (58 REGONIVO, 38 RIN), liver or peritoneal metastases led to poor outcomes, with 0 % ORR, and median PFS of 2.0 and 1.5 months respectively. In contrast, lung-only metastases had an ORR of 56.3 % and a PFS of 14 months. The presence of concurrent LN or other extrahepatic metastatic disease in patients with lung metastatic disease diminished but did not prohibit responses. The 2-month response assessment revealed activity in the lungs, soft tissues, and distant lymph nodes., Conclusions: REGONIVO and RIN were most active in lung-only metastases. Liver and peritoneal metastases were resistant. Future checkpoint inhibitor trials in MSS colorectal cancer should stratify patients based on metastatic locations., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Fakih reports on receiving Honoraria from Amgen and research funding from Astra Zeneca, Amgen and Novartis. Dr. Fakih reports serving as advisor for Array, Bayer, GSK, Taiho, Incyte, and Pfizer. All other authors declare no conflict of interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The current third-line (and beyond) treatment options for RAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer have yielded limited efficacy. At the time of study start, the combination of sotorasib, a KRAS (Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog)-G12C inhibitor, and panitumumab, an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor, was hypothesized to overcome treatment-induced resistance. This phase 1b substudy of the CodeBreaK 101 master protocol evaluated sotorasib plus panitumumab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory KRAS G12C -mutated metastatic colorectal cancer. Here, we report the results in a dose-exploration cohort and a dose-expansion cohort. Patients received sotorasib (960 mg, once daily) plus panitumumab (6 mg kg -1 , once every 2 weeks). The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints included efficacy and pharmacokinetics. Exploratory biomarkers at baseline were assessed. Forty-eight patients (dose-exploration cohort, n = 8; dose-expansion cohort, n = 40) were treated. Treatment-related adverse events of any grade and grade ≥3 occurred in 45 (94%) and 13 (27%) patients, respectively. In the dose-expansion cohort, the confirmed objective response rate was 30.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 16.6%, 46.5%). Median progression-free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI 4.2, 7.7 months). Median overall survival was 15.2 months (95% CI 12.5 months, not estimable). Prevalent genomic coalterations included APC (84%), TP53 (74%), SMAD4 (33%), PIK3CA (28%) and EGFR (26%). Sotorasib-panitumumab demonstrated acceptable safety with promising efficacy in chemotherapy-refractory KRAS G12C -mutated metastatic colorectal cancer. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04185883 ., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Background: KRAS G12C is a mutation that occurs in approximately 3 to 4% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Monotherapy with KRAS G12C inhibitors has yielded only modest efficacy. Combining the KRAS G12C inhibitor sotorasib with panitumumab, an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor, may be an effective strategy., Methods: In this phase 3, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial, we assigned patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer with mutated KRAS G12C who had not received previous treatment with a KRAS G12C inhibitor to receive sotorasib at a dose of 960 mg once daily plus panitumumab (53 patients), sotorasib at a dose of 240 mg once daily plus panitumumab (53 patients), or the investigator's choice of trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib (standard care; 54 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Key secondary end points were overall survival and objective response., Results: After a median follow-up of 7.8 months (range, 0.1 to 13.9), the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2 to 6.3) and 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.8) in the 960-mg sotorasib-panitumumab and 240-mg sotorasib-panitumumab groups, respectively, as compared with 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.9) in the standard-care group. The hazard ratio for disease progression or death in the 960-mg sotorasib-panitumumab group as compared with the standard-care group was 0.49 (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.80; P = 0.006), and the hazard ratio in the 240-mg sotorasib-panitumumab group was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.36 to 0.93; P = 0.03). Overall survival data are maturing. The objective response was 26.4% (95% CI, 15.3 to 40.3), 5.7% (95% CI, 1.2 to 15.7), and 0% (95% CI, 0.0 to 6.6) in the 960-mg sotorasib-panitumumab, 240-mg sotorasib-panitumumab, and standard-care groups, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 35.8%, 30.2%, and 43.1% of patients, respectively. Skin-related toxic effects and hypomagnesemia were the most common adverse events observed with sotorasib-panitumumab., Conclusions: In this phase 3 trial of a KRAS G12C inhibitor plus an EGFR inhibitor in patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer, both doses of sotorasib in combination with panitumumab resulted in longer progression-free survival than standard treatment. Toxic effects were as expected for either agent alone and resulted in few discontinuations of treatment. (Funded by Amgen; CodeBreaK 300 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05198934.)., (Copyright © 2023 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a laparoscopic locoregional treatment for peritoneal metastases (PM) from colorectal cancer (CRC) or appendiceal cancer (AC) in patients who cannot undergo cytoreductive surgery (CRS). While PIPAC has been studied in Europe and Asia, it has not been investigated in the USA., Patients and Methods: We evaluated PIPAC with 90 mg/m 2 oxaliplatin alone (cycle 1) and preceded by systemic chemotherapy with fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV) (cycle 2-3) as a multicenter prospective phase I clinical trial (NCT04329494). The primary endpoint was treatment-related adverse events (AEs). Secondary endpoints included survival and laparoscopic, histologic, and radiographic response., Results: 12 patients were included: 8 with CRC and 4 with AC. Median prior chemotherapy cycles was 2 (interquartile range (IQR) 2-3). All patients were refractory to systemic oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. Median peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) was 28 (IQR 19-32). Six (50%) of twelve patients completed three PIPAC cycles. No surgical complications or dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Two patients developed grade 3 treatment-related toxicities (one abdominal pain and one anemia). Median overall survival (OS) was 12.0 months, and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.9 months. OS was correlated with stable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria but not with laparoscopic response by PCI or histologic response by peritoneal regression grading system (PRGS)., Conclusions: This phase I trial in the USA demonstrated safety, feasibility, and early efficacy signal of PIPAC with oxaliplatin and chemotherapy in patients with PM from AC or CRC who are refractory to standard lines of systemic chemotherapy., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Patients with microsatellite stable (MSS) colorectal cancer with liver metastases are resistant to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy, while about one-third of patients with colorectal cancer without liver metastases, particularly those with lung-only metastases, respond to ICI. We analyzed primary colorectal cancer tumors and major metastatic sites (liver, lung, peritoneal) using multiplex immunofluorescence and whole-slide spatial analyses to identify variations in immune contexture and regional localization within the tumor microenvironment. While levels of T and B cells within peritumoral regions were similar, their levels were significantly lower within the tumor core of liver and peritoneal metastases compared with lung metastases. In contrast, antigen-presenting cells (APC) and APC-T cell interactions were more abundant in all regions of lung metastases. We also identified an abundance of lymphoid aggregates throughout lung metastases, but these were present only within peritumoral regions of liver and peritoneal metastases. Larger lymphoid aggregates consistent with features of tertiary lymphoid structures were observed within or adjacent to primary tumors, but not metastatic lesions. Our findings were validated using NanoString GeoMx DSP, which further showed that liver metastases had higher expression of immune-suppressive markers, while lung metastases showed higher proinflammatory activity and T-cell activation markers. Peritoneal metastases demonstrated higher expression of cancer-associated fibroblast-related proteins and upregulated PD-1/PD-L1 signaling molecules. Our results demonstrate that functional status and spatial distribution of immune cells vary significantly across different metastatic sites. These findings suggest that metastatic site-dependent immune contexture may underlie discordant responses to ICI therapy in patients with MSS colorectal cancer., Significance: Our results demonstrate that functional status and spatial distribution of immune cells vary significantly across different metastatic sites in MSS colorectal cancer. These findings suggest that metastatic site-dependent immune contexture may underlie discordant responses to ICI therapy in patients with MSS colorectal cancer., (© 2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: We pooled data from 2 cohorts of immune checkpoint inhibitors-treated microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer patients to evaluate the prognostic value of RAS/BRAFV600E mutations and Lynch syndrome (LS)., Patients and Methods: Patients were defined as LS-linked if germline mutation was detected and as sporadic if loss of MLH1/PMS2 expression with BRAFV600E mutation and/or MLH1 promoter hypermethylation, or biallelic somatic MMR genes mutations were found. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were adjusted on prognostic modifiers selected on unadjusted analysis (P < .2) if limited number of events., Results: Of 466 included patients, 305 (65.4%) and 161 (34.5%) received, respectively, anti-PD1 alone and anti-PD1+anti-CTLA4 in the total population, 111 (24.0%) were treated in first-line; 129 (28.8%) were BRAFV600E-mutated and 153 (32.8%) RAS-mutated. Median follow-up was 20.9 months. In adjusted analysis of the whole population (PFS/OS events = 186/133), no associations with PFS and OS were observed for BRAFV600E-mutated (PFS HR= 1.20, P = .372; OS HR = 1.06, P = .811) and RAS-mutated patients (PFS HR = 0.93, P = .712, OS HR = 0.75, P = .202). In adjusted analysis in the Lynch/sporadic status-assigned population (n = 242; PFS/OS events = 80/54), LS-liked patients had an improved PFS compared to sporadic cases (HR = 0.49, P = .036). The adjusted HR for OS was 0.56 with no significance (P = .143). No adjustment on BRAFV600E mutation was done due to collinearity., Conclusion: In this cohort, RAS/BRAFV600E mutations were not associated with survival while LS conferred an improved PFS., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: In the phase III TAGS trial, trifluridine/tipiracil showed survival benefit versus placebo in patients with metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer and ≥ 2 prior chemotherapies. This post hoc exploratory analysis assessed the impact of prior therapy type on outcomes., Methods: Based on prior treatment, patients in TAGS (N = 507) were categorized into overlapping subgroups: ramucirumab ± other agents (n = 169), no ramucirumab (n = 338), paclitaxel but no ramucirumab (n = 136), ramucirumab + paclitaxel sequentially or in combination (n = 154), neither paclitaxel nor ramucirumab (n = 202), irinotecan (n = 281), and no irinotecan (n = 226). Overall and progression-free survival, time to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≥ 2, and safety were assessed., Results: Baseline characteristics and prior therapy patterns were generally well balanced between trifluridine/tipiracil and placebo arms across subgroups. Trifluridine/tipiracil was associated with survival benefits versus placebo regardless of prior treatment: across subgroups, median overall survival was 4.6-6.1 versus 3.0-3.8 months (hazard ratios, 0.47-0.88), median progression-free survival was 1.9-2.3 versus 1.7-1.8 months (hazard ratios, 0.49-0.67), and median time to ECOG PS ≥ 2 was 4.0-4.7 versus 1.9-2.5 months (hazard ratios, 0.56-0.88). Among trifluridine/tipiracil-randomized patients, median overall and progression-free survival trended longer in those who had not received ramucirumab, paclitaxel and ramucirumab, or irinotecan (6.0-6.1 and 2.1-2.3 months, respectively) than in those who previously received these agents (4.6-5.7 and 1.9 months). The trifluridine/tipiracil safety profile was consistent across subgroups, with similar overall incidences of grade ≥ 3 adverse events. Minor variations in hematologic toxicities were noted., Conclusions: In TAGS, third- or later-line trifluridine/tipiracil treatment demonstrated overall and progression-free survival and functioning benefits versus placebo and a consistent safety profile in patients with metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer, regardless of prior treatment type., Clinical Trials Registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02500043., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Existing literature on the safety of combined liver and colorectal resections for synchronous colorectal liver metastases is mixed. Using a retrospective review of our institutional data, we aimed to show that combined colorectal and liver resections for synchronous metastases is both feasible and safe in a quaternary center., Methods: A retrospective review of combined resections for synchronous colorectal liver metastases at a quaternary referral center from 2015 to 2020 was completed. Clinicopathologic and perioperative data was collected. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to identify risk factors for major postoperative complications., Results: One hundred one patients were identified, with 35 undergoing major liver resections ( ≥ 3 segments) and 66 undergoing minor liver resections. The vast majority of patients (94%) received neoadjuvant therapy. There was no difference in postoperative major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade 3+) between major and minor liver resections (23.9% versus 12.1%, P = 0.16). On univariate analysis, Albumin-Bilirubin (ALBI) score >1 (P < 0.05) was predictive of major complication. However, on multivariable regression analysis, no factor was associated with significantly increased odds of major complication., Conclusions: This work demonstrates that with thoughtful patient selection, combined resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases can be safely performed at a quaternary referral center., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In a previous phase 3 trial, treatment with trifluridine-tipiracil (FTD-TPI) prolonged overall survival among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Preliminary data from single-group and randomized phase 2 trials suggest that treatment with FTD-TPI in addition to bevacizumab has the potential to extend survival., Methods: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, adult patients who had received no more than two previous chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer to receive FTD-TPI plus bevacizumab (combination group) or FTD-TPI alone (FTD-TPI group). The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were progression-free survival and safety, including the time to worsening of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance-status score from 0 or 1 to 2 or more (on a scale from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater disability)., Results: A total of 246 patients were assigned to each group. The median overall survival was 10.8 months in the combination group and 7.5 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio for death, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.77; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in the combination group and 2.4 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.54; P<0.001). The most common adverse events in both groups were neutropenia, nausea, and anemia. No treatment-related deaths were reported. The median time to worsening of the ECOG performance-status score from 0 or 1 to 2 or more was 9.3 months in the combination group and 6.3 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.67)., Conclusions: Among patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer, treatment with FTD-TPI plus bevacizumab resulted in longer overall survival than FTD-TPI alone. (Funded by Servier and Taiho Oncology; SUNLIGHT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04737187; EudraCT number, 2020-001976-14.)., (Copyright © 2023 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Importance: Immunotherapy combinations with activity in patients with microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer need to be identified., Objective: To determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of regorafenib, ipilimumab, and nivolumab (RIN) and evaluate its activity in an expansion cohort of patients with MSS metastatic colorectal cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: This nonrandomized clinical trial was a single-center 3 + 3 dose de-escalation study with an effectiveness expansion cohort at the RP2D. After the identification of the RP2D, a study amendment was executed to explore a regorafenib dose optimization strategy to mitigate skin-related toxic effects. Study enrollment occurred between May 12, 2020, and January 21, 2022. The trial was conducted at a single academic center. A total of 39 patients with MSS metastatic colorectal cancer whose disease progressed after standard chemotherapy and who had not received prior regorafenib or anti-programmed cell death protein 1 therapy were included., Interventions: Patients received regorafenib daily for 21 days every 4 weeks; fixed-dose ipilimumab, 1 mg/kg, intravenously every 6 weeks; and fixed-dose nivolumab, 240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks. Patients were treated until progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or completion of 2 years of therapy., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was RP2D selection. Secondary end points were safety and overall response rate (ORR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours at the RP2D level., Results: A total of 39 patients were enrolled, 23 (59.0%) were female, median age was 54 years (range, 25-75 years), 3 were Black (7.7%), and 26 were White (66.7%). No dose-limiting toxic effects were noted in the first 9 patients at the starting dose of RIN, with regorafenib dosed at 80 mg daily. No dose de-escalation was needed. This dose was declared the RP2D. Twenty more patients were enrolled at this level. The ORR, median progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in the RP2D cohort were 27.6%, 4 months (IQR, 2-9 months), and 20 months (IQR, 7 months to not estimable), respectively. For the 22 patients without liver metastases, the ORR, PFS, and OS were 36.4%, 5 months (IQR, 2-11), and greater than 22 months, respectively. A dose optimization cohort with regorafenib at 40 mg/d on cycle 1 and 80 mg/d on cycle 2 and beyond was associated with lower skin and immune toxic effects but had limited activity with stable disease for 5 of 10 patients as the best response., Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this nonrandomized clinical trial suggest that RIN at the RP2D demonstrated interesting clinical activity in patients with advanced MSS colorectal cancer without liver metastases. These findings should be confirmed in randomized clinical trials., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04362839.

Purpose: Napabucasin is an investigational, orally administered reactive oxygen species generator bioactivated by intracellular antioxidant NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase 1 that has been evaluated in various solid tumors, including metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Phosphorylated signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (pSTAT3) is hypothesized to predict response in napabucasin-treated patients with mCRC., Patient and Methods: In the multi-center, open-label, phase III CanStem303C (NCT02753127) study, adults with histologically confirmed mCRC that progressed on first-line fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin ± bevacizumab were randomized to twice-daily napabucasin plus FOLFIRI (napabucasin) or FOLFIRI alone (control). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) in the general study population and in patients with pSTAT3-positive tumors (biomarker-positive)., Results: In the general study population (napabucasin, n = 624; control, n = 629), median OS was 14.3 months for napabucasin and 13.8 months for control (hazard ratio [HR], 0.976, one-sided P = .74). Overall, 44% of patients were biomarker-positive (napabucasin, n = 275; control, n = 272). In the biomarker-positive population, median OS was 13.2 months for napabucasin and 12.1 months for control (HR, 0.969; one-sided P > .99). In the control arm, median OS was shorter for biomarker-positive versus biomarker negative patients (12.1 vs. 18.5 months; HR, 1.518; nominal 2-sided P = .0002). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were diarrhea (napabucasin, 84.6%; control, 53.9%), nausea (60.5%, 50.5%), vomiting (41.2%, 29.3%), and abdominal pain (41.0%, 25.2%). Grade ≥3 TEAEs occurred in 73.8% of napabucasin-treated and 66.7% of control-treated patients, most commonly diarrhea (21.2%, 7.0%), neutrophil count decreased (13.7%, 19.2%), and neutropenia (13.3%, 15.2%). Safety was similar in biomarker-positive patients., Conclusion: In patients with previously treated mCRC, adding napabucasin to FOLFIRI did not improve OS. Results from the control arm indicate that pSTAT3 is an adverse prognostic factor in mCRC., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To develop recommendations for treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)., Methods: ASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice., Results: Five systematic reviews and 10 randomized controlled trials met the systematic review inclusion criteria., Recommendations: Doublet chemotherapy should be offered, or triplet therapy may be offered to patients with previously untreated, initially unresectable mCRC, on the basis of included studies of chemotherapy in combination with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies. In the first-line setting, pembrolizumab is recommended for patients with mCRC and microsatellite instability-high or deficient mismatch repair tumors; chemotherapy and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair left-sided treatment-naive RAS wild-type mCRC; chemotherapy and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair RAS wild-type right-sided mCRC. Encorafenib plus cetuximab is recommended for patients with previously treated BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC that has progressed after at least one previous line of therapy. Cytoreductive surgery plus systemic chemotherapy may be recommended for selected patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases; however, the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is not recommended. Stereotactic body radiation therapy may be recommended following systemic therapy for patients with oligometastases of the liver who are not considered candidates for resection. Selective internal radiation therapy is not routinely recommended for patients with unilobar or bilobar metastases of the liver. Perioperative chemotherapy or surgery alone should be offered to patients with mCRC who are candidates for potentially curative resection of liver metastases. Multidisciplinary team management and shared decision making are recommended. Qualifying statements with further details related to implementation of guideline recommendations are also included.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.

Background: Despite recent advancements in the treatment of metastatic BRAF V600E colorectal cancer (CRC), prognosis remains poor. However, a some patients with BRAF V600E disease have superior outcomes compared to the overall cohort and the prognostic factors associated with this improved survival are not well understood., Methods: We conducted a single center retrospective review of patients with metastatic CRC and available next generation sequencing data. Patients with confirmed BRAF V600E disease were selected for the final analysis. We collected baseline demographic characteristics, concurrent mutations, and metastatic pattern. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Univariate and multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between baseline concurrent somatic mutations and sites of metastatic disease with survival., Results: Of 466 patients with metastatic CRC, 50 harbored BRAF V600E disease and 42 were included in the final analysis. The median OS in this cohort was 18.7 months (95% CI: 5.55-31.8). There was no association between baseline concurrent somatic mutations and OS. On univariate analysis, patients with lymph node only disease at the time of metastatic disease were more likely to have longer OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.09-0.98, p = 0.047) and patients with peritoneal disease were more likely to have shorter OS (HR = 2.78, 95% CI: 1.12-6.88, p = 0.03). However, these associations did not retain statistical significance on multivariable analysis., Conclusions: The pattern of metastatic disease in BRAF V600E CRC may be a prognostic factor and future studies are needed to better understand the underlying mechanisms and potentially change clinical practice for a select patient population., Microabstract: Select patients with metastatic BRAF V600E colorectal cancer may have better than expected survival but are not well characterized. We conducted a retrospective review of 42 patients with metastatic BRAF V600E colorectal cancer and showed that lymph node only disease at the time of metastatic disease was associated with superior survival., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr Fakih reported receiving speaker's fees from Amgen Advisory and Guardant360; receiving consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Incyte, Mirati Therapeutics, PsiOxus Therapeutics Ltd, and Taiho Oncology; serving in an advisory capacity for Amgen, Array, Bayer, GSK, Taiho, Incyte, Mirati Therapeutics, Nouscom, Roche/Genentech, and Pfizer; and receiving grants to institution from Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Novartis, and Verastem Oncology outside the submitted work. Other authors have no conflict to disclose., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) show a tremendous activity in microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but a consistent fraction of patients does not respond. Prognostic/predictive markers are needed. Despite previous investigations in other tumor types, immune-related adverse events (irAEs) have not been well evaluated in patients with MSI-H cancers treated with ICIs., Methods: We conducted an international cohort study at tertiary cancer centers collecting clinic-pathological features from 331 patients with MSI-H mCRC treated with ICIs. Of note, the irAEs were summarized using a 'burden score' constructed in a way that the same score value could be obtained by cumulating many low-grade irAEs or few high-grade irAEs; as a result, the lower the burden the better. Clearly, the irAE burden is not a baseline information, thus it was modeled as a time-dependent variable in univariable and multivariable Cox models., Results: Among 331 patients, irAEs were reported in 144 (43.5%) patients. After a median follow-up time of 29.7 months, patients with higher burden of skin, endocrine and musculoskeletal irAEs (the latter two's effect was confirmed at multivariable analysis) had longer overall survival (OS), as opposed to gastrointestinal, pneumonitis, neurological, liver, renal and other irAEs, which showed an harmful effect. Similar results were observed for progression-free survival (PFS). Based on the results retrieved from organ-specific irAEs, 'aggregated' burden scores were developed to distinguish 'protective' (endocrine and musculoskeletal) and 'harmful' (gastrointestinal, pneumonitis, neurological, hepatic) irAEs showing prognostic effects on OS and PFS., Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that not all irAEs could exert a protective effect on oncologic outcome. An easy-to-use model for ICIs toxicity (burden score of protective and harmful irAEs) may be used as surrogate marker of response., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LS: Speakers’ and consultant’s fees from MSD, Astra-Zeneca, Servier, Bayer, Merck, Amgen, Pierre-FabreMJO: Consulting fees from Pfizer, Merck, Glaxosmithkline, 3D Medicine, Nouscom, Roche. Research fees from Roche, Takeda, Merck, BMS, Astra-Zeneca, Nouscom. FP: Honoraria: Servier, Bayer, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Lilly, MSD Oncology, Amgen, Pierre-Fabre, Merck-Serono, BMS. Consulting or Advisory Role: Merck-Serono, Amgen, Servier, MSD Oncology, Organon. Research Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Incyte. All other authors declare no specific conflicts of interest(s)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: We conducted a phase I study to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of trametinib in combination with TAS-102 in patients with chemotherapy-refractory KRAS-mutant, wild-type PIK3CA/PTEN metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)., Methods: A 3+3 dose de-escalation single arm phase I clinical trial was performed in patients with chemorefractory mCRC without priorTAS-102 exposure. Patients received fixed dosing of trametinib 2mg oral daily along with de-escalating doses of TAS-102 beginning at 35 mg/m 2 twice daily on days 1-5 and days 8-12 every 28 days. Primary endpoint was evaluation of MTD., Results: 25 eligible patients were enrolled in this study. During the dose de-escalation phase, no dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were observed at the full doses of trametinib/TAS-102 and the MTD was determined to be TAS-102 35 mg/m 2 orally twice daily on days 1 to5 and days 8 to12 every 28 days with continuous trametinib dosing at 2mg orally daily. No patients achieved a partial or complete response. 5 of 21 evaluable patients (23.81%) achieved a stable disease response. Median PFS was two months (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.70-4.82) while median OS was 7 months (95% CI 6.36-11.48). Treatments were well tolerated with most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events being anemia (20%), neutropenia (12%), leukopenia (8%), diarrhea (8%), rash (4%), and fatigue (4%)., Conclusions: Trametinib in combination with TAS-102 demonstrated a manageable safety profile. However, this combination did not achieve meaningful clinical benefit in patients with RAS-mutated PIK3CA and PTEN wild-type refractory mCRC., Clinical Trial Information: NCT03317119., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors yielded unprecedented outcomes in patients with mismatch repair deficient/ microsatellite instability-high (dMMR/MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but clinical decision-making in this rapidly evolving treatment landscape is challenging. Since performance status (PS) represents a well-established prognostic factor in clinical practice, we investigated whether worse PS, overall or related to either patients' frailty or high tumour burden, could affect the outcomes in this whole patients' population and according to immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment type., Methods: We conducted a global study at Tertiary Cancer Centres and collected data of patients with dMMR/MSI-H mCRC treated with anti- programmed-death (ligand)-1 (PD(L)-1) monotherapy or anti-PD-1/anti- cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 combination., Results: The cohort included 502 patients. At a median follow-up of 31.2 months, worse PFS and OS were reported in patients with patient-related PS ≥ 1 (adjusted-HRs: 1.73, 95%CI: 1.06-2.83, p = 0.004 and 2.06, 95%CI: 1.13-3.74, p = 0.001, respectively) and cancer-related PS ≥ 1 (adjusted-HRs: 1.61, 95%CI: 1.19-2.17, p = 0.004 and 1.87, 95%CI: 1.32-2.66, p = 0.001, respectively). Anti-PD-1/anti- cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 combination did not provide significantly better survival compared to anti-PD(L)-1 monotherapy in PS 0 subgroup (PFS HR = 0.62, 95%CI: 0.37-1.02, p = 0.059; OS HR = 0.59, 95%CI: 0.32-1.11, p = 0.100) and in patient-related PS ≥ 1 (PFS HR 0.93, 95%CI: 0.31-2.83, p = 0.899; OS HR 1.22, 95%CI: 0.34-4.37, p = 0.760), but the difference was significant and clinically meaningful in the subgroup with cancer-related PS ≥ 1 (PFS HR = 0.32, 95%CI: 0.19-0.53, p &lt; 0.001; OS HR = 0.26, 95%CI: 0.14-0.48, p &lt; 0.001)., Conclusions: In patients with dMMR/MSI-H mCRC, an extensive evaluation of clinical variables including PS may be implemented in the therapy decision-making., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Sara Lonardi received honoraria from Amgen, Merck-Serono, Bayer, Servier, Astrazeneca, MSD, Pierre-Fabre; research grants from Merck-Serono. Michael J Overman reports consulting for Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, AbbVie, Agilvax, Acrotech Biopharma, and Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp; and scientific/advisory committee member of Takeda Pharmaceuticals (Japan). Thierry André reports consulting/advisory role and/or honoraria from Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Astra-Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Clovis, Gritstone Oncology, GlaxoSmithKline, Haliodx, Kaleido Biosciences, Merck & Co., Inc., Pierre Fabre, Roche/Ventana, Sanofi, Seagen, Servier and compensation for travel, accommodation, and expenses from Roche/Genentech, MSD & Co., Inc, and Bristol-Myers Squib. Filippo Pietrantonio received honoraria from Amgen, Merck-Serono, Sanofi, Lilly, Bayer, Servier, Astrazeneca, MSD, Organon; research grants from Astrazeneca and BMS. All the other authors declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The KRAS p.G12C mutation has recently become an actionable drug target. To further understand KRAS p.G12C disease, we describe clinicopathologic characteristics, treatment patterns, overall survival (OS), and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), KRAS p.G12C mutations (KRAS G12C), and other KRAS mutations (KRAS non-G12C) using a de-identified database., Patients and Methods: Clinical and tumor characteristics, including treatments received, genomic profile, and clinical outcomes were assessed for patients from a US clinical genomic database with mCRC diagnosed between January 1, 2011, and March 31, 2020, with genomic sequencing data available., Results: Of 6477 patients with mCRC (mCRC cohort), 238 (3.7%) had KRAS G12C and 2947 (45.5%) had KRAS non-G12C mutations. Treatment patterns were generally comparable across lines of therapy (LOT) in KRAS G12C versus KRAS non-G12C cohorts. Median (95% CI) OS after the first LOT was 16.1 (13.0-19.0) months for the KRAS G12C cohort versus 18.3 (17.2-19.3) months for the KRAS non-G12C cohort, and 19.2 (18.5-19.8) months for the mCRC overall cohort; median (95% CI) rwPFS was 7.4 (6.3-9.5), 9.0 (8.2-9.7), and 9.2 (8.6-9.7) months, respectively. The different KRAS non-G12C mutations examined did not affect clinical outcomes. Median OS and rwPFS for all cohorts declined with each subsequent LOT., Conclusions: Patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutant mCRC have poor treatment outcomes, and outcomes appear numerically worse than for those without this mutation, indicating potential prognostic implications for KRAS p.G12C mutations and an unmet medical need in this population., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Little is known about the influence of hepatic artery infusion pump (HAIP) therapy in the setting of chemotherapy resistant hepatic disease in the era of modern systemic therapies., Methods: Patients who underwent HAIP therapy for chemotherapy resistant and unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) were reviewed retrospectively., Results: A total of 25 patients met inclusion criteria. 52% had isolated CRLM and 92% had five or more metastatic lesions. Partial response was noted in 40% of patients. Median hepatic progression-free survival (PFS) was 7 months in those with extrahepatic disease versus 6 months in those with isolated CRLM at the time of HAIP placement (p = 0.75). Median overall survival was 8 months in patients with extrahepatic disease and 14 months in patients with isolated CRLM (p = 0.06)., Conclusions: Our findings are comparable to published data and augment the literature which supports HAIP use in chemotherapy-resistant, liver-predominant metastatic colorectal cancer patients., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Limited studies have suggested that mucinous histology is associated an attenuated response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy., Methods: We conducted a single-institution, retrospective study to review the anti-EGFR response and the molecular profile of patients with left-sided microsatellite stable RAS/BRAF wild-type mucinous metastatic colorectal cancer., Results: In comparison to nonmucinous population (n = 98), mucinous histology (n = 20) was associated with a younger age (48 vs 54, P = .02), wild-type APC (80% vs 15.3%, P < .0001), and wild-type TP53 (40% vs 8.2%, P = .001). Guanine nucleotide binding protein, alpha stimulating (GNAS) mutations were exclusively found in mucinous tumors (20% vs 0, P < .0001). Genomic alterations associated with resistance to anti-EGFR therapy, such as ERBB2 amplification, PIK3CA mutation, MAP2K1 mutation, and KRAS amplification, were identified in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mucinous metastatic colorectal cancer. Mucinous histology was not associated with a worse outcome than non-mucinous histology (34.3 vs 42.2 months, P = .85). However, patients with left-sided RAS/BARF wild-type mucinous colorectal cancer treated with first-line anti-EGFR therapy had significantly worse progression-free survival (4 vs 6.5 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 5.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-21.7, P = .01) than patients treated with the first-line vascular endothelial growth factor A antibody, bevacizumab. Anti-EGFR therapy was associated with limited responses and a short PFS across all lines of therapy in 12 patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mucinous colorectal cancer., Conclusions: Mucinous histology is associated with diminished benefits from anti-EGFR therapy in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type colorectal cancer. These patients should be considered for bevacizumab-based therapy in the first- and second-line settings., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Importance: A circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assay (Signatera; Natera) has been marketed for use in the surveillance of resected colorectal cancer despite limited data supporting such practice., Objective: To compare a ctDNA assay with standard radiographic imaging and measurement of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels, per National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, in the surveillance of resected colorectal cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, single-center cohort study evaluated surveillance strategies of ctDNA, imaging, and measurement of CEA levels in patients with resected colorectal cancer from September 1, 2019, to November 30, 2021., Main Outcomes and Measures: The sensitivity and specificity of ctDNA, imaging, measurement of CEA levels, and combination of imaging plus measurement of CEA levels in detecting a confirmed recurrence of colorectal disease. A confirmed recurrence was defined as a positive ctDNA finding or a finding on imaging confirmed by biopsy, CEA level elevation, or subsequent tumor radiographic dynamics., Results: A total of 48 patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer satisfied the inclusion criteria for this study (28 men [58.3%]; median age, 60 [IQR, 34-85] years) and underwent surveillance by ctDNA, imaging, and measurement of CEA levels. Fifteen patients had disease recurrence during surveillance. Positive ctDNA findings confirmed disease recurrence in 8 patients; imaging, in 9 patients; CEA levels, in 3 patients; and combined imaging plus CEA levels, in 11 patients. Numerically, ctDNA did not perform better than imaging in detecting recurrence, with sensitivities of 53.3% (95% CI, 27.4%-77.7%) and 60.0% (95% CI, 32.9%-82.5%), respectively (P > .99). The combination of imaging plus measurement of CEA levels (sensitivity, 73.3% [95% CI, 44.8%-91.1%]) had a numerical advantage compared with ctDNA in identifying recurrence (P = .55). In addition, no significant difference was noted among ctDNA (median, 14.3 months), imaging (median, 15.0 months), or imaging plus measurement of CEA levels (median, 15.0 months) in the time to identify disease recurrence., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that ctDNA assay may not provide advantages as a surveillance strategy compared with standard imaging combined with CEA levels when performed per National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines.

Importance: Cotargeting vascular endothelial growth factor and programmed cell death 1 or programmed cell death ligand 1 may produce anticancer activity in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The clinical benefit of atezolizumab combined with chemotherapy and bevacizumab remains unclear for the treatment of mCRC., Objectives: To assess whether the addition of atezolizumab to capecitabine and bevacizumab therapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with refractory mCRC and to perform exploratory analyses among patients with microsatellite-stable (MSS) disease and liver metastasis., Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind phase 2 randomized clinical trial enrolled 133 patients between September 25, 2017, and June 28, 2018 (median duration of follow-up for PFS, 20.9 months), with data cutoff on May 4, 2020. The study was conducted at multiple centers through the Academic and Community Cancer Research United network. Adult patients with mCRC who experienced disease progression while receiving fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, bevacizumab, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody therapy (if the patient had a RAS wild-type tumor) were included., Interventions: Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive capecitabine (850 or 1000 mg/m2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 and bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) on day 1 plus either atezolizumab (1200 mg; investigational group) or placebo (placebo group) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was PFS; 110 events were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.65 with 80% power (1-sided α = .10). Secondary end points were objective response rate, overall survival (OS), and toxic effects., Results: Of 133 randomized patients, 128 individuals (median age, 58.0 years [IQR, 51.0-65.0 years]; 77 men [60.2%]) were assessed for efficacy (82 in the investigational group and 46 in the placebo group). Overall, 15 patients (11.7%) self-identified as African American or Black, 8 (6.3%) as Asian, 1 (0.8%) as Pacific Islander, 101 (78.9%) as White, 1 (0.8%) as multiple races (Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and White), and 2 (1.6%) as unknown race or unsure of race. Microsatellite-stable disease was present in 110 patients (69 in the investigational group and 41 in the placebo group). Median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 4.1-6.4 months) in the investigational group and 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.2-6.2 months) in the placebo group (1-sided log-rank P = .07, a statistically significant result; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.52-1.09). Among patients with MSS and proficient mismatch repair, the HR for PFS was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.44-0.99). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events in the investigational vs placebo groups were hypertension (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]), diarrhea (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]), and hand-foot syndrome (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]). One treatment-related death occurred in the investigational group. In the investigational group, the response rate was higher among patients without liver metastasis (3 of 13 individuals [23.1%]) vs with liver metastasis (4 of 69 individuals [5.8%]). The benefit of atezolizumab for PFS and OS was greater among patients without vs with liver metastasis (primary analysis of PFS: HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.27-1.47] vs 0.77 [95% CI, 0.51-1.17]; OS: HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.11-1.02] vs 1.14 [95% CI, 0.72-1.81])., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the addition of atezolizumab to capecitabine and bevacizumab therapy provided limited (ie, not clinically meaningful) clinical benefit. Patients with MSS and proficient mismatch repair tumors and those without liver metastasis benefited more from dual inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor and programmed cell death 1 or programmed cell death ligand 1 pathways., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02873195.

Background: Despite unprecedented benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with mismatch repair deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability high (MSI-H) advanced gastrointestinal cancers, a relevant proportion of patients shows primary resistance or short-term disease control. Since malignant effusions represent an immune-suppressed niche, we investigated whether peritoneal involvement with or without ascites is a poor prognostic factor in patients with dMMR/MSI-H metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and gastric cancer (mGC) receiving ICIs., Methods: We conducted a global multicohort study at Tertiary Cancer Centers and collected clinic-pathological data from a cohort of patients with dMMR/MSI-H mCRC treated with anti-PD-(L)1 ±anti-CTLA-4 agents at 12 institutions (developing set). A cohort of patients with dMMR/MSI-high mGC treated with anti-PD-1 agents±chemotherapy at five institutions was used as validating dataset., Results: The mCRC cohort included 502 patients. After a median follow-up of 31.2 months, patients without peritoneal metastases and those with peritoneal metastases and no ascites had similar outcomes (adjusted HR (aHR) 1.15, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.56 for progression-free survival (PFS); aHR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.42 for overall survival (OS)), whereas inferior outcomes were observed in patients with peritoneal metastases and ascites (aHR 2.90, 95% CI 1.70 to 4.94; aHR 3.33, 95% CI 1.88 to 5.91) compared with patients without peritoneal involvement. The mGC cohort included 59 patients. After a median follow-up of 17.4 months, inferior PFS and OS were reported in patients with peritoneal metastases and ascites (aHR 3.83, 95% CI 1.68 to 8.72; aHR 3.44, 95% CI 1.39 to 8.53, respectively), but not in patients with only peritoneal metastases (aHR 1.87, 95% CI 0.64 to 5.46; aHR 2.15, 95% CI 0.64 to 7.27) when compared with patients without peritoneal involvement., Conclusions: Patients with dMMR/MSI-H gastrointestinal cancers with peritoneal metastases and ascites should be considered as a peculiar subgroup with highly unfavorable outcomes to current ICI-based therapies. Novel strategies to target the immune-suppressive niche in malignant effusions should be investigated, as well as next-generation ICIs or intraperitoneal approaches., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KS paid consulting or advisory roles for Astellas, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Pfizer, Ono, MSD, Taiho, Novartis, AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, and Boehringer Ingelheim ; honoraria from Novartis, AbbVie, and Yakult; and research funding from Astellas, Lilly, Ono, Sumoitomo Dainippon, Daiichi Sankyo, Taiho, Chugai, MSD, Medi Science and Eisai. JC reports grants and personal fees from Merck, Amgen, Macrogenics, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Foundation Medicine, Daiichi-Sankyo and Bristol Myers Squibb. AK reports honoraria from Ono Pharmaceutical, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Eli Lilly outside the submitted work. CC received honoraria from Amgen, Bayer, Merck, Roche, and Servier; has consulting or advisory role at Amgen, Bayer, MSD, and Roche; was a speakers bureau member at Servier; received research funding from Bayer, Merck, and Servier; and received travel and accommodation expenses from Roche and Servier. MO: consulting for Merck Sharp & Dohme, AbbVie, Agilvax, Acrotech Biopharma, and Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp; and scientific/ advisory committee member of Takeda Pharmaceuticals (Japan). AK reports honoraria from from Ono Pharmaceutical, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Eli Lilly outside the submitted work. FP received honoraria from Amgen, Merck-Serono, Sanofi, Lilly, Bayer, Servier, Astrazeneca; research grants from Astrazeneca and BMS. All the remaining authors declared no conflict of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Sotorasib, a specific, irreversible KRAS G12C protein inhibitor, has shown monotherapy clinical activity in KRAS G12C -mutated solid tumours, including colorectal cancer, in the CodeBreaK100 phase 1 trial. We aimed to investigate the activity and safety of sotorasib in phase 2 of the trial., Methods: In this single-arm, phase 2 trial, adult patients with KRAS G12C -mutated advanced solid tumours were enrolled, from 59 medical centres in 11 countries, if they were aged 18 years or older, had at least one measurable lesion according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or lower. Only data for patients with colorectal cancer, enrolled at 33 medical centres in nine countries, are presented from this basket trial. To be enrolled, the patients had to have progressed after receiving fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan treatment. These patients were administered 960 mg sotorasib orally once per day until disease progression, development of unacceptable side-effects, withdrawal of consent, or death. The primary endpoint was objective response (complete or partial response) as assessed by blinded independent central review. Response was evaluated in patients who received at least one dose of sotorasib and had at least one measurable lesion at baseline; safety was evaluated in patients who received at least one dose of sotorasib. This analysis is a prespecified analysis triggered by the phase 2 colorectal cancer cohort. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03600883, and is active but no longer recruiting., Findings: On March 1, 2021, at data cutoff, 62 patients with KRAS G12C -mutant colorectal cancer had been enrolled between Aug 14, 2019, and May 21, 2020, and had received at least one dose of sotorasib monotherapy. Objective response was observed in six (9·7%, 95% CI 3·6-19·9) of 62 patients, all with partial response. Treatment-related adverse events at grade 3 occurred in six (10%) patients, the most common of which was diarrhoea (two [3%] of 62 patients), and at grade 4 occurred in one (2%) patient (blood creatine phosphokinase increase); no fatal events were recorded. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in two (3%) patients (back pain and acute kidney injury)., Interpretation: Although the 9·7% overall response rate did not reach the benchmark, oral administration of sotorasib once per day showed modest anti-tumour activity and manageable safety in these heavily pretreated chemorefractory patients. Sotorasib is under evaluation in combination with other therapeutics to increase potential activity and overcome potential resistance mechanisms., Funding: Amgen., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MGF reports honoraria from Amgen; consulting or advisory roles for Taiho, Bayer, Array, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, GlaxoSmithKline, Zhuhai Biotech, Mirati, and Incyte; speakers' bureau for Guardant; and research funding (to the institution) from Verastem, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Amgen, and AstraZeneca. SK reports stock or ownership interests in Navire and Lutris; consulting or advisory roles to EMD Serono, Merck, Holy Stone Healthcare, Novartis, Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bayer Health, Pierre Fabre, Redx Pharma, Ispen, Daiichi Sankyo, Natera, HalioDx, Lutris, Jacobio, Pfizer, Repare Therapeutics, Inivata, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Navire, and Amgen; and research funding (to the institution) from Roche, EMD Serono, MedImmune, Novartis, Amgen, Lilly, and Daiichi Sankyo; and research funding (to self) from Merck, Navire, Holy Stone Healthcare, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bayer Health, Pierre Fabre, Redx Pharma, Ispen, Natera, HalioDx, Lutris, Jacobio, Pfizer, Repare Therapeutics, Inivata, and Jazz Pharmaceuticals. YK reports speaker's bureau for Taiho, ONO, Bayer, and Sanofi; research grants (to the institution) from Daiichi-Sankyo; being the principal investigator for Taiho, Takeda, ONO, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, Amgen, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Genmab, and Astelas; and advisory roles for Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Taiho. TWK reports research funding (to the institution) from Roche, Sanofi, Aventis, AstraZeneca. JCK reports support to the University of Michigan from Roche, Boston Biomedical, Bristol-Myers Squibb, NSABP Foundation, AstraZeneca, Isofol Medical, Merck Sharp and Dohme, AbbVie, Hutchison Medipharma, Novartis, and Tempest. GSF reports royalties from Wolters Kluwer; advisory roles (payment to the institution) for Fujifilm, Silicon, Navire, and Turning Point; advisory roles (payment to GSF) for EMD Serono; travel expenses (for research related to the institution) for Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Fujifilm, Millennium, and Sarah Cannon Research Institute; speaker's honorarium, Total Health Conferencing, and Rocky Mountain Oncology Society (2020); research funding (to the institution) for 3-V Biosciences, Abbisko, AbbVie, ADC Therapeutics, Aileron, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Amgen, ARMO/Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bioatla, Bioinvent, Biothera, Bicycle, Celldex, Celgene, Ciclomed, Curegenix, Curis, Cyteir, Daiichi, DelMar, eFFECTOR, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Epizyme, Erasca, Exelixis, Fujifilm, Genmab, GlaxoSmithKline, Hutchison MediPharma, IGM Biosciences, Ignyta, ImmunoGen/MacroGenics, Incyte, Jacobio, Jounce, Kolltan, Loxo/Bayer, MedImmune, Millennium, Merck, miRNA Therapeutics, National Institutes of Health, Navire, Novartis, OncoMed, Oncorus, Oncothyreon, Poseida, Precision Oncology, Prelude, PureTech, RasCal, Regeneron, Rgenix, Ribon, Sapience, Silicon, Strategia, Syndax, Synthorx/Sanofi, Taiho, Takeda, Tarveda, Teneobio, Tesaro, Tocagen, Turning Point Therapeutics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Vegenics, and Xencor. VH reports honoraria from Amgen, Baxalta, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Lilly, Merck, Roche, Sanofi, SERVIER, Sirtex Medical, and Taiho Pharmaceutical; consulting or advisory roles for Amgen, Baxalta, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Halozyme, Merck, Merck Sharpe and Dohme (MSD), Roche, Sanofi, SERVIER, and Sirtex Medical; research funding from Amgen (to the institution), Boehringer Ingelheim (to the institution), Celgene (to the institution), Merck (to the institution), Roche (to the institution), Shire (to the institution), and Sirtex Medical (to the institution); and travel and accommodation expenses from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, MSD, Roche, SERVIER, Shire, and Sirtex Medical. KM reports grants from Solasia Pharma, Merck Serono, Daiichi Sankyo, Parexel International, Pfizer, and MSD; grants and consulting fees from Amgen; grants, consulting fees, and honorarium from ONO Pharmaceutical; grants and honorarium from Sanofi and Taiho; consulting fees from AstraZeneca; and honorarium from Chugai, Takeda, Eli Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Bayer, outside the submitted work. JHS reports consulting and advisory board membership for AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Genentech/Roche, Inivata, Mereo, SeaGen, Natera, Pfizer, and Viatris; and research funding from SeaGen, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, AStar D3, Daiichi-Sankyo, Genentech/Roche, Gossamer Bio, AbbVie, Exelixis, Amgen, and Nektar. DSH reports grants from Bayer, Lilly, Genentech, LOXO, Pfizer, Amgen, Mirati, Ignyta, Merck, Daichii-Sanko, Eisai, Adaptimmune, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genmab, Infinity, Kite, Kyowa, Medimmune, Molecular Template, Novartis, and Takeda; personal fees from Mirna and LOXO; and honoraria or stock options from Bayer, Baxter, Guidepoint Global, Oncoresponse, Janssen, and Molecular Match, outside the submitted work. CSD reports grants (to the institution for research) from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Agios, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeiGene, Exelixis, Genmab, Macrogenics, Zymeworks, Sanofi Aventis, MedImmune, Array BioPharma, and Lycera; and honoraria (personal for scientific advising or data safety monitoring board) from Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Bayer, BeiGene, Astellas, Exelixis, Eli Lilly, Taiho Oncology, and Zymeworks. GG reports research funding from Amgen, BMS, MSD, Merck, and Roche. HH, QT, JKP, and GN report Amgen employment and stock. TJP reports Servier speaker honorarium and being on the MSD advisory board. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer mortality. Creatine metabolism was previously shown to critically regulate colon cancer progression. We report that RGX-202, an oral small-molecule SLC6A8 transporter inhibitor, robustly inhibits creatine import in vitro and in vivo, reduces intracellular phosphocreatine and ATP levels, and induces tumor apoptosis. RGX-202 suppressed CRC growth across KRAS wild-type and KRAS mutant xenograft, syngeneic, and patient-derived xenograft (PDX) tumors. Antitumor efficacy correlated with tumoral expression of creatine kinase B. Combining RGX-202 with 5-fluorouracil or the DHODH inhibitor leflunomide caused regressions of multiple colorectal xenograft and PDX tumors of distinct mutational backgrounds. RGX-202 also perturbed creatine metabolism in patients with metastatic CRC in a phase 1 trial, mirroring pharmacodynamic effects on creatine metabolism observed in mice. This is, to our knowledge, the first demonstration of preclinical and human pharmacodynamic activity for creatine metabolism targeting in oncology, thus revealing a critical therapeutic target.

Introduction: Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibition has shown potent antitumor activity in patients with microsatellite instability (MSI) metastatic cancer. Microsatellite stable (MSS) colorectal cancer has long been considered resistant to immunotherapy., Areas Covered: In this review, we provide an overview of current progress on strategies to overcome the resistance to immunotherapy in MSS colorectal cancer., Expert Opinion: Emerging evidence suggest that combination of immune modulators such as regorafenib may improve the responsiveness of MSS colorectal cancer to checkpoint blockade. In addition, signs of clinical activity have also been observed in other combination strategies, such as the combination of checkpoint blockade with Stat3 inhibitor, or bispecific T-cell engagers. Nevertheless, predictive biomarkers that can identify patients who may benefit from immunotherapy are key for its implementation in clinical setting. Metastatic disease sites may predict for the response or resistance to checkpoint blockade, with liver metastases emerging as a strong predictive biomarker of lack of benefit from PD-1 targeting, even with combination therapies. Additional efforts are required to study the mechanism of resistance and to develop novel therapeutic strategies to overcome immune resistance., Abbreviations: CEA: carcinoembryonic antigen; CR: complete response; CTLA-4: cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4; DCR: disease control rate; MSI-H: microsatellite instability-high; MSS: Microsatellite stable (MSS); OS: overall survival; PD-1: programmed cell death protein 1; PD-L1: programmed death-ligand receptor 1; PR: partial response; PFS: progression-free survival; SD: stable disease; TMB: tumor mutation burden; VEGFR: vascular endothelial growth factor receptor.

Importance: Microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer has been historically characterized as resistant to immunotherapy. Recent studies have demonstrated limited clinical activity of programmed cell death receptor 1/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) targeting in MSS metastatic colorectal cancer. The association of metastatic disease in the liver with treatment response has not been fully investigated., Objective: To investigate the association of liver metastases with response to PD-1/PD-L1-targeting therapy in MSS metastatic colorectal cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-center retrospective cohort study evaluated clinical responses to PD-1- or PD-L1-targeting therapy, with or without other investigational agents, in patients with MSS metastatic colorectal cancer and disease progression after standard of care therapy from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2020., Main Outcomes and Measures: Objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS), measured from initiation of PD-1/PD-L1-targeting therapy., Results: Ninety-five patients with MSS metastatic colorectal cancer were identified (54 men [56.8%]; median age, 55 [interquartile range (IQR), 49-64] years). The overall ORR was 8.4% (8 of 95 patients). Eight of 41 patients without liver metastases achieved an ORR of 19.5%, and no response was observed in 54 patients with liver metastases. The disease control rate was 58.5% (24 of 41) in patients without liver metastasis and 1.9% (1 of 54) in patients with liver metastasis. Patients without liver metastases at the time of PD-1/PD-L1-targeting treatment had a superior median PFS compared with patients with liver metastases (4.0 [IQR, 2.0-7.5] vs 1.5 [IQR, 1.0-2.0] months; P < .001). In addition, median PFS was 5.5 (IQR, 2.0-11.5) months for patients without any prior or current liver involvement at the time of PD-1/PD-L1-targeting treatment initiation. Using a multivariate Cox regression model correcting for Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, primary tumor location, RAS and BRAF status, tumor mutation burden, and metastatic sites, liver metastases was the variable with the most significant association with faster progression after PD-1/PD-L1 treatment inhibition (hazard ratio, 7.00; 95% CI, 3.18-15.42; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this cohort study suggest that patients with MSS metastatic colorectal cancer and without liver metastases may derive clinical benefits from checkpoint inhibitors, whereas the presence of liver metastases was associated with resistance. Further prospective studies are needed to investigate PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with MSS metastatic colorectal cancer without liver metastases.

Background: The efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with microsatellite instability (MSI)-high metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is unprecedented. A relevant proportion of subjects achieving durable disease control may be considered potentially 'cured', as opposed to patients experiencing primary ICI refractoriness or short-term clinical benefit. We developed and externally validated a nomogram to estimate the progression-free survival (PFS) and the time-independent event-free probability (EFP) in patients with MSI-high mCRC receiving ICIs., Methods: The PFS and EFP were estimated using a cure model fitted on a developing set of 163 patients and validated on a set of 146 patients with MSI-high mCRC receiving anti-programmed death (ligand)1 (PD-(L)1) ± anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) agents. A total of 23 putative prognostic factors were chosen and then selected using a random survival forest (RSF). The model performance in estimating PFS probability was evaluated by assessing calibration (internally-developing set and externally-validating set) and quantifying the discriminative ability (Harrell C index)., Results: RFS selected five variables: ICI type (anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy vs anti-CTLA-4 combo), ECOG PS (0 vs >0), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (≤3 vs >3), platelet count, and prior treatment lines. As both in the developing and validation series most PFS events occurred within 12 months, this was chosen as cut-point for PFS prediction. The combination of the selected variables allowed estimation of the 12-month PFS (focused on patients with low chance of being cured) and the EFP (focused on patients likely to be event-free at a certain point of their follow-up). ICI type was significantly associated with disease control, as patients receiving the anti-CTLA-4-combination experienced the best outcomes. The calibration of PFS predictions was good both in the developing and validating sets. The median value of the EFP (46%) allowed segregation of two prognostic groups in both the developing (PFS HR=3.73, 95% CI 2.25 to 6.18; p<0.0001) and validating (PFS HR=1.86, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.23; p=0.0269) sets., Conclusions: A nomogram based on five easily assessable variables including ICI treatment was built to estimate the outcomes of patients with MSI-high mCRC, with the potential to assist clinicians in their clinical practice. The web-based system 'MSI mCRC Cure' was released., Competing Interests: Competing interests: FP received honoraria from Amgen, Merck-Serono, Sanofi, Lilly, Bayer, Servier, Astrazeneca; research grants from Astrazeneca, and BMS. CC received honoraria from Amgen, Bayer, Merck, Roche, and Servier; has consulting or advisory role at Amgen, Bayer, MSD, and Roche; was a speakers bureau member at Servier; received research funding from Bayer, Merck, and Servier; and received travel and accommodation expenses from Roche and Servier. FM received honoraria from Servier. MO: consulting for Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, AbbVie, Agilvax, Acrotech Biopharma, and Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp; and scientific/advisory committee member of Takeda Pharmaceuticals (Japan). All the other authors declared no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Dual HER2-targeted therapy has been associated with clinical responses and prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival in RAS-wild type HER2-amplified colorectal cancer (CRC). However, no clinical benefits have been reported in patients with CRC with HER2 mutations. Activated HER2 mutations have been largely deemed resistant to trastuzumab and to dual HER2 targeting. This report describes a patient with metastatic CRC with concurrent HER2 amplification and a HER2 S310F mutation, which is an active mutation located in the extracellular dimerization domain of HER2. Treatment with trastuzumab + lapatinib resulted in an excellent response that lasted for 10 months. Upon disease progression, treatment with the antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab-deruxtecan resulted in a short-lived response. This is the first case report of successful HER2 targeting in metastatic CRC with concurrent HER2 amplification and a HER2 S310F mutation.

Background: RAS short variant (SV) mutations in colorectal cancer (CRC) are associated with lack of benefit from epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody (EGFRmAb). However, the clinical implications for RAS amplification (RASa) as a biomarker for anti-EGFR therapy in CRC remain ill defined., Methods: Genomic analysis was performed using the Foundation Medicine (FM) comprehensive genomic profiling database of 37,233 CRC cases. Clinical outcomes were assessed using two independent cohorts: the City of Hope (COH) cohort of 338 patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) and the Flatiron Health-FM real-world clinicogenomic database (CGDB) of 3,904 patients with mCRC., Results: RASa was detected in 1.6% (614/37,233) of primarily mCRC. RASa 6-9 (n = 241, 39%), 10-19 (n = 165, 27%), and ≥ 20 (n = 209, 34%) copy number subsets had co-RAS SV/BRAF V600E in 63%/3%, 31%/0.6%, and 4.8%/0% of cases, respectively. In the COH cohort, six patients with RASa (13-54 copies) received EGFRmAb, four of six had progressive disease, two had stable disease, and median time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) was 2.5 months. Of the CGDB EGFRmAb-treated patients, those with RASa (n = 9) had median TTD of 4.7 months and overall survival (OS) of 11.4 months, those with RAS SV (n = 101) had median TTD and OS of 5.3 and 9.4 months, and those with RAS/BRAF wild-type (n = 608) had median TTD and OS of 7.6 and 13.7 months., Conclusion: Patients with RASa without RAS mutations (1.1% of mCRC) may have poor outcomes on EGFRmAb, although numbers herein were small, and interpretation is confounded by combination chemotherapy. Larger independent studies are warranted to determine if RASa, including degree of amplification, may act similarly to RAS mutation as a resistance mechanism to EGFRmAb therapies., Implications for Practice: Genomic data suggest that RAS amplification occurs as the sole RAS/RAF alteration in >1% of colorectal cancer cases and that degree of amplification inversely correlates with co-occurring MAPK pathway alterations. Preliminary clinical evidence suggests that RAS amplification may function similarly to RAS mutation as a negative predictor of benefit from anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapies in colorectal cancer. More clinical data are needed, and comprehensive genomic profiling, including detection of RAS amplification, should be used in trial design to inform therapy selection., (© 2021 AlphaMed Press.)

Background: HER2 amplification has been identified in 2-3% of patients with colorectal cancer, although there are currently no approved HER2-targeted therapies for colorectal cancer. We aimed to study the antitumour activity and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan (an antibody-drug conjugate of humanised anti-HER2 antibody with topoisomerase I inhibitor payloads) in patients with HER2-expressing metastatic colorectal cancer., Methods: DESTINY-CRC01 is an open-label, phase 2 study that recruited patients from 25 clinics and hospitals in Italy, Japan, Spain, the UK, and the USA. Eligible patients had centrally confirmed HER2-expressing metastatic colorectal cancer that had progressed on two or more previous regimens (HER2-targeted therapies other than trastuzumab deruxtecan permitted), were aged 18 years or older (≥20 years in Japan), had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0 or 1, and had RAS and BRAF V600E wild-type tumours. Patients were enrolled into one of three cohorts by HER2 expression level: cohort A (HER2-positive, immunohistochemistry [IHC] 3+ or IHC2+ and in-situ hybridisation [ISH]-positive), cohort B (IHC2+ and ISH-negative), or cohort C (IHC1+). Patients received 6·4 mg/kg trastuzumab deruxtecan intravenously every 3 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, withdrawal of consent, or death. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate in cohort A by independent central review which was assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety analysis set. Both the full analysis set and the safety analysis set included all patients who received one or more doses of trastuzumab deruxtecan. This ongoing trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03384940., Findings: Between Feb 23, 2018, and July 3, 2019, 78 patients were enrolled in the study (53 in cohort A, seven in cohort B, and 18 in cohort C), all of whom received at least one dose of study drug. For the 53 (68%) patients with HER2-positive tumours (cohort A), a confirmed objective response was reported in 24 (45·3%, 95% CI 31·6-59·6) patients after a median follow-up of 27·1 weeks (IQR 19·3-40·1). Grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events that occurred in at least 10% of all participants were decreased neutrophil count (17 [22%] of 78) and anaemia (11 [14%]). Five patients (6%) had adjudicated interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis (two grade 2; one grade 3; two grade 5, the only treatment-related deaths)., Interpretation: Trastuzumab deruxtecan showed promising and durable activity in HER2-positive metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard treatment, with a safety profile consistent with that reported in previous trastuzumab deruxtecan trials. Interstitial lung disease and pneumonitis are important risks requiring careful monitoring and prompt intervention., Funding: Daiichi Sankyo., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests SS reports personal fees from and is an advisory board member for Daiichi-Sankyo, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CheckmAb, Merck, Roche-Genentech, and Seattle Genetics. KR is an advisor and speaker for Bayer and Daiichi Sankyo, and an advisor for AstraZeneca, outside of the submitted work. MDB reports grants from Eli Lilly Italia and personal fees from Eli Lilly Italia and Bristol Myers Squibb outside the submitted work and is a consultant for Myland Italy and speaker for Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Sharp & Dohme, and Eli Lilly Italia. TM reports personal fees from Takeda, Chugai, Merck, Taiho, Bayer, Lilly Japan, Yakult Honsha, and Sanofi, and grants from MSD, Daiichi Sankyo, and Ono, outside the submitted work. HK reports non-financial support from Daiichi Sankyo, during the conduct of the study; grants, personal fees, and support for advisory role and honoraria (speeches) from Taiho, personal fees and support for advisory role and honoraria (speeches) from Bristol Myers Squibb Japan, Ono, and Lilly Japan, grants, personal fees, and upport for advisory role and honoraria (speeches) from Daiichi Sankyo, grants and personal fees from Chugai/Roche, personal fees from Yakult Pharmaceutical, Takeda, MSD KK, Merck Serono, Bayer, and AstraZeneca, and grants from Eisai, outside the submitted work. KY reports a grant from Daiichi Sankyo during the conduct of the study, and grants from Taiho, Sanofi, Ono, and Yakurt Honsha, and is a speaker for Taiho, Eli Lilly, Takeda, Chugai, Ono, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer, and Merck, outside the submitted work. TN reports a grant from Daiichi Sankyo during the conduct of the study, and grants from Taiho, Chugai, MSD, Ono, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly, and Dainippon Sumitomo. MF reports personal fees from Amgen, Array, Bayer, Guardant360, and Pfizer, and grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Novartis, outside the submitted work. EE reports grants and personal fees from Hoffman-La Roche, Amgen, Merck Serono, and Servier, personal fees from Sanofi Aventis, and Array, honoraria institution support from MSD, and grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, during the conduct of the study. FC has served as an advisor and speaker for Roche, Amgen, Merck-Serono, Pfizer, Sanofi, Bayer, Servier, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, and Eli Lilly, and received institutional research grants from Bayer, Roche, Merck-Serono, Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Takeda. YK reports grants from Daiichi Sankyo, during the conduct of the study, grants from A2 Healthcare, Dainippon Sumitomo, Eisai, EP – CRSU, EPS, Linical, NanoCarrier, QuintilesIMS, Sysmex, Astellas, Incyte, IQVIA, and Syneos Health Clinical KK, grants and personal fees from Bayer Yakuhin, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly Japan, Linical, MSD KK, Taiho, Kyowa Kirin, Ono, Sanofi-Aventis, and Yakult Honsha, and personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, EA Pharma, Takeda, Merck, Nipro, Pfizer Japan, Sawai, Shiseido, Asahi Kasei, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Merck, Shire Japan, Nippon Kayaku, Otsuka, and Novartis, outside the submitted work. TE reports grants and personal fees from MSD, Ono, Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, Taiho, Lilly, Merck Serono, Nihon Kayaku, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Shionogi, Chugai, and Takeda, grants from Novartis, Dainippon Sumitomo, Astellas, Amgen, BeiGene, Array, Shionogi, and Yakult, and personal fees from Sanofi, outside the submitted work. ZW reports grants from Plexxikon and Novartis outside the submitted work, and is a consultant for Array, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, Ono, Eli Lilly, Ipsen, Incyte, Merck, and EMD Serono. AS-B reports personal fees from Amgen, Bayer, Sanofi, and Servier, outside the submitted work. KS, EY, EB, YO, and JS are full-time employees of Daiichi Sankyo. AG reports grants from Daiichi Sanyko, during the conduct of the study, grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Bayer, Merck, and Array/ Pfizer, and grants from OBI, outside the submitted work. TY reports grants from Novartis, MSD, Sumitomo Dainippon, Chugai, Sanofi, Daiichi Sankyo, Parexel, Ono, and GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. FL, JR, and KC declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) is an orally active formulation of trifluridine, a thymidine-based nucleoside analog, and tipiracil hydrochloride, a thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor that increases the bioavailability of trifluridine. Preliminary studies of FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab have produced encouraging results in the treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Here, we describe the design of the multinational Phase III SUNLIGHT, an open-label study of FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab as third-line treatment for patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. A total of 490 patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab, or FTD/TPI monotherapy. The primary objective is to significantly improve overall survival with FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab compared with FTD/TPI monotherapy. The first patient was enrolled in November 2020.

Purpose: External control (EC) arms derived from electronic health records (EHRs) can provide appropriate comparison groups when randomized control arms are not feasible, but have not been explored for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) trials. We constructed EC arms from two patient-level EHR-derived databases and evaluated them against the control arm from a phase III, randomized controlled mCRC trial., Methods: IMblaze370 evaluated atezolizumab with or without cobimetinib versus regorafenib in patients with mCRC. EC arms were constructed from the Flatiron Health (FH) EHR-derived de-identified database and the combined FH/Foundation Medicine Clinico-Genomic Database (CGDB). IMblaze370 eligibility criteria were applied to the EC cohorts. Propensity scores and standardized mortality ratio weighting were used to balance baseline characteristics between the IMblaze370 and EC arms; balance was assessed using standardized mean differences. Kaplan-Meier method estimated median overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards models estimated hazard ratios with bootstrapped 95% CIs to compare differences in OS between study arms., Results: The FH EC included 184 patients; the CGDB EC included 108 patients. Most characteristics were well-balanced (standardized mean difference < 0.1) between each EC arm and the IMblaze370 population. Median OS was similar between the IMblaze370 control arm (8.5 months [95% CI, 6.41 to 10.71]) and both EC arms: FH (8.5 months [6.93 to 9.92]) and CGDB (8.8 months [7.85 to 9.92]). OS comparisons between the IMblaze370 experimental arm and the FH EC (hazard ratio, 0.85 [0.64 to 1.14]) and CGDB EC (0.86 [0.65 to 1.18]) yielded similar results as the comparison with the IMblaze370 control arm (1.01 [0.75 to 1.37])., Conclusion: EC arms constructed from the FH database and the CGDB closely replicated the control arm from IMblaze370. EHR-derived EC arms can provide meaningful comparators in mCRC trials when recruiting a randomized control arm is not feasible., Competing Interests: Carsten SchröderEmployment: RocheStock and Other Ownership Interests: Roche, Pfizer, Bayer, Sanofi Marcus LawranceEmployment: Roche/GenentechStock and Other Ownership Interests: Roche/Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline Chen LiEmployment: Roche Christelle LenainEmployment: RocheStock and Other Ownership Interests: RocheTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche Shivani K. MhatreEmployment: Genentech/RocheStock and Other Ownership Interests: Genentech/Roche Marwan FakihHonoraria: AmgenConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Bayer, Pfizer, Array BioPharmaSpeakers' Bureau: Amgen, Guardant HealthResearch Funding: Novartis, Amgen, AstraZeneca Irmarie Reyes-RiveraEmployment: Roche Pharma AGStock and Other Ownership Interests: Roche/GenentechResearch Funding: Roche Pharma AGTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche Pharma AG Michael T. BretscherEmployment: F. Hoffmann-La RocheStock and Other Ownership Interests: F. Hoffmann-La RocheTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: F. Hoffmann-La RocheNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Survivors of lung and colorectal cancer have high post-treatment needs; the majority are older and suffer from greater comorbidities and poor quality of life (QOL). They remain underrepresented in research, leading to significant disparities in post-treatment outcomes. Personalized post-treatment follow-up care and care coordination among healthcare teams is a priority for survivors of lung and colorectal cancer. However, there are few evidence-based interventions that address survivors' post-treatment needs beyond the use of a follow-up care plan. This paper describes the rationale and design of an evidence-informed telehealth intervention that integrates shared care coordination between oncology/primary care and self-management skills building to empower post-treatment survivors of lung and colorectal cancer. The intervention design was informed by (1) contemporary published evidence on cancer survivorship, (2) our previous research in lung and colorectal cancer survivorship, (3) the chronic care self-management model (CCM), and (4) shared post-treatment follow-up care between oncology and primary care. A two-arm, parallel randomized controlled trial will determine the efficacy of the telehealth intervention to improve cancer care delivery and survivor-specific outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04428905.

Background: MAP2K1 mutations, otherwise known as MEK mutations, are rare oncogenic alterations that have been implicated in MAPK pathway activation. The impact of MAP2K1 mutations in colorectal cancer on EGFR antibody response has not been characterized., Patients and Methods: Antitumor activity was assessed in mouse xenograft models with SW48 cell lines harboring MAP2K1 mutation, and protein expression of the RAS signaling pathway was studied by Western blot analysis. We retrospectively identified patients with MAP2K1-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated at City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center between 2015 and 2020 using next-generation sequencing. Patients' tumor characteristics, treatment response, and outcome are described. Additional patients with the MAP2K1 mutation were identified from The Cancer Genome Atlas and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center oncogenomic databases., Results: Antitumor activity in mouse xenograft models demonstrated efficacy with combination therapy with EGFR and MEK inhibition with either BRAF or ERK inhibitors. Five patients treated at City of Hope between 2015 and 2020 harbored a MAP2K1 mutation at a frequency of 1%. APC and TP53 were common coalterations. All disease was RAS and BRAF wild type, except 1 case that harbored a concurrent KRAS mutation. Four RAS/BRAF wild-type MAP2K1-mutated patients was treated with anti-EGFR, anti-EGFR + MEK and BRAF inhibitors, and anti-EGFR + ERK inhibitors. All 4 patients experienced disease progression., Conclusion: MAP2K1 mutation in colorectal cancer is associated with poor response to EGFR inhibition. EGFR inhibition with or without MEK, BRAF, or ERK inhibitors did not result in any clinical benefit in our limited experience., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)