RAS and BRAF mutations in cell‐free DNA are predictive for outcome of cetuximab monotherapy in patients with tissue‐tested RAS wild‐type advanced colorectal cancer

Erik J. Helden,Lindsay Angus,C. Willemien Menke‐van der Houven van Oordt,Daniëlle A. M. Heideman,Eline Boon,Suzanne C. Es,Sandra A. Radema,Carla M. L. Herpen,Derk Jan A. Groot,Elisabeth G. E. Vries,Maurice P. H. M. Jansen,Stefan Sleijfer,Henk M. W. Verheul
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.12550
2019-09-30
Molecular Oncology
Abstract:<p>In metastatic colorectal cancer, <i>RAS</i> and <i>BRAF</i> mutations cause resistance to anti‐EGFR therapies, such as cetuximab. Heterogeneity in <i>RAS</i> and <i>BRAF</i> mutations might explain non‐response in a subset of patients receiving cetuximab. Analyzing mutations in plasma‐derived circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) could provide a more comprehensive overview of the mutational landscape as compared to analyses of primary and or metastatic tumor tissue. Therefore, this prospective multicenter study followed 34 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who were tissue‐tested as <i>RAS</i> wild‐type (exons 2‐4) during routine work‐up and received third‐line cetuximab monotherapy. <i>BRAF</i> mutation status was also tested but did not exclude patients from therapy. At baseline and upon disease progression, cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) was isolated for targeted next‐generation sequencing (NGS). At 8 weeks, we determined which patients had benefited from treatment. NGS of cfDNA identified three patients with <i>RAS</i> mutations not detected in tumor tissue during routine work‐up. Another six patients had a <i>BRAF</i> or rare <i>RAS</i> mutation in ctDNA and/or tumor tissue. Relative to patients without mutations in <i>RAS/BRAF</i>, patients with mutations at baseline had shorter progression‐free survival (1.8 versus 4.9 months (P &lt;0.001)) and overall survival (3.1 versus 9.4 months (P=0.001)). In patients with clinical benefit (progressive disease after 8 weeks), ctDNA testing revealed previously undetected mutations in <i>RAS/BRAF</i> (71%) and <i>EGFR</i> (47%), which often emerged polyclonally. Our results indicate that baseline NGS of ctDNA can identify additional <i>RAS</i> mutation‐carriers which could improve patient selection for anti‐EGFR therapies. Acquired resistance, in patients with initial treatment benefit, is mainly explained by polyclonal emergence of <i>RAS</i>,<i> BRAF</i> and <i>EGFR</i> mutations in ctDNA.</p><p>This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.</p>
oncology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?