Impact of <i>RAS</i> and <i>BRAF</i> heterogeneity on the efficacy of EGFR blockade in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

255 Background: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) blockade can effectively shrink tumors in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients without RAS nor BRAF mutations. However, some patients without RAS or BRAF mutations in their primary tumors may develop these mutations in metastatic tumors (heterogeneity). Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can reflect this heterogeneity in metastatic tumors. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of EGFR blockade in patients who had no RAS or BRAF mutations in their primary tumors but did have them in ctDNA. Methods: We prospectively enrolled 100 patients with confirmed metastatic CRC without RAS or BRAF mutations in their primary tumors. Patients were treated with first-line systemic chemotherapy including EGFR blockade. We obtained ctDNA from each patient before they started chemotherapy. RAS, BRAF (V600E), and PIK3CA mutations were detected using digital PCR. Results: One of the 100 cases were excluded due to protocol violation. In the ctDNA obtained before starting chemotherapy, RAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA mutations were detected in 12, 4, and 6 patients, respectively. No patients had both RAS and BRAF mutations in their ctDNA; however, one patient had both BRAF and PIK3CA mutations and one had both RAS and PIK3CA mutations. Eighty-nine patients had measurable tumor lesions. Among these, 3 experienced a complete response (CR), 71 had a partial response (PR), 13 had stable disease (SD), and 2 had progressive disease (PD). The response rates for patients with RAS or BRAF mutations and for patients with neither mutation were 81% and 83%, respectively (P=0.73). Median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with RAS or BRAF mutations and those without mutations were 251 days and 216.5 days, respectively (P=0.82). The presence or absence of PIK3CA mutations did not affect the response rate or PFS. Conclusions: Previously, we reported that the incidence of RAS and BRAF heterogeneity were 10% (1) and 4% (2). In the present study, RAS and BRAF heterogeneity were 12% and 4%, respectively. The heterogeneity of RAS and BRAF mutations had no effect on the response rate and PFS of EGFR blockade as first line chemotherapy. The effect of heterogeneity on the overall survival is of great interest; however, about half of the patients are still alive. 1. Yamada T, et al. Cancer Science 2016. 2. Ueda K, et al. Eur J Surg Oncol 2022. Clinical trial information: UMIN000031177 .

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-01-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.4_suppl.255
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.05
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impact of RAS and BRAF heterogeneity on the efficacy of EGFR blockade in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Akihisa Matsuda, Hiroshi Matsuoka, Yoshinori Kagawa, Chihiro Kosugi et al.
1 citations
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
1.05
article

Impact of RAS and BRAF heterogeneity on the efficacy of EGFR blockade in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Akihisa Matsuda, Hiroshi Matsuoka, Yoshinori Kagawa, Chihiro Kosugi, Kozo Kataoka, Kazuhiro Sakamoto, Jun Nagata, Hiroshi Yoshida, Kazuhiro Hiramatsu, Hidekazu Kuramochi, Takeshi Nagasaka, Hideyuki Ishida, Keiji Hirata, Mitsukuni Suenaga, Kei Ishimaru, Keiji Koda, Takeshi Yamada, Takao Takahashi, Hajime Yokomizo, Nobuhisa Matsuhashi
article en
1 citations

Abstract

255 Background: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) blockade can effectively shrink tumors in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients without RAS nor BRAF mutations. However, some patients without RAS or BRAF mutations in their primary tumors may develop these mutations in metastatic tumors (heterogeneity). Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can reflect this heterogeneity in metastatic tumors. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of EGFR blockade in patients who had no RAS or BRAF mutations in their primary tumors but did have them in ctDNA. Methods: We prospectively enrolled 100 patients with confirmed metastatic CRC without RAS or BRAF mutations in their primary tumors. Patients were treated with first-line systemic chemotherapy including EGFR blockade. We obtained ctDNA from each patient before they started chemotherapy. RAS, BRAF (V600E), and PIK3CA mutations were detected using digital PCR. Results: One of the 100 cases were excluded due to protocol violation. In the ctDNA obtained before starting chemotherapy, RAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA mutations were detected in 12, 4, and 6 patients, respectively. No patients had both RAS and BRAF mutations in their ctDNA; however, one patient had both BRAF and PIK3CA mutations and one had both RAS and PIK3CA mutations. Eighty-nine patients had measurable tumor lesions. Among these, 3 experienced a complete response (CR), 71 had a partial response (PR), 13 had stable disease (SD), and 2 had progressive disease (PD). The response rates for patients with RAS or BRAF mutations and for patients with neither mutation were 81% and 83%, respectively (P=0.73). Median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with RAS or BRAF mutations and those without mutations were 251 days and 216.5 days, respectively (P=0.82). The presence or absence of PIK3CA mutations did not affect the response rate or PFS. Conclusions: Previously, we reported that the incidence of RAS and BRAF heterogeneity were 10% (1) and 4% (2). In the present study, RAS and BRAF heterogeneity were 12% and 4%, respectively. The heterogeneity of RAS and BRAF mutations had no effect on the response rate and PFS of EGFR blockade as first line chemotherapy. The effect of heterogeneity on the overall survival is of great interest; however, about half of the patients are still alive. 1. Yamada T, et al. Cancer Science 2016. 2. Ueda K, et al. Eur J Surg Oncol 2022. Clinical trial information: UMIN000031177 .

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(4_suppl)
Tokyo Medical and Dental University (JP), University of Occupational and Environmental Health Japan (JP), Fujita Health University Hospital (JP), Juntendo University Shizuoka Hospital (JP), Teikyo University Chiba Medical Center (JP), Tokyo Women's Medical University Adachi Medical Center (JP), Tokyo Women's Medical University (JP), Toyohashi Municipal Hospital (JP), Kawasaki Medical School Hospital (JP), Osaka International Cancer Institute (JP), Social Insurance Saitama Chuo Hospital (JP), Gifu University (JP), Ehime University (JP), Nippon Medical School (JP), Hyogo University (JP), Saitama Medical University (JP)
Openalex Percentile: Top 26%
Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
1.05
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.