Novel potential mechanisms of acquired resistance to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy detected in liquid biopsies (LBx) from patients (pts) with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC).
Christine Megerdichian Parseghian,Jessica Kim Lee,Julia Quintanilha,Alexa B. Schrock,Ryon Graf,Lincoln Pasquina,Smruthy Sivakumar,Geoffrey R. Oxnard,Hanna Tukachinsky,Samuel J. Klempner,Scott Kopetz
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.3_suppl.199
IF: 45.3
2024-01-20
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Abstract:199 Background: While several studies have explored the evolving clonal profile of mCRC under stress of anti-EGFR using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), heterogeneity and small cohorts limit our understanding of acquired genomic alterations (GAs) associated with EGFR resistance. Methods: CRC LBx were profiled with FoundationOne Liquid CDx, which reports GAs in 324 cancer-related genes. Foundation Medicine’s (FMI) ctDNA tumor fraction (TF) is a composite algorithm prioritizing aneuploidy at higher levels and variant allele frequency (VAF) of canonical alterations at lower levels. Variants were considered clonal at VAF/TF ≥25%, subclonal at <25%. Among 4,546 non-MSI-H LBx, 2,776 (61%) had TF ≥1% and were used in this analysis. A subset of pts had treatment data in the US-based de-identified Flatiron Health-FM real-world clinico-genomic database (CGDB), originating from ~280 US cancer clinics (01/2011–03/2023). Results: 1,349 (49%) LBx had a clonal RAS GA, 107 (3.9%) had a clonal BRAF V600E, and 1,320 (48%) had no clonal RAS pathway driver GA. GAs in EGFR and MAP2K1 were significantly (FDR<0.0001) more common in LBx with no clonal RAS GA (162, 11%; 105, 7.4%) than with one (27, 2.0%; 24, 1.8%), consistent with prior reports of these GAs appearing in the setting of acquired resistance to anti-EGFR mAb. The 362 LBx with GAs in EGFR, MAP2K1, or subclonal RAS GAs (indicators of anti-EGFR mAb exposure based on a validated exposure signature) were compared to the 1349 LBx with a clonal RAS mutation. Post anti-EGFR LBx were significantly enriched in BRAF, TP53, FGFR3, PTPN11, ERRFI1, and MLH1 GAs (FDR<0.05) and all but TP53 had median VAF/TF <25%. The majority of clonal BRAF GAs were V600E (14/19, 74%) while the majority of subclonal BRAF GAs were Class 2 (36/61, 59%). Other subclonal GAs in receptor tyrosine kinases and RAS pathway components detected in these LBx included: NF1 (26), ROS1 (9), ALK (7), MET (7), RAF1 (7), FGFR2 (6), HRAS (6), MAP2K2 (6), and RET (4). 18/362 (4.4%) of the LBx had ≥2 of these resistance GAs (up to 5 per LBx). In CGDB, 14/25 (56%) LBx collected at progression had potential resistance GAs (median 2, maximum 10). LBx collected at progression (N = 25) had higher prevalence of GA in EGFR (28% vs. 2.3%, p=0.0003), KRAS (28% vs. 0%, p<0.0001), NRAS (20% vs. 0%, p=0.0002) and MAP2K1 (20% vs. 2.3%, p=0.008) than LBx collected before therapy start (N = 87). Conclusions: This study reports on the largest set of LBx from pts likely exposed to anti-EGFR published to date. LBx can provide a more comprehensive and quantitative picture of acquired resistance to anti-EGFR in CRC than tissue biopsy, including some potential novel mechanisms identified in this study. Further investigation into whether detection of resistance can inform clinical decisions about timing of anti-EGFR mAb use and rechallenge is warranted.
oncology