Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains one of the major cancer types and cancer related death worldwide. Sensitive, non-invasive biomarkers that can facilitate disease detection, staging and prediction of ...therapeutic outcome are highly desirable to improve survival rate and help to determine optimized treatment for CRC. The small non-coding RNAs, microRNAs (miRNAs), have recently been identified as critical regulators for various diseases including cancer and may represent a novel class of cancer biomarkers. The purpose of this study was to identify and validate circulating microRNAs in human plasma for use as such biomarkers in colon cancer.
By using quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, we found that circulating miR-141 was significantly associated with stage IV colon cancer in a cohort of 102 plasma samples. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of candidate plasma microRNA markers. We observed that combination of miR-141 and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), a widely used marker for CRC, further improved the accuracy of detection. These findings were validated in an independent cohort of 156 plasma samples collected at Tianjin, China. Furthermore, our analysis showed that high levels of plasma miR-141 predicted poor survival in both cohorts and that miR-141 was an independent prognostic factor for advanced colon cancer.
We propose that plasma miR-141 may represent a novel biomarker that complements CEA in detecting colon cancer with distant metastasis and that high levels of miR-141 in plasma were associated with poor prognosis.
An American Society of Clinical Oncology Provisional Clinical Opinion (PCO) offers timely clinical direction after publication or presentation of potentially practice-changing data from major ...studies. This PCO update addresses the utility of extended RAS gene mutation testing in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) to detect resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody (MoAb) therapy.
Recent results from phase II and III clinical trials in mCRC demonstrate that patients whose tumors harbor RAS mutations in exons 2 (codons 12 and 13), 3 (codons 59 and 61), and 4 (codons 117 and 146) are unlikely to benefit from therapy with MoAbs directed against EGFR, when used as monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy.
In addition to the evidence reviewed in the original PCO, 11 systematic reviews with meta-analyses, two retrospective analyses, and two health technology assessments based on a systematic review were obtained. These evaluated the outcomes for patients with mCRC with no mutation detected or presence of mutation in additional exons in KRAS and NRAS. PCO: All patients with mCRC who are candidates for anti-EGFR antibody therapy should have their tumor tested in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified laboratory for mutations in both KRAS and NRAS exons 2 (codons 12 and 13), 3 (codons 59 and 61), and 4 (codons 117 and 146). The weight of current evidence indicates that anti-EGFR MoAb therapy should only be considered for treatment of patients whose tumor is determined to not have mutations detected after such extended RAS testing.
Purpose Molecular testing of colorectal cancers (CRCs) to improve patient care and outcomes of targeted and conventional therapies has been the center of many recent studies, including clinical ...trials. Evidence-based recommendations for the molecular testing of CRC tissues to guide epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) -targeted therapies and conventional chemotherapy regimens are warranted in clinical practice. The purpose of this guideline is to develop evidence-based recommendations to help establish standard molecular biomarker testing for CRC through a systematic review of the literature. Methods The American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP), College of American Pathologists (CAP), Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) convened an Expert Panel to develop an evidence-based guideline to help establish standard molecular biomarker testing, guide targeted therapies, and advance personalized care for patients with CRC. A comprehensive literature search that included over 4,000 articles was conducted to gather data to inform this guideline. Results Twenty-one guideline statements (eight recommendations, 10 expert consensus opinions and three no recommendations) were established. Recommendations Evidence supports mutational testing for genes in the EGFR signaling pathway, since they provide clinically actionable information as negative predictors of benefit to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapies for targeted therapy of CRC. Mutations in several of the biomarkers have clear prognostic value. Laboratory approaches to operationalize molecular testing for predictive and prognostic molecular biomarkers involve selection of assays, type of specimens to be tested, timing of ordering of tests and turnaround time for testing results. Additional information is available at: www.asco.org/CRC-markers-guideline and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.
To provide recommendations on prevention, screening, genetics, treatment, and management for people at risk for hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) syndromes. The American Society of Clinical Oncology ...(ASCO) has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations.
The Familial Risk-Colorectal Cancer: European Society for Medical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline published in 2013 on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Guidelines Working Group in Annals of Oncology was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists, with content and recommendations reviewed by an ASCO endorsement panel.
The ASCO endorsement panel determined that the recommendations of the ESMO guidelines are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. The ASCO panel endorsed the ESMO guidelines and added a few qualifying statements.
Approximately 5% to 6% of patient cases of CRC are associated with germline mutations that confer an inherited predisposition for cancer. The possibility of a hereditary cancer syndrome should be assessed for every patient at the time of CRC diagnosis. A diagnosis of Lynch syndrome, familial adenomatous polyposis, or another genetic syndrome can influence clinical management for patients with CRC and their family members. Screening for hereditary cancer syndromes in patients with CRC should include review of personal and family histories and testing of tumors for DNA mismatch repair deficiency and/or microsatellite instability. Formal genetic evaluation is recommended for individuals who meet defined criteria.
Prior reports have indicated that patients with colon cancer who demonstrate high-level microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or defective DNA mismatch repair (dMMR) have improved survival and receive ...no benefit from fluorouracil (FU) -based adjuvant therapy compared with patients who have microsatellite-stable or proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) tumors. We examined MMR status as a predictor of adjuvant therapy benefit in patients with stages II and III colon cancer.
MSI assay or immunohistochemistry for MMR proteins were performed on 457 patients who were previously randomly assigned to FU-based therapy (either FU + levamisole or FU + leucovorin; n = 229) versus no postsurgical treatment (n = 228). Data were subsequently pooled with data from a previous analysis. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS).
Overall, 70 (15%) of 457 patients exhibited dMMR. Adjuvant therapy significantly improved DFS (hazard ratio HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.93; P = .02) in patients with pMMR tumors. Patients with dMMR tumors receiving FU had no improvement in DFS (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.42 to 2.91; P = .85) compared with those randomly assigned to surgery alone. In the pooled data set of 1,027 patients (n = 165 with dMMR), these findings were maintained; in patients with stage II disease and with dMMR tumors, treatment was associated with reduced overall survival (HR, 2.95; 95% CI, 1.02 to 8.54; P = .04).
Patient stratification by MMR status may provide a more tailored approach to colon cancer adjuvant therapy. These data support MMR status assessment for patients being considered for FU therapy alone and consideration of MMR status in treatment decision making.
Therapeutically actionable molecular alterations are widely distributed across cancer types. The National Cancer Institute Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) trial was designed to ...evaluate targeted therapy antitumor activity in underexplored cancer types. Tumor biopsy specimens were analyzed centrally with next-generation sequencing (NGS) in a master screening protocol. Patients with a tumor molecular alteration addressed by a targeted treatment lacking established efficacy in that tumor type were assigned to 1 of 30 treatments in parallel, single-arm, phase II subprotocols.
Tumor biopsy specimens from 5,954 patients with refractory malignancies at 1,117 accrual sites were analyzed centrally with NGS and selected immunohistochemistry in a master screening protocol. The treatment-assignment rate to treatment arms was assessed. Molecular alterations in seven tumors profiled in both NCI-MATCH trial and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) of primary tumors were compared.
Molecular profiling was successful in 93.0% of specimens. An actionable alteration was found in 37.6%. After applying clinical and molecular exclusion criteria, 17.8% were assigned (26.4% could have been assigned if all subprotocols were available simultaneously). Eleven subprotocols reached their accrual goal as of this report. Actionability rates differed among histologies (eg, > 35% for urothelial cancers and < 6% for pancreatic and small-cell lung cancer). Multiple actionable or resistance-conferring tumor mutations were seen in 11.9% and 71.3% of specimens, respectively. Known resistance mutations to targeted therapies were numerically more frequent in NCI-MATCH than TCGA tumors, but not markedly so.
We demonstrated feasibility of screening large numbers of patients at numerous accruing sites in a complex trial to test investigational therapies for moderately frequent molecular targets. Co-occurring resistance mutations were common and endorse investigation of combination targeted-therapy regimens.
An American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) provisional clinical opinion (PCO), offers timely clinical direction to ASCO's oncologists following publication or presentation of potentially ...practice-changing data from major studies. This PCO addresses the utility of KRAS gene mutation testing in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma to predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody (MoAb) therapy with cetuximab or panitumumab (see Note).
Recent results from phase II and III clinical trials demonstrate that patients with metastatic colorectal cancer benefit from therapy with monoclonal antibodies directed against the EGFR, when used either as monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy. Retrospective subset analyses of the data from these trials strongly suggest that patients who have KRAS mutations detected in codon 12 or 13 do not benefit from this therapy.
Five randomized controlled trials of cetuximab or panitumumab have evaluated outcomes for patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma in relation to KRAS mutational status as no mutation detected (wild type) or abnormal (mutated). Another five single-arm studies have retrospectively evaluated tumor response according to KRAS status.
Based on systematic reviews of the relevant literature, all patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma who are candidates for anti-EGFR antibody therapy should have their tumor tested for KRAS mutations in a CLIA-accredited laboratory. If KRAS mutation in codon 12 or 13 is detected, then patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma should not receive anti-EGFR antibody therapy as part of their treatment.
ASCO's provisional clinical opinions (PCOs) reflect expert consensus based on clinical evidence and literature available at the time they are written, and are intended to assist physicians in clinical decision-making and identify questions and settings for further research. Due to the rapid flow of scientific information in oncology, new evidence may have emerged since the time a PCO was submitted for publication. PCOs are not continually updated and may not reflect the most recent evidence. PCOs cannot account for individual variation among patients, and cannot be considered inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of other treatments. It is the responsibility of the treating physician or other health care provider, relying on independent experience and knowledge of the patient, to determine the best course of treatment for the patient. Accordingly, adherence to any PCO is voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding its application to be made by the physician in light of each patient's individual circumstances. ASCO PCOs describe the use of procedures and therapies in clinical practice and cannot be assumed to apply to the use of these interventions in the context of clinical trials. ASCO assumes no responsibility for any injury or damage to persons or property arising out of or related to any use of ASCO's PCOs, or for any errors or omissions.
In this issue of Cancer Cell, Yaeger et al. report mutations, copy number variations, and selected rearrangements from a large series of metastatic colorectal carcinomas and primaries that produced ...metastases. The results provide important insights into differences in anatomical site of origin, age at onset, etiologic factors, and therapeutic responses.
In this issue of Cancer Cell, Yaeger et al. report mutations, copy number variations, and selected rearrangements from a large series of metastatic colorectal carcinomas and primaries that produced metastases. The results provide important insights into differences in anatomical site of origin, age at onset, etiologic factors, and therapeutic responses.
The National Cancer Institute Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) trial, the largest national precision oncology study to date (> 1,100 sites) of patients with relapsed or refractory ...malignancies, assigned patients to targeted therapy in parallel phase II studies based on tumor molecular alterations. The anti-programmed death receptor 1 inhibitor nivolumab previously showed activity in mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient colon cancer. We hypothesized that nivolumab would have activity in patients with MMR-deficient, noncolorectal tumors.
Eligible patients with relapsed or refractory tumors, good end-organ function, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of ≤ 1 underwent tumor biopsy for centralized screening of molecular alterations. MMR deficiency was defined by complete loss of nuclear expression of
or
MMR gene products by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Patients with MMR-deficient colorectal cancer were excluded. Nivolumab, 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (28-day cycles) and 480 mg every 4 weeks after cycle 4, was administered intravenously. Disease reassessment was performed every 2 cycles. The primary end point was RECIST 1.1 objective response rate (ORR).
Two percent of 4,902 screened patients had an MMR-deficient cancer by IHC. Forty-two evaluable patients were enrolled, with a median age of 60 years and a median of 3 prior therapies. The most common histologies were endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma (n = 13), prostate adenocarcinoma (n = 5), and uterine carcinosarcoma (n = 4). ORR was 36% (15 of 42 patients). An additional 21% of patients had stable disease. The estimated 6-, 12-, and 18-month progression-free survival rates were 51.3% (90% CI, 38.2% to 64.5%), 46.2% (90% CI, 33.1% to 59.3%), and 31.4% (90% CI, 18.7% to 44.2%), respectively. Median overall survival was 17.3 months. Toxicity was predominantly low grade.
A variety of refractory cancers (2.0% of those screened) had MMR deficiency as defined in NCI-MATCH. Nivolumab has promising activity in MMR-deficient noncolorectal cancers of a wide variety of histopathologic types.
Predictive biomarkers are becoming increasingly important tools in drug development and clinical research. The importance of using both guidelines for specimen acquisition and analytical methods for ...biomarker measurements that are standardized has become recognized widely as an important issue, which must be addressed in order to provide high-quality, validated assays. Herein, we review the major challenges in biomarker validation processes, including pre-analytical (sample-related), analytical, and post-analytical (data-related) aspects of assay development. Recommendations for improving biomarker assay development and method validation are proposed to facilitate the use of predictive biomarkers in clinical trials and the practice of oncology.
PDF
