BRAF V600E Mutant mCRC Research Articles

Clinicopathologic features and treatment efficacy of patients with BRAF V600E-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer: a multi-center real-world propensity score matching study.

Patients with BRAF 600E mutated mCRC are associated with specific clinicopathological features and poor prognosis. The relative efficacy of first-line FOLFOXIRI triplet chemotherapy or doublet chemotherapy combined with bevacizumab in patients with BRAF 600E mutated mCRC remains controversial. BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC patients from 3 institutions were included. The clinicopathological characteristics of the enrolled patients were analyzed. Overall survival (OS) of patients was divided into 4 fractions, including 0-25%, 25-50%, 50-75%,75-100% by quartile method. Patients with OS ranging from 0 to 25% were defined as the poor prognosis group, and patients with OS ranging from 75 to 100% were defined as the good prognosis group. A propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance the baseline characteristics of patients treated with doublet chemotherapy and triplet chemotherapy combined with bevacizumab. Survival and tumor response of the two regimens were evaluated. A total of 125 patients with BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC were enrolled. The median OS of BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC was 14.9 months and the median PFS of first-line therapy was 6.1 months. According to the multivariate analysis and the difference in baseline characteristics between the poor prognosis group and the good prognosis group, poor differentiation and liver metastasis were negative independent prognostic factors for OS in patientsx with BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC. Patients treated with first-line triplets had a longer OS than those treated with doublets both before PSM (17.4 months vs. 13.4 months, p = 0.022) and after PSM (17.4 months vs. 10.4 months, p = 0.004). There was no significant benefit between triplet-drug group and doublet-drug group for PFS, ORR and DCR. Subgroup analysis showed that patients in the triplet-drug group had a better prognosis with the following favorable factors: age ≤ 60 years old, PS score of 0-1, liver metastases and multiple organ metastases. The overall prognosis of BRAF V600E mutant mCRC patients is poor. Poor differentiation and liver metastases were negative independent prognostic factors for OS. First-line triplet-drug therapy was associated with better OS, especially in patients with good physical condition and high tumor burden.

Expert consensus on the optimal management of BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer in the Asia-Pacific region.

The burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) is high in the Asia-Pacific region, and several countries in this region have among the highest and/or fastest growing rates of CRC in the world. A significant proportion of patients will present with or develop metastatic CRC (mCRC), and BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC represents a particularly aggressive phenotype that is less responsive to standard chemotherapies. In light of recent therapeutic advances, an Asia-Pacific expert consensus panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and management of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. The expert panel comprised nine medical oncologists from Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan (the authors), who met to review current literature and develop eight consensus statements that describe the optimal management of BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC in the Asia-Pacific region. As agreed by the expert panel, the consensus statements recommend molecular testing at diagnosis to guide individualized treatment decisions, propose optimal treatment pathways according to microsatellite stability status, advocate for more frequent monitoring of BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC, and discuss local treatment strategies for oligometastatic disease. Together, these expert consensus statements are intended to optimize treatment and improve outcomes for patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC in the Asia-Pacific region.

MOGAT3-Mediated DAG Accumulation Drives Acquired Resistance to Anti-BRAF/EGFR Therapy in BRAFV600E-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is associated with poor prognosis. The combination of anti-BRAF/EGFR (encorafenib/cetuximab) treatment for patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC improved clinical benefits; unfortunately, inevitable acquired resistance limits the treatment outcome, and the mechanism has not been validated. Here, we discovered that monoacylglycerol O-Acyltransferase 3 (MOGAT3) mediated diacylglycerol (DAG) accumulation contributed to acquired resistance to encorafenib/cetuximab by dissecting BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC patient-derived xenograft (PDX) model exposed to encorafenib/cetuximab administration. Mechanistically, upregulated MOGAT3 promotes DAG synthesis and reduces fatty acid oxidation (FAO)-promoting DAG accumulation and activating PKCα-CRAF-MEK-ERK, driving acquired resistance. Resistance-induced hypoxia promotes MOGAT3 transcriptional elevation; simultaneously, MOGAT3-mediated DAG accumulation increases HIF1A expression in translation level through PKCα-CRAF-eIF4E activation, strengthening the resistance status. Intriguingly, reducing intratumoral DAG by fenofibrate or Pf-06471553 restores the antitumor efficacy of encorafenib/cetuximab on resistant BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC, interrupted PKCα-CRAF-MEK-ERK signaling. These findings reveal the critical metabolite DAG as a modulator of encorafenib/cetuximab efficacy in BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC, suggesting that fenofibrate may prove beneficial for resistant BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC patients.

BRAF + EGFR +/- MEK inhibitors after immune checkpoint inhibitors in BRAF V600E mutated and deficient mismatch repair or microsatellite instability high metastatic colorectal cancer

BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the guideline endorsed first choice for patients with deficient mismatch repair or microsatellite instability high (dMMR/MSI-H) mCRC, however a significant proportion experience primary or secondary resistance. BRAF V600E mutated (BRAFm) and dMMR/MSI-H mCRC can be treated with BRAF + EGFR inhibitors but specific data on the efficacy after progression to ICIs are missing. MethodsWe collected consecutive patients with BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H mCRC treated from 2017 to 2024 with a combination of BRAFi+EGFRi+/-MEKi, after disease progression on ICIs. A control cohort of BRAFm pMMR/MSS mCRC patients treated with encorafenib+cetuximab+/-binimetinib from 2nd line was used. ResultsdMMR/MSI-H (n = 50) BRAFm mCRC patients were more often > 70-year-old, with right-sided primary tumors, without liver but more lymphnode metastases than pMMR/MSS (n = 170). They were treated more frequently beyond 2nd line and 45 % were primary progressors to ICIs. Lower ORR (18 % versus 32 %, p = 0.09) and DCR (60 % versus 73 %, p = 0.11) was seen without reaching significance in dMMR/MSI-H as compared to pMMR/MSS patients. After a median follow-up of 14.04 months, no differences in PFS (median 5.13 versus 4.50 months, HR 0.83, 95 %CI: 0.57–1.20, p = 0.31) and OS (median 10.75 versus 9.11 months, HR 0.89, 95 %CI: 0.59–1.32, p = 0.55) were observed. ConclusionsOur results show that BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H mCRC patients benefit from BRAFi+EGFRi+/-MEKi after progression under ICIs. Despite lower ORR and DCR, the outcome is not different from that observed in pMMR/MSS BRAFm CRC and is in line with the results of the BEACON registration trial.

Impact of primary tumor sidedness and sex on prognosis and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody efficacy in BRAF-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of AIO studies FIRE-1, CIOX, FIRE-3, XELAVIRI, and VOLFI

Primary tumor (PT) sidedness is an established prognostic marker in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and has a predictive impact on the efficacy of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) antibody [monoclonal antibody (mAb)] in patients with RAS wild-type mCRC. This investigation focuses on patients with BRAFV600E-mutated (BRAFmt) mCRC and examines the efficacy of anti-EGFR mAbs in relation to primary tumor sidedness (PTS). This pooled analysis was carried out using individual patient data from five randomized studies in the first-line setting of mCRC. The population of interest was limited to patients with BRAFmt mCRC and known PTS. For analysis, treatment was stratified into two groups: those treated with anti-EGFR mAbs and those without. Dichotomous variables, such as overall response rate and objective response rate (ORR), were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Time-to-event endpoints [progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)] were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox regression. An interaction test was carried out via Cox regression. A total of 102 patients with BRAFmt mCRC were identified. The type of targeted therapy (anti-EGFR-based versus non-anti-EGFR) did not significantly impact the outcome. However, in patients with left-sided primary tumors, anti-EGFR mAb-based treatment, compared with non-anti-EGFR, was associated with a higher ORR (58% versus 34%; P < 0.01), trended toward improved PFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-1.13; P= 0.12], and demonstrated prolonged OS (HR 0.38; 95% CI 0.20-0.72; P < 0.01). In patients with right-sided primary tumors, anti-EGFR-based therapy had no effect on ORR (33% versus 36%; P > 0.99), induced inferior PFS (HR 1.97; 95% CI 1.12-3.47; P= 0.02), and trended toward a worse OS (HR 1.76; 95% CI 0.99-3.13; P= 0.05). This analysis suggests that PTS has predictive value for the efficacy of anti-EGFR mAb in the first-line treatment of BRAFmt mCRC.

Encorafenib and cetuximab versus irinotecan/cetuximab or FOLFIRI/cetuximab in Chinese patients with BRAF V600E mutant metastatic colorectal cancer: The NAUTICAL CRC study.

LBA3559 Background: BRAF V600E mutations are present in 8-12% worldwide of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and linked with a poor prognosis. Encorafenib + cetuximab (E+C) was approved by the FDA and EMA for patients with BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC who received prior systemic therapy, based on data from the BEACON CRC study. Methods: This Phase II, multicenter, randomized, open-label, 2-arm study evaluated E+C vs irinotecan + cetuximab or FOLFIRI + cetuximab (control arm) in Chinese patients with BRAF V600E mutant mCRC whose disease progressed after 1 or 2 prior treatment lines in the metastatic setting. A safety lead-in initially conducted in 10 patients reported no DLTs. Eligible patients had mCRC and a BRAF V600E mutation in tumor tissue determined by a local assay before screening and centrally confirmed. Patients were randomly assigned to the doublet arm (E+C) or the control arm in a 2:1 ratio, respectively. Randomization was stratified by baseline ECOG performance status (0 vs 1) and prior use of irinotecan (yes vs no). The primary objective of the randomized phase was to compare the efficacy of E+C vs the control arm, as measured by PFS (assessed by blinded independent central review). Secondary objectives included PFS assessed by the investigator, ORR, DOR, DCR, TTR, OS, QoL, and safety and tolerability of E+C. Results of the randomized phase of the study are reported. Results: At data cut-off (19 Dec 2023), 65 patients were enrolled in the E+C arm and 32 in the control arm. Median patient age was 56 years, the primary cancer site was the left colon in 56.7% of patients, 48.5% had metastases to ≥3 organs, 56.7% had liver metastases, 77.3% received one prior metastatic treatment, and 22.7% received 2 prior metastatic treatments. Results are shown below for E+C vs the control arm, respectively. Median PFS assessed by BICR was 4.2 mo vs 2.5 mo (HR 0.37; 95% CI: 0.20, 0.68; P=0.0004). Median OS was 11.6 mo vs 8.2 mo (HR for death 0.55; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.99). Confirmed ORR was 24.6% (95% CI: 14.8, 36.9) vs 6.3% (95% CI: 0.8, 20.8). Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of grade 3 or higher occurred in 47.7% vs 51.9% of patients. Treatment-related grade 3 or higher occurred in 24.6% and 44.4% of patients. The most frequent TEAEs were anemia (30.8% vs 37%), vomiting (26.2% vs 33.3%), rash (24.6% vs 29.6%), weight loss (23.1% vs 18.5%), hypoalbuminemia (21.5% vs 22.2%), and melanocytic naevus (21.5% vs 0%). Three patient deaths were reported during treatment: unknown cause (n=1) and pneumonia (n=1) in the E+C arm and septic shock (n=1) in the control arm. Conclusions: Treatment with a combination of encorafenib and cetuximab is effective and well tolerated in Chinese patients with BRAF V600E mutant mCRC, resulting in a significantly longer PFS than standard therapies. These results are consistent with those previously reported in the BEACON study. Clinical trial information: NCT05004350 .

A phase ib-II study of dabrafenib, trametinib, cetuximab plus irinotecan in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic colorectal cancer: Subgroup analysis and biomarker identification.

e15581 Background: About 5%-12% of patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) have BRAF mutations in which BRAF V600E mutated was most common, accounts for approximately 90% of cases of BRAF mutation mCRC. Therefore, multi-drug combination therapy with BRAF inhibitor has been tried. The efficacy results of this study have been reported in 2023 ASCO GI (#156). The ORR was 30% (3/10), the DCR was 80% (8/10). After a median follow-up of 19.7 months, the median PFS was 7.5 months. Here, we reported the results of subsequent analyses. Methods: In this phase Ib-II trial, 15 patients with BRAF-mutant mCRC received Dabrafenib, trametinib, cetuximab plus irinotecan combination therapy. Whole exome sequencing was conducted in 8 proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) mCRC patients with BRAF V600E-mutant. Patients were followed up clinically and radiographically. Response was defined as Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR), Stable Disease (SD) and Progressive Disease (PD) were defined according to the response definitions of the RECIST criteria. Results: 3 mCRC patients (CR or PR) were divided into response group, 5 mCRC patients (SD or PD) were divided into non-response group. Age (59.6±4.22 vs 39.0±9.93), Gender (male 66.67% vs 80%), ECOG score (0.67 vs 0.60), ALT flare rate (66.67% vs 60%) were similar in the two group. Patients in response group have better 2-year survival rate (66.7% vs 0%, P &lt; 0.05). Furthermore, response-related Differential Expression Genes (DEGs) (log2fc &gt; 1, P &lt; 0.05) were analyzed. Meanwhile, GO and KEGG pathway analysis was conducted based on DEGs. Results showed that MAPK signaling pathway related genes were down-regulated in response group such as EGF, FGF18, HGF, IGF1, MAPK10, NGF. While Apoptosis related genes were up-regulated in response group such as BCL2L1, AIFM1, DAXX. Moreover, Antigen processing and presentation related genes such as CALR, CANX, HSPA8 were enriched in response group, which indicated a more active immune microenvironment. On the contrary, Hedgehog signaling pathway related genes such as GLI1, HHIP, BOC were enriched in non-response group. Next, we verified the clinical significance of DEGS in TCGA CRC cohort database using Cox-regression analysis. Results showed that expression of IGF1, NGF, CAMK2B, CCNA1 were associated with poor prognosis and CANX, HSPA8 were associated with better prognosis, which is in accordance with our sequencing results. Conclusions: Inhibition of MAPK signaling and promoted Apoptosis was found in BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC patients who were response to Dabrafenib, trametinib, cetuximab plus irinotecan. It's worth noticing that immune activation occurred in responsive patients, indicated a potential benefit from immunotherapy combination therapy. Moreover, Hedgehog signaling pathway may be target in rescue therapy in mCRC patients. Clinical trial information: ChiCTR2200063316.

Updates in BRAF V600E-Mutated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide, and the second leading cause of cancer death. Approximately one in five patients with CRC present with metastatic disease at diagnosis. The BRAF V600E mutation occurs in 8–12% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), and is characterised by an aggressive clinical course and poor prognosis. This article is based on a webinar discussion in March 2024, between two experts in gastrointestinal cancers, Chiara Cremolini, University of Pisa, Italy; and Julien Taieb, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Université Paris-Cité, France, both of whom have a wealth of experience and expertise in the clinical management of CRC. The experts described the most important recent advances in the treatment of BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC, including data presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress in October 2023, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Gastrointestinal (GI) Cancers Symposium in January 2024. Cremolini and Taieb gave valuable insights into topics such as the aggressive nature of BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC, and how this impacts choice of treatment, patient outcomes, and quality of life, as well as the importance of early testing and monitoring. The experts also discussed how the BRAF V600E mutation impacts treatment response and outcomes in patients with microsatellite unstable (microsatellite instability [MSI]) versus microsatellite stable (MSS) tumours, and recent key clinical trials in BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC. The importance of surgery in the multidisciplinary management of patients with BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC, BRAF as a prognostic marker in resected CRC, and real-world studies in this field were also explored. Finally, Cremolini and Taieb described what the future of the management of patients with BRAF V600E-mutated mCRC might look like, and which advancements in research they would like to see.

Safety and Efficacy of Encorafenib, Binimetinib, and Cetuximab for BRAFV600E-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Results of the Japanese Expanded Access Program

BackgroundThe phase 3 BEACON CRC study demonstrated the survival benefits of encorafenib and cetuximab, with or without binimetinib (the BEACON triplet or doublet regimen), for BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This expanded access program (EAP) and subsequent follow-up study assessed the efficacy and safety of the BEACON triplet regimen in Japanese patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. Materials and MethodsThe EAP was an open-label, single-arm study including Japanese patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC whose disease progressed after 1 to 2 prior regimens. The patients received the BEACON triplet regimen with 28-day cycles. The subsequent follow-up study assessed the survival outcomes following EAP completion. Safety was assessed only during the EAP. ResultsAmong the 86 enrolled patients, 81 received the BEACON triplet regimen. The objective response rate and median progression-free survival were 27.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 18.0%-39.1%) and 5.26 (95% CI, 4.14-5.52) months, respectively. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events and treatment-related adverse events occurred in 43.2% and 28.4% of patients, respectively. No new safety signals were observed during the EAP. Among 58 patients with confirmed survival at EAP completion, 57 were included in the follow-up study. With a median observation period of 9.17 months through the EAP and follow-up study, the median overall survival was 10.38 (95% CI, 9.00-16.16) months. ConclusionThe efficacy and safety of the BEACON triplet regimen in Japanese patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC were consistent with those reported in the BEACON CRC trial, supporting its use as a standard treatment for pretreated patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC.

Impact of early tumor shrinkage and depth of response in patients with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer.

142 Background: Early tumor shrinkage (ETS) and the depth of response (DpR) are early on-treatment surrogate markers for survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody. However, the utility of ETS and DpR for BRAF V600E mutant (MT) mCRC which has a poor prognosis remains unclear. The aim of this study is to evaluate the association between ETS and DpR and clinical outcomes in BRAF V600E MT mCRC. Methods: mCRC patients who were diagnosed BRAF V600E MT and treated with 1st line chemotherapy from June 2011 to March 2023 at single cancer institute were enrolled. We analyzed the association between ETS and DpR and clinical outcome in patients who had at least one target lesion. Subgroup analysis of clinical factors related to progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was performed using multivariate analysis. ETS was defined as the relative change in the sum of the longest diameters of RECIST target lesions at first follow-up CT scan compared to baseline and DpR was defined as the relative change in the sum of the longest diameters of RECIST target lesions at the nadir in the absence of new lesions or progression of non-target lesions compared to baseline. Results: In total, 54 patients of BRAF V600E MT mCRC had at least one target lesion. In total of StageI-IV CRC patients, the incidence of BRAF V600E MT was 6.3% (233/3705). Patients with ETS ≥ 20% and DpR ≥ 25% (median value) were 24 (44.4%) and 27 (50%) respectively. PFS was 7.5 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 5.0-9.9) and OS was 17.1 months (95% CI, 11.7-20.2). Patients with ETS ≥ 20% had longer PFS and tended to have longer OS than those with non-ETS, with a median PFS of 9.8 months vs. 4.8 months (P Log-rank = 0.048, hazard ratio (HR), 0.55; 95% CI, 0.30-1.00), and a median OS of 22.6 months vs. 11.6 months (P Log-rank = 0.18, HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.37-1.21). Patients with DpR ≥ 25% had also longer PFS and OS than those with non-DpR, with a median PFS of 11.0 vs. 4.3 months (P Log-rank &lt; 0.01, HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20-0.66) and a median OS of 22.6 vs. 10.1 months (P Log-rank = 0.047, HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.31-1.00). Median time to DpR was 3.05 months. In multivariate analysis, DpR was significantly associated with both longer PFS (HR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.14–0.55, P &lt; 0.01) and OS (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.29–0.96, P = 0.04). Conclusions: ETS and DpR may be early surrogate markers for clinical outcome in BRAF V600E MT mCRC who were treated with 1st line chemotherapy.

Impact of Online Tumor Board Simulation for Optimizing Testing and Treatment of Patients with BRAFV600E- mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Abstract Introduction/Objective Approximately 10% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have BRAF genetic mutations, 90% of which result in a V600E substitution. Although there are targeted therapies available, there has been confusion about new and emerging testing and treatment options for BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. Methods/Case Report To meet these needs, ASCP designed a 60-minute, self-paced, CME/CMLE online tumor board simulation to: increase knowledge, skills, and competence of pathologists and laboratory professionals to ensure patients with mCRC are appropriately and efficiently tested for BRAF mutations in accordance with NCCN guidelines, and enable pathologists to guide medical oncologists in the appropriate diagnosis, testing, and treatment of patients with mCRC. In the simulation, an expert pathologist and oncologist presented patient cases involving BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. Learners answered questions designed to help them carefully consider the nuances of each case, building their knowledge and skills related to the detection and optimal management of patients with BRAF-mutant mCRC. Results (if a Case Study enter NA) 250+ learners have participated, with results demonstrating greater understanding of the NCCN guidelines for molecular testing of patients with mCRC, the clinicopathologic characteristics of BRAF-mutant mCRC. The tumor board simulation also increased awareness of strategies for improving turnaround times in biomarker testing for patients with mCRC, as well as current and emerging treatment options for BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC, which were two of the main goals of the education. Conclusion This project advanced knowledge, skills, and competence among pathologists and laboratory professionals, particularly those in community practice, to help ensure that patients who may be eligible for new and emerging therapies for BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC receive effective, optimized, and timely biomarker testing and treatment. The education may be useful to learners who want an increased understanding of BRAF mutations and their role in treatment selection.

SEAMARK: phase II study of first-line encorafenib and cetuximab plus pembrolizumab for MSI-H/dMMR BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC.

Patients with both BRAF V600E mutations and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have poor prognosis. Currently, there are no specifically targeted first-line treatment options indicated for patients with mCRC whose tumors harbor both molecular aberrations. Pembrolizumab is a checkpoint inhibitor approved for the treatment of MSI-H/dMMR mCRC, and the BRAF inhibitor encorafenib, in combination with cetuximab, is approved for previously treated BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC. Combination of pembrolizumab with encorafenib and cetuximab may synergistically enhance antitumor activity in patients with BRAF V600E-mutant, MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. SEAMARK is a randomized phase II study comparing the efficacy of the combination of pembrolizumab with encorafenib and cetuximab versus pembrolizumab alone in patients with previously untreated BRAF V600E-mutant, MSI-H/dMMR mCRC.

Impact of encorafenib on survival of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer in a real-world setting

PurposePatients with BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have a dismal prognosis. The best strategies in these patients remain elusive. Against this background, we report the clinical course of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC to retrieve the best treatment strategy.Patients and methodsClinico-pathological data were extracted from the electronic health records. Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Objective response rate (ORR) was assessed according to RECIST 1.1.ResultsIn total, 51 patients were enrolled. FOLFOXIRI was administered to 12 patients; 29 patients received FOLFOX or FOLFIRI as first-line treatment. Median OS was 17.6 months. Median PFS with FOLFOXIRI (13.0 months) was significantly prolonged (HR 0.325) as compared to FOLFOX/FOLFIRI (4.3 months). However, this failed to translate into an OS benefit (p = 0.433). Interestingly, addition of a monoclonal antibody to chemotherapy associated with superior OS (HR 0.523). A total of 64.7% patients received further-line therapy, which included a BRAF inhibitor in 17 patients. Targeted therapy associated with very favourable OS (25.1 months).ConclusionPatients with BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC benefit from the addition of an antibody to first-line chemotherapy. Further-line treatment including a BRAF inhibitor has a dramatic impact on survival.

Treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer with BRAF V600E mutation: A multicenter real-world study in China

BackgroundBRAF V600E mutant-metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is characterized by its short survival time. Treatment approaches vary depending on whether or not the metastases are initially resectable. The benefit of metastasectomy remains unclear, and the optimal first-line treatment is controversial. This study aimed to describe the prognosis of BRAF V600E mutant-mCRC, analyze the recurrence pattern in resectable patients, and explore the optimal first-line treatment for unresectable patients. MethodsPatients diagnosed with BRAF V600E mutant-mCRC between February 2014 and January 2022 in five hospitals were enrolled. Date on clinical and pathological characteristics, treatment features, and survival outcomes were collected. ResultsOf the 220 included patients, 64 initially resectable patients had a significantly longer overall survival (OS) (37.07 vs. 20.20 months, P < 0.001) than initially unresectable patients. Of 156 unresectable patients, 54 received doublet (FOLFOX, XELOX or FOLFIRI) or triplet (FOLFOXIRI) chemotherapies (Chemo), 55 received Chemo plus Bevacizumab (Chemo+Bev), and 33 received vemurafenib plus cetuximab and irinotecan (VIC). The VIC regimen had a better progression-free survival (PFS) (12.70 months) than the Chemo (6.70 months, P < 0.001) and Chemo+Bev (8.8 months, P = 0.044) regimens. Patients treated with VIC had the best overall response rate (60.16%, P < 0.001), disease control rate (93.94%, P < 0.001) and conversional resection rate (24.24%, P = 0.003). ConclusionsMetastasectomy is beneficial to the survival of patients with BRAF V600E mutant-mCRC. For initially unresectable patients, VIC as first-line therapy is associated with a better prognosis and efficacy than doublet and triplet chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab.

FOLFOXIRI Plus Cetuximab or Bevacizumab as First-Line Treatment of BRAFV600E-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Randomized Phase II FIRE-4.5 (AIO KRK0116) Study.

BRAFV600E mutation is associated with a poor outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This clinical trial investigated the efficacy of triplet chemotherapy (fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) combined with either cetuximab or bevacizumab in patients with previously untreated BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. In this controlled, randomized, open-label phase II trial, 109 patients were randomly assigned, 107 of whom were included into the full analysis set (FAS). Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either FOLFOXIRI plus cetuximab in the experimental arm (n = 72) or FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab in the control arm (n = 35). The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) according to RECIST 1.1., evaluated in patients treated according to protocol (ATP population). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, and feasibility were analyzed as secondary end points. Eighteen patients discontinued study treatment before the first tumor assessment, thus resulting in the ATP population of 89 patients. In these patients, ORR was 51% (30/59) in the cetuximab-based experimental arm and 67% (20/30) in the bevacizumab-based control arm (odds ratio, 1.93; 80% CI, 1.06 to 3.52; P = .92 [one-sided]). In the full analysis set, median PFS was significantly inferior in the experimental arm (6.7 months v 10.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 1.89; P = .006). Median OS analyzed at an event rate of 64.5% showed a trend toward shorter survival in cetuximab-treated patients (12.9 months v 17.1 months; HR, 1.4; P = .20). To our knowledge, FIRE-4.5 is the first prospective and randomized study investigating first-line treatment of BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. FOLFOXIRI plus cetuximab does not induce a higher ORR when compared with FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab in first-line treatment of BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. Bevacizumab-based chemotherapy remains the preferable first-line treatment of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC.

BREAKWATER: An open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 study, with a safety lead-in (SLI), of first-line (1L) encorafenib (E) + cetuximab (C) ± chemotherapy (CT) vs standard-of-care (SOC) CT for BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

TPS3627 Background: Globally, 8-12% of patients (pts) with mCRC have BRAF V600E mutations, which confer poor prognosis. Based on BEACON (NCT02928224), EC was approved for the treatment (tx) of previously treated pts with BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC. BREAKWATER (NCT04607421) is evaluating EC ± CT vs SOC CT in pts with BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC. In the BREAKWATER SLI (N = 57), EC + CT showed encouraging antitumor activity. Confirmed ORR by BICR (95% CI) with EC + mFOLFOX6 and EC + FOLFIRI, respectively, was 68.4% (46.0, 84.6) and 75.0% (46.8, 91.1) in 1L, and 37.5% (13.7, 69.4) and 44.4% (24.6, 66.3) in 2L. mPFS by BICR (95% CI) with EC + mFOLFOX6 and EC + FOLFIRI, respectively, was 11.1 months [mo] (8.5, NE) and NE (13.8, NE) in 1L, and 10.8 mo (4.3, NE) and 12.6 mo (6.9, NE) in 2L. These results support the continued evaluation of EC + CT. Based on the SLI, EC + mFOLFOX6 was selected for the phase 3 portion. Here we present the updated study design. Methods: BREAKWATER is an ongoing, open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 study evaluating 1L EC ± CT vs SOC CT alone in pts with BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC. Approximately 620 pts will be enrolled in the phase 3 portion and an additional 135 in cohort 3 (Table). Phase 3 and cohort 3 inclusion criteria are age ≥16 (or ≥18 based on country); no prior systemic tx for metastatic disease; measurable disease (RECIST 1.1); BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC (blood or tumor tissue); ECOG PS 0 or 1; and adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function. Pts who received prior BRAF or EGFR inhibitors, those with symptomatic brain metastases (unless stable for ≥4 weeks prior to randomization), or with MSI-H/dMMR tumors (unless ineligible to receive immune checkpoint inhibitors due to a pre-existing medical condition) are excluded. Study treatments and endpoints are shown in the Table. Phase 3 enrollment began in November 2021. Clinical trial information: NCT04607421 . [Table: see text]

Overall survival of patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer treated with encorafenib-cetuximab in a real-world nationwide study in the Netherlands.

3589 Background: Approximately 10-15% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have BRAFV600E mutated tumors. Encorafenib plus cetuximab (EC) combination treatment was approved following the results of the randomized phase III BEACON trial and is currently recommended for all pretreated patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC. Selection of patients in randomized controlled trials is based on restrictive eligibility criteria and often not representative of the patient population in daily clinical practice. Complementary real-world effectiveness studies can improve knowledge on the generalizability of trial results, and support decision making in clinical practice. Methods: This population-based study included all mCRC patients in the Netherlands treated with EC since approval in October 2020 until June 2022. Individual patient data and original pathology reports were collected. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), defined as time from EC initiation until death by any cause, analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves. WebPlotDigitizer was used to reconstruct the Kaplan-Meier survival curve of the BEACON trial. Uni- and multivariable analyses were performed. Subgroup analyses were conducted for patients who would have been eligible for the BEACON trial based on key eligibility criteria: BRAFV600E mutation, 1-2 prior regimens, world health organization performance status (WHO PS) of 0-1, normal neutrophil count, absence of brain metastases, no prior RAS/RAF/MEK treatment, and no concurrent malignancies. Results: 155 patients were included with a median follow-up time of 11.1 months. Patient characteristics differed from BEACON in mean age (64 versus 60 years), primary tumor sidedness (69% versus 50% right-sided) and WHO PS (23% versus 51% WHO 0). Median OS of the total real-world cohort was 6.6 months (95% CI: 6.0-8.3) and differed significantly from BEACON (9.3 months; 95% CI: 8.0-11.3; p = 0.003). 35% of real-world patients treated with EC would not have been eligible for the BEACON trial, showing an inferior median OS of 6.0 months (95% CI: 4.6-9.2) compared to 7.0 months (95% CI: 6.4-9.8) in trial eligible real-world patients. WHO PS was independently associated with poor survival in multivariable analysis. Patients with WHO PS≥2 had a median OS of 3.9 months (95% CI: 2.4-NA) with a hazard rate of 2.5 (95% CI: 1.1-5.5; p = 0.003). Conclusions: This largest to date - unselected - population-based cohort of mCRC patients treated with EC showed an efficacy-effectiveness gap for OS. These outcomes should be considered in clinical practice for treatment decision making. Omitting EC for subgroups demonstrating very short OS, such as patients with WHO PS ≥2, needs to be considered. Further research is warranted to adapt treatment guidelines towards a more personalized approach for patients with BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC.

Nursing care and management of adverse events for patients with BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer receiving encorafenib in combination with cetuximab: a review

Encorafenib is a B-Raf proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase (BRAF) inhibitor, approved in the EU and USA, in combination with the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor cetuximab, for the treatment of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In the pivotal BEACON CRC trial, patients achieved longer survival with encorafenib in combination with cetuximab vs. conventional chemotherapy. This targeted therapy regimen is also generally better tolerated than cytotoxic treatments. However, patients may present with adverse events unique to the regimen and characteristic of BRAF and EGFR inhibitors, which produce their own set of challenges. Nurses play an essential role in navigating the care of patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC and managing adverse events that patients may experience. This includes early and efficient identification of treatment-related adverse events, subsequent management of adverse events and education of patients and their caregivers around key adverse events. This manuscript aims to provide support to nurses managing patients with BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC receiving encorafenib in combination with cetuximab, by summarising potential adverse events and providing guidance on how to manage them. Special attention will be paid to the presentation of key adverse events, dose modifications that may be required, practical recommendations and supportive care measures.

BRAF V600E and RNF43 Co-mutations Predict Patient Outcomes With Targeted Therapies in Real-World Cases of Colorectal Cancer.

Anti-BRAF/EGFR therapy is approved for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with BRAFV600E mutations, although not all patients respond. Novel recent findings indicate the potential of RNF43 mutations to predict outcomes in patients with BRAF-mutated microsatellite stable (MSS) mCRC treated with anti-BRAF/EGFR therapy. This study aimed to independently and rapidly validate BRAFV600E/RNF43 co-mutations as predictive biomarkers of benefit to anti-EGFR/BRAF therapy. Clinical data were derived from electronic health record data from ~280 US cancer clinics between January 2011 and March 2022 from the Flatiron Health-Foundation Medicine real-world clinico-genomic mCRC database. Real-world cases of BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC, with patients receiving anti-BRAF/EGFR therapy (n = 49), were included. Patients who were MSS, with RNF43 mutations, had favorable progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.29; 95% CI [CI], 0.13-0.65) and overall survival (HR 0.32, 95% CI, 0.12-0.84) compared with wild type. No difference in outcomes was observed between patient groups with RNF43-mutant versus wild-type receiving standard-of-care chemotherapy. BRAFV600E/RNF43 co-mutations predict mCRC anti-BRAF/EGFR outcomes in diverse clinical settings.

TRIDENTE trial: A phase II study of rechallenge with encorafenib, binimetinib, and cetuximab in patients with RAS wild-type/BRAF V600E–mutant metastatic colorectal cancer.

TPS264 Background: The BEACON CRC trial demonstrated survival benefit of combination therapy with encorafenib (ENCO) + cetuximab (CET) +/- binimetinib (BINI) in patients with RAS wild-type (WT)/ BRAF V600E mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, prognosis of those patients still be poor after the refractoriness to the BEACON combination therapy. One of resistant mechanisms to BRAF inhibitor has been reported as MAPK alterations including RAS mutation, similar to those for anti-EGFR antibody in patients with RAS/ BRAF V600E WT mCRC. Promising results of rechallenge therapy with anti-EGFR antibody in patients with RAS/ BRAF V600E WT mCRC and with combination of BRAF inhibitor + MEK inhibitor in patients with BRAF V600 mutant melanoma suggest the treatment strategy of rechallenge therapy with the BEACON triplet therapy in patients with RAS WT/ BRAF V600E mutant mCRC. Methods: TRIDENTE trial is a multicenter phase II trial to assess efficacy and safety of rechallenge therapy with ENCO + BINI + CET in patients with RAS WT/ BRAF V600E mutant mCRC after the refractoriness to either the BEACON doublet or triplet therapy. Key eligibility criteria includes RAS WT/ BRAF V600E mutant mCRC; ≥ 20 years old; ECOG PS 0-1; refractory or intolerant to at least one fluoropyrimidine-based regimen (including irinotecan or oxaliplatin); refractory or intolerant to anti-PD-1 antibody if patients with MSI-high; history of previous combination therapy containing ENCO + CET with at least partial response by RECIST v1.1; confirmed disease progression within 4 weeks after last administration of previous ENCO; ≥ 4 months of period between the last administration of previous ENCO and the start of study treatment. Enrolled patients receive the combination therapy with ENCO (300 mg, QD), BINI (45 mg, BID), and CET (initially 400 mg/m2, and subsequently 250 mg/m2, QW) as the study treatment. Primary endpoint is the objective response rate (ORR) by investigators’ assessment in patients receiving at least one dose of study treatment. A target sample size is calculated to be 21 on the hypothesis that the threshold ORR is 3% and expected ORR is 20%, with a significant level of 5% (one-sided) and power of 80%. Secondary endpoint includes progression-free and overall survivals, disease control rate, and safety. Exploratory molecular analysis is performed using targeted next-generation sequencing in circulating-tumor DNA at the timepoints of baseline and discontinuation of study treatment. As of September 19, 2022, 8 patients have been enrolled. Clinical trial information: jRCTs031210511 .