Molecular assessment of colorectal cancer (CRC) is receiving growing attention, beyond RAS and BRAF, because of its influence on prognosis and prediction in cancer treatment. PTEN (phosphatase and tensin homologue), a tumor suppressor, regulating cell division and apoptosis, has been explored, and significant evidence suggests a role in cetuximab and panitumumab resistance linked to the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signal transduction pathway. Factors influencing PTEN activity should be analyzed to develop strategies to maximize the tumor suppressor role and to improve tumor response to cancer treatment. Therefore, an in-depth knowledge of the PI3K-Akt pathway—one of the major cancer survival pathways—and the role of PTEN—a major brake of this pathway—is essential in the era of precision medicine. The purpose of this literature review is to summarize the role of PTEN as a predictive factor and possible therapeutic target in CRC, focusing on ongoing studies and the possible implications in clinical practice.
Background: Despite the well-known negative prognostic value of the V600E BRAF mutation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), its outcome is quite heterogeneous, and the basis for this prognostic heterogeneity should be better defined. Methods: Two large retrospective series of V600E BRAF-mutated mCRC from 22 institutions served as an exploratory and validation set to develop a prognostic score. The model was internally and externally validated. Results: A total of 395 V600E BRAF-mutated mCRCs were included in the exploratory set. Performance status, CA19.9, lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, grading and liver, lung and nodal involvement emerged as independent prognostic factors for overall survival (OS). Two different scoring systems were built: a 'complete' score (0e16) including all significant covariates and a 'simplified' score (0e9), based only on clinicopathological covariates, and excluding laboratory values. Adopting the complete score, proportions of patients with a low (0e4), intermediate (5e8) and high (9e16) score were 44.7%, 42.6% and 12.6%, respectively. The median OS was 29.6, 15.5 (hazard ratio [HR] for intermediate vs low risk: 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.44e3.22, p < .001) and 6.6 months (HR for high vs low risk: 4.72, 95% CI: 2.72e8.20, p < .001). Similar results were observed also after adjusting for the type of first-line treatment and adopting the simplified score. The simplified prognostic score derived from the exploratory set was then applied to the validation set for external confirmation. Conclusions: These scoring systems are based on easy-to-collect data and defined specific subgroups with relevant differences in their life expectancy. These tools could be useful in clinical practice, would allow better stratification of patients in clinical trials and may be adopted for proper adjustments in exploratory translational analyses.
PURPOSE This is a multicenter, single-arm phase II trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of an immune-sensitizing strategy with temozolomide priming followed by a combination of low-dose ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with microsatellite-stable (MSS) and O6-methylguanine–DNA methyltransferase (MGMT)–silenced metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with pretreated mCRC were centrally prescreened for MSS status and MGMT silencing (ie, lack of MGMT expression by immunohistochemistry plus MGMT methylation by pyrosequencing). Eligible patients received two priming cycles of oral temozolomide 150 mg/sqm once daily, days 1-5, once every 4 weeks (first treatment part) followed, in absence of progression, by its combination with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 8 weeks and nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks (second treatment part). The primary end point was the 8-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate calculated from enrollment in patients who started the second treatment part, with ≥ 4 out of 27 subjects progression-free by the 8-month time point as decision rule. RESULTS Among 716 prescreened patients, 204 (29%) were molecularly eligible and 135 started the first treatment part. Among these, 102 (76%) were discontinued because of death or disease progression on temozolomide priming, whereas 33 patients (24%) who achieved disease control started the second treatment part and represented the final study population. After a median follow-up of 23.1 months (interquartile range, 14.9-24.6 months), 8-month PFS rate was 36%. Median PFS and overall survival were 7.0 and 18.4 months, respectively, and overall response rate was 45%. Grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events were skin rash (6%), colitis (3%), and hypophysitis (3%). No unexpected adverse events or treatment-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSION The MAYA study provided proof-of-concept that a sequence of temozolomide priming followed by a combination of low-dose ipilimumab and nivolumab may induce durable clinical benefit in MSS and MGMT-silenced mCRC.
Background:Presently, few options are available for refractory colorectal cancer (CRC). O6-methyl-guanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation is a frequent and early event in CRC tumourigenesis. This epigenetic silencing is a predictor of response to the alkylating drug temozolomide in glioblastoma. Preclinical evidences and some case reports showed temozolomide activity in CRC with MGMT silencing, but the available data from clinical trials are inconsistent.Methods:This was a multicentre, phase 2 trial, planned according to a two-stage Simon’s optimal design to investigate activity and safety of temozolomide in refractory CRC harbouring MGMT promoter methylation. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR). Patients who failed two or more prior treatments received temozolomide at a dose of 150–200 mg m−2 per day on days 1–5 every 28 days.Results:From July 2012 to June 2016, 225 patients were screened, 80 showed MGMT promoter methylation and 41 were enrolled. Overall response rate was 10% and disease control rate was 32%. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.9 and 5.1 months, respectively.Conclusions:Temozolomide showed a modest activity in this heavily pretreated population and the study did not meet its primary end point. The role of temozolomide in CRC remains still controversial and further research is warranted.
In our exploratory analysis GEM seems as effective as FOLFIRINOX in terms of survival with a better safety profile in hENT1 positive metastatic pancreatic cancer.
The combination of perioperative chemotherapy plus complete surgical resection is currently accounted as the first-choice strategy in patients with locally advanced Gastric Cancer (LAGC). Nevertheless, the partial response rate makes it necessary to search biological parameters useful to select patients who would benefit most from neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAD-CT). We performed a retrospective analysis on a cohort of 65 LAGC cases, EBV negative and without MMR defect, submitted to perioperative chemotherapy plus surgical resection. We evaluated the neutrophil-lymphocytes ratio (NLR) in peripheral blood, the TILs density (reported as CD4/CD8 tissue ratio) and PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemistry on bioptic tissues before the treatment. Results were correlated with the biological features, histological response (TRG) and clinical outcome (PFS and OS). We found that NLR, TILs and PD-L1 expression showed a significant correlation with TNM stage, lymphovascular invasion and response to NAD-CT (TRG). Correlating the NLR, TILs and PD-L1 expression with PFS and OS, we found that patients with lower NLR levels (< 2.5 ratio), lower TILs (< 0.2 ratio) and higher PD-L1 level (CPS ≥ 1) had a significantly better PFS and OS than those with higher NLR, higher TILs and lower PD-L1 expression (p < 0.0001). Multivariate and multiple regression analyses confirmed the predictive and prognostic role of all three parameters, especially when all three parameters are combined. Our study demonstrated that pre-treatment NLR, TILs and PD-L1 expression are predictive and prognostic parameters in NAD-CT-treated LAGC suggesting a pivotal role of the systemic and tumor microenvironment immunological profile in the response to chemotherapy.
Background:In this study, we evaluated the possibility that KRAS mutational status might be predictive of oxaliplatin (OXA) efficacy. We also explored the role of excision repair cross complementing group-1 (ERCC-1).Methods:Ninety anti-epidermal growth factor receptor-naive advanced colorectal cancer patients were retrospectively analysed. In all patients KRAS mutational status was assessed. In 60 patients mRNA ERCC-1 expression was also investigated. Response rate (RR) and progression-free survival (PFS) after FOLFOX-6±bevacizumab were evaluated according to KRAS status and mRNA ERCC-1 expression.Results:Among 90 patients 47% wild-type (wt) and 53% mutated (mt) KRAS tumours were found. Response rate was 26% in the wt KRAS group, whereas it was 56% in the mt KRAS group; the difference is statistically significant in the total sample (P=0.008) and when only patients receiving FOLFOX-6±bevacizumab as first-line are considered (P=0.01). Progression-free survival was longer in mt than in wt KRAS patients over all patients (10 vs 8 months, respectively, P=0.001) and in those treated as first-line (10 vs 8 months, respectively, P=0.0069). Mt KRAS patients experienced a longer survival (24 vs 18 months; P=0.01). ERCC-1 mRNA expression was not found to correlate with FOLFOX activity in our analysis.Conclusion:Our results suggest that activating mutation of KRAS oncogene may predict response to OXA. Basal expression of ERCC-1 mRNA does not explain the high efficacy of FOLFOX-6 in mt KRAS patients.
Background: The optimal anti-angiogenic strategy as second-line treatment in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with anti-EGFR (Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor) based first-line treatment is still debated. Methods: This multicenter, real-world, retrospective study is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of second-line Bevacizumab- and Aflibercept-based treatments after an anti-EGFR based first-line regimen. Clinical outcomes measured were: objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs) profiles. Results: From February 2011 to October 2019, 277 consecutive mCRC patients received Bevacizumab-based (228, 82.3%) or Aflibercept-based (49, 17.7%) regimen. No significant difference was found regarding ORR. The median follow-up was 27.7 months (95%CI: 24.7–34.4). Aflibercept-treated group had a significantly shorter PFS compared to Bevacizumab-treated group (5.6 vs. 7.1 months, respectively) (HR = 1.34 (95%CI: 0.95–1.89); p = 0.0932). The median OS of the Bevacizumab-treated group and Aflibercept-treated group was 16.2 (95%CI: 15.3–18.1) and 12.7 (95%CI: 8.8–17.5) months, respectively (HR= 1.31 (95%CI: 0.89–1.93) p = 0.16). After adjusting for the key covariates (age, gender, performance status, number of metastatic sites and primary tumor side) Bevacizumab-based regimens revealed to be significantly related with a prolonged PFS (HR = 1.44 (95%CI: 1.02–2.03); p = 0.0399) compared to Aflibercept-based regimens, but not with a prolonged OS (HR = 1.47 (95%CI: 0.99–2.17); p = 0.0503). The incidence of G3/G4 VEGF inhibitors class-specific AEs was 7.5% and 26.5% in the Bevacizumab-treated group and the Aflibercept-treated group, respectively (p = 0.0001). Conclusion: Our analysis seems to reveal that Bevacizumab-based regimens have a slightly better PFS and class-specific AEs profile compared to Aflibercept-based regimen as second-line treatment of RAS wild-type mCRC patients previously treated with anti-EGFR based treatments. These results have to be taken with caution and no conclusive considerations are allowed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.