Katie Southward

Value of Mismatch Repair, KRAS, and BRAF Mutations in Predicting Recurrence and Benefits From Chemotherapy in Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE It is uncertain whether modest benefits from adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colorectal cancer justify the toxicity, cost, and inconvenience. We investigated the usefulness of defective mismatch repair (dMMR), BRAF, and KRAS mutations in predicting tumor recurrence and sensitivity to chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Immunohistochemistry for dMMR and pyrosequencing for KRAS/BRAF were performed for 1,913 patients randomly assigned between fluorouracil and folinic acid chemotherapy and no chemotherapy in the Quick and Simple and Reliable (QUASAR) trial. RESULTS Twenty-six percent of 695 right-sided colon, 3% of 685 left-sided colon, and 1% of 407 rectal tumors were dMMR. Similarly, 17% of right colon, 2% of left colon, and 2% of rectal tumors were BRAF mutant. KRAS mutant tumors were more evenly distributed: 40% right colon, 28% left colon, and 36% rectal tumors. Recurrence rate for dMMR tumors was half that for MMR-proficient tumors (11% [25 of 218] v 26% [438 of 1,695] recurred; risk ratio [RR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.70; P < .001). Risk of recurrence was also significantly higher for KRAS mutant than KRAS wild-type tumors (28% [150 of 542] v 21% [219 of 1,041]; RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.74; P = .002) but did not differ significantly between BRAF mutant and wild-type tumors (P = .36). No marker predicted benefit from chemotherapy with efficacy not differing significantly by MMR, KRAS, or BRAF status. The prognostic value of MMR and KRAS was similar in the presence and absence of chemotherapy. CONCLUSION MMR assays identify patients with a low risk of recurrence. KRAS mutational analysis provides useful additional risk stratification to guide use of chemotherapy.

HER2 overexpression and amplification as a potential therapeutic target in colorectal cancer: analysis of 3256 patients enrolled in the QUASAR, FOCUS and PICCOLO colorectal cancer trials

HER2 overexpression/amplification is linked to trastuzumab response in breast/gastric cancers. One suggested anti‐EGFR resistance mechanism in colorectal cancer (CRC) is aberrant MEK–AKT pathway activation through HER2 up‐regulation. We assessed HER2‐amplification/overexpression in stage II–III and IV CRC patients, assessing relationships to KRAS/BRAF and outcome. Pathological material was obtained from 1914 patients in the QUASAR stage II–III trial and 1342 patients in stage IV trials (FOCUS and PICCOLO). Tissue microarrays were created for HER2 immunohistochemistry. HER2‐amplification was assessed using FISH and copy number variation. KRAS/BRAF mutation status was assessed by pyrosequencing. Progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) data were obtained for FOCUS/PICCOLO and recurrence and mortality for QUASAR; 29/1342 (2.2%) stage IV and 25/1914 (1.3%) stage II–III tumours showed HER2 protein overexpression. Of the HER2‐overexpressing cases, 27/28 (96.4%) stage IV tumours and 20/24 (83.3%) stage II–III tumours demonstrated HER2 amplification by FISH; 41/47 (87.2%) also showed copy number gains. HER2‐overexpression was associated with KRAS/BRAF wild‐type (WT) status at all stages: in 5.2% WT versus 1.0% mutated tumours (p < 0.0001) in stage IV and 2.1% versus 0.2% in stage II–III tumours (p = 0.01), respectively. HER2 was not associated with OS or PFS. At stage II–III, there was no significant correlation between HER2 overexpression and 5FU/FA response. A higher proportion of HER2‐overexpressing cases experienced recurrence, but the difference was not significant. HER2‐amplification/overexpression is identifiable by immunohistochemistry, occurring infrequently in stage II–III CRC, rising in stage IV and further in KRAS/BRAF WT tumours. The value of HER2‐targeted therapy in patients with HER2‐amplified CRC must be tested in a clinical trial.

Cross-laboratory validation of the OncoScan® FFPE Assay, a multiplex tool for whole genome tumour profiling

BackgroundAdoption of new technology in both basic research and clinical settings requires rigorous validation of analytical performance. The OncoScan® FFPE Assay is a multiplexing tool that offers genome-wide copy number and loss of heterozygosity detection, as well as identification of frequently tested somatic mutations.MethodsIn this study, 162 formalin fixed paraffin embedded samples, representing six different tumour types, were profiled in triplicate across three independent laboratories. OncoScan® formalin fixed paraffin embedded assay data was then analysed for reproducibility of genome-wide copy number, loss of heterozygosity and somatic mutations. Where available, somatic mutation data was compared to data from orthogonal technologies (pyro/sanger sequencing).ResultsCross site comparisons of genome-wide copy number and loss of heterozygosity profiles showed greater than 95% average agreement between sites. Somatic mutations pre-validated by orthogonal technologies showed greater than 90% agreement with OncoScan® somatic mutation calls and somatic mutation concordance between sites averaged 97%.ConclusionsReproducibility of whole-genome copy number, loss of heterozygosity and somatic mutation data using the OncoScan® assay has been demonstrated with comparatively low DNA inputs from a range of highly degraded formalin fixed paraffin embedded samples. In addition, our data shows examples of clinically-relevant aberrations that demonstrate the potential utility of the OncoScan® assay as a robust clinical tool for guiding tumour therapy.

Intratumoral stromal morphometry predicts disease recurrence but not response to 5-fluorouracil-results from the QUASAR trial of colorectal cancer.

The biological importance of tumour‐associated stroma is becoming increasingly apparent, but its clinical utility remains ill‐defined. For stage II/Dukes B colorectal cancer (CRC), clinical biomarkers are urgently required to direct therapeutic options. We report here prognostic/predictive analyses, and molecular associations, of stromal morphometric quantification in the Quick and Simple and Reliable (QUASAR) trial of CRC.

Preoperative chemoradiation with capecitabine, irinotecan and cetuximab in rectal cancer: significance of pre-treatment and post-resection RAS mutations

Background:The influence of EGFR pathway mutations on cetuximab-containing rectal cancer preoperative chemoradiation (CRT) is uncertain.Methods:In a prospective phase II trial (EXCITE), patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-defined non-metastatic rectal adenocarinoma threatening/involving the surgical resection plane received pelvic radiotherapy with concurrent capecitabine, irinotecan and cetuximab. Resection was recommended 8 weeks later. The primary endpoint was histopathologically clear (R0) resection margin. Pre-planned retrospective DNA pyrosequencing (PS) and next generation sequencing (NGS) of KRAS, NRAS, PIK3CA and BRAF was performed on the pre-treatment biopsy and resected specimen.Results:Eighty-two patients were recruited and 76 underwent surgery, with R0 resection in 67 (82%, 90%CI: 73–88%) (four patients with clinical complete response declined surgery). Twenty–four patients (30%) had an excellent clinical or pathological response (ECPR). Using NGS 24 (46%) of 52 matched biopsies/resections were discrepant: ten patients (19%) gained 13 new resection mutations compared to biopsy (12 KRAS, one PIK3CA) and 18 (35%) lost 22 mutations (15 KRAS, 7 PIK3CA). Tumours only ever testing RAS wild-type had significantly greater ECPR than tumours with either biopsy or resection RAS mutations (14/29 [48%] vs 10/51 [20%], P=0.008), with a trend towards increased overall survival (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.05–1.03, P=0.055).Conclusions:This regimen was feasible and the primary study endpoint was met. For the first time using pre-operative rectal CRT, emergence of clinically important new resection mutations is described, likely reflecting intratumoural heterogeneity manifesting either as treatment-driven selective clonal expansion or a geographical biopsy sampling miss.

509PDPRIMARY TUMOUR LOCATION (PTL) AS A PROGNOSTIC AND PREDICTIVE FACTOR IN ADVANCED COLORECTAL CANCER (ACRC): DATA FROM 2075 PATIENTS (PTS) IN RANDOMISED TRIALS

ABSTRACT Aim: Variations in tumour biology and outcomes depending upon PTL have been reported in aCRC. We tested effects of PTL in two phase III randomised trials. Methods: We studied 2075 pts, from FOCUS (1st-line; n = 1390; Lancet 370: 143-52) and PICCOLO (2nd-line; n = 685; Lancet Oncol 14:749-59). We compared: (1) right colon (RC) vs [left colon (LC) or rectum] and (2) LC vs rectum. Association of PTL with RAS/RAF, AREG/EREG and MMR was assessed where available. PTL was tested as a prognostic factor, then for predictive utility by testing PTL/treatment interactions on OS and PFS for: 1st line FU vs doublet (FOCUS); 1st-line irinotecan doublet vs oxaliplatin doublet (FOCUS); 2nd line irinotecan (Ir) +/- panitumumab (Pan) (KRAS-wt pts, PICCOLO). Results: PTL was RC in 575 (28%), LC in 801 (39%) and rectum in 699 (34%) pts. RC tumours had more BRAF mutations (n = 1136, 22% vs 6%, p Interaction test p-values for treatment comparisons Comparison Interaction Test p-values RC vs LC/rectum LC vs Rectum OS PFS OS PFS 1st line doublet vs single-agent FU (1334 pts) 0.39 0.84 0.48 0.8 1st line OxFU doublet vs IrFU doublet (452 pts) 0.99 0.67 0.18 0.50 2nd line Ir +/- Pan KRAS-WT (450 pts) 0.35 0.13 0.63 0.46 2nd line Ir +/- Pan KRAS/BRAF-WT (341 pts) 0.72 0.89 0.83 0.19 Conclusions: We confirm that RC tumours are biologically distinct, and have worse outcomes with 1st-line therapy. We did not find PTL to be predictive for the benefit of the drugs under test in these trials, so cannot recommend its use for selection of therapy. Better objective predictive biomarkers are required. Disclosure: All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Abstract 626: Cross-site reproducibility and orthogonal validation of copy number and somatic mutation calls of OncoScan® FFPE Assay Kit in solid tumors

Proceedings: AACR 106th Annual Meeting 2015; April 18-22, 2015; Philadelphia, PA Objectives Copy number (CN) and somatic mutation (SM) analysis in tumors is rapidly gaining importance in cancer management as a tool for differential diagnosis, determination of prognosis, and selection of therapeutic. Genome-wide copy number and LOH detection as well as a panel of frequently tested somatic mutations can be detected with OncoScan® FFPE Assay Kit. We report on a validation study of OncoScan FFPE Assay Kit CN and SM data by orthogonal technologies (FISH and NGS, respectively) to estimate the sensitivity and specificity parameters of the platform. In addition, we assessed the reproducibility of the platform across three different sites in the UK: Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology (LICP), West Midlands Regional Genetics Laboratory (WMRGL), and Almac Diagnostics (Almac). Methods Validation of CN data was performed on a cohort of cancer samples identified as Her2 positive/ambiguous by FISH. The panel of SMs available was validated by a custom targeted amplicon NGS panel on a diverse collection of samples derived from multiple cohorts across several tumor types sourced from both LICP and WMRGL. For the reproducibility study, 162 samples encompassing six different tumor types (breast, colorectal, lung, melanoma, prostate, and ovarian) were collected from LICP and WMRGL. DNA was extracted and plated in triplicate and distributed to the three testing sites: LICP, WMRGL, and Almac. Data from all sites was analyzed for reproducibility of genome-wide CN/LOH calls and SM calls. Results Cross-site comparisons of genome-wide CN and LOH profiles on 162 FFPE solid tumor samples showed greater than 95% average agreement between three sites (LICP, WMGRL, and Almac), while SM classification concordance between the sites averaged 97%. Initial orthogonal validation of Her2 amplification by FISH showed greater than 90% concordance, as did initial test samples used for validating OncoScan SM calls by a targeted amplicon NGS panel. Conclusion In this study we validated both CN and SM calls using OncoScan FFPE Assay Kit and demonstrated a high degree of agreement with orthogonal methods in all aspects. Reproducibility of whole-genome CN, LOH, and SM data using OncoScan FFPE Assay Kit has also been demonstrated for a range of FFPE samples, including highly degraded samples. This study is a step forward in evaluating the potential clinical utility of a platform combining genome-wide copy number and somatic mutation calls within the national health service of the UK. Citation Format: Joseph M. Foster, Assa Oumie, Fiona S. Togneri, Morag Taylor, Sofia Alyas, Paula Wojtowicz, Henry Wood, Emma Tinkler-Hundal, Katie Southward, Dominic McMullan, Phil Quirke, Katherine E. Keating, Mike Griffiths, Karen G. Spink, Fiona Brew, Eric Fung, Jeanette Schmidt. Cross-site reproducibility and orthogonal validation of copy number and somatic mutation calls of OncoScan® FFPE Assay Kit in solid tumors. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr 626. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-626