Explore the vast range of titles available.

This work on colorectal cancer shows that secondary mutations in KRAS that confer resistance to panitumumab, an anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody, are already present when antibody treatment begins; the apparent inevitability of resistance suggests that combinations of drugs targeting at least two different oncogenic pathway will be needed for treatment. Acquired resistance in anti-EGFR therapy Antibodies targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have become an established treatment for colorectal cancer, but they are contraindicated in patients carrying mutations in the KRAS oncogene. Drug resistance can also arise in initially responsive patients, and two papers in this issue of Nature present unequivocal evidence that mutations in KRAS underlie acquired resistance to anti-EGFR antibodies in many patients and that KRAS mutations can be detected in the serum of patients before the clinical emergence of resistance and relapse. Misale et al . show in cell-line models that KRAS mutations can confer resistance to cetuximab. And in colorectal cancer patients treated with cetuximab or panitumumab, resistance is associated with KRAS mutations selected from pre-existing subclones or acquired during treatment. Diaz et al . also find KRAS mutations accumulating in patients becoming resistant to panitumumab. Their mathematical models suggest that KRAS mutations pre-existed in tumour cells before therapy, which may explain why clinical recurrence is usually seen after about six months of treatment, by which time the resistant subpopulations of tumour cells with KRAS mutations has expanded. The apparent inevitability of resistance suggests that combinations of drugs targeting more than one oncogenic pathway will be needed if resistance is to be avoided. Colorectal tumours that are wild type for KRAS are often sensitive to EGFR blockade, but almost always develop resistance within several months of initiating therapy 1 , 2 . The mechanisms underlying this acquired resistance to anti-EGFR antibodies are largely unknown. This situation is in marked contrast to that of small-molecule targeted agents, such as inhibitors of ABL, EGFR, BRAF and MEK, in which mutations in the genes encoding the protein targets render the tumours resistant to the effects of the drugs 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 . The simplest hypothesis to account for the development of resistance to EGFR blockade is that rare cells with KRAS mutations pre-exist at low levels in tumours with ostensibly wild-type KRAS genes. Although this hypothesis would seem readily testable, there is no evidence in pre-clinical models to support it, nor is there data from patients. To test this hypothesis, we determined whether mutant KRAS DNA could be detected in the circulation of 28 patients receiving monotherapy with panitumumab, a therapeutic anti-EGFR antibody. We found that 9 out of 24 (38%) patients whose tumours were initially KRAS wild type developed detectable mutations in KRAS in their sera, three of which developed multiple different KRAS mutations. The appearance of these mutations was very consistent, generally occurring between 5 and 6 months following treatment. Mathematical modelling indicated that the mutations were present in expanded subclones before the initiation of panitumumab treatment. These results suggest that the emergence of KRAS mutations is a mediator of acquired resistance to EGFR blockade and that these mutations can be detected in a non-invasive manner. They explain why solid tumours develop resistance to targeted therapies in a highly reproducible fashion.

Bevacizumab improves the efficacy of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. Our aim was to assess the use of bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma. Patients from 330 centres in 34 countries were enrolled into this phase 3, open-label randomised trial. Patients with curatively resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive FOLFOX4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 200 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus plus 600 mg/m2 22-h continuous infusion on day 1; leucovorin 200 mg/m2 plus fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus plus 600 mg/m2 22-h continuous infusion on day 2) every 2 weeks for 12 cycles; bevacizumab 5 mg/kg plus FOLFOX4 (every 2 weeks for 12 cycles) followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks); or bevacizumab 7·5 mg/kg plus XELOX (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 every 2 weeks plus oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1–15) every 3 weeks for eight cycles followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks). Block randomisation was done with a central interactive computerised system, stratified by geographic region and disease stage. Surgery with curative intent occurred 4–8 weeks before randomisation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival, analysed for all randomised patients with stage III disease. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00112918. Of the total intention-to-treat population (n=3451), 2867 patients had stage III disease, of whom 955 were randomly assigned to receive FOLFOX4, 960 to receive bevacizumab–FOLFOX4, and 952 to receive bevacizumab–XELOX. After a median follow-up of 48 months (range 0–66 months), 237 patients (25%) in the FOLFOX4 group, 280 (29%) in the bevacizumab–FOLFOX4 group, and 253 (27%) in the bevacizumab–XELOX group had relapsed, developed a new colon cancer, or died. The disease-free survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab–FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1·17 (95% CI 0·98–1·39; p=0·07), and for bevacizumab–XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1·07 (0·90–1·28; p=0·44). After a minimum follow-up of 60 months, the overall survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab–FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1·27 (1·03–1·57; p=0·02), and for bevacizumab–XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1·15 (0·93–1·42; p=0·21). The 573 patients with high-risk stage II cancer were included in the safety analysis. The most common grade 3–5 adverse events were neutropenia (FOLFOX4: 477 [42%] of 1126 patients, bevacizumab-FOLFOX4: 416 [36%] of 1145 patients, and bevacizumab–XELOX: 74 [7%] of 1135 patients), diarrhoea (110 [10%], 135 [12%], and 181 [16%], respectively), and hypertension (12 [1%], 122 [11%], and 116 [10%], respectively). Serious adverse events were more common in the bevacizumab groups (bevacizumab–FOLFOX4: 297 [26%]; bevacizumab–XELOX: 284 [25%]) than in the FOLFOX4 group (226 [20%]). Treatment-related deaths were reported in one patient receiving FOLFOX4, two receiving bevacizumab–FOLFOX4, and five receiving bevacizumab–XELOX. Bevacizumab does not prolong disease-free survival when added to adjuvant chemotherapy in resected stage III colon cancer. Overall survival data suggest a potential detrimental effect with bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy in these patients. On the basis of these and other data, we do not recommend the use of bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of patients with curatively resected stage III colon cancer. Genentech, Roche, and Chugai.

Zanzalintinib is a multitargeted tyrosine-kinase inhibitor that, when combined with atezolizumab, showed promising antitumour activity and manageable toxicity in a phase 1 study. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of zanzalintinib–atezolizumab versus regorafenib in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer. STELLAR-303 is a global, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 121 centres (including hospitals, academic medical centres, and specialised cancer research facilities) in 16 countries. Patients aged 18 years and older with confirmed metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum, who had previously received standard-of-care therapy, and did not have microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) tumours were randomly assigned (1:1) in blocks of four to oral zanzalintinib (100 mg daily) plus intravenous atezolizumab (1200 mg every 3 weeks) or oral regorafenib (160 mg daily on days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle) using an interactive response technology system, stratified by geographical region, RAS status, and presence of liver metastases. Dual primary endpoints were overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and in the subset of patients without liver metastases. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This report is based on a planned overall survival analysis (data cutoff April 30, 2025); the trial is active but not recruiting, and continues to the final overall survival analysis in the subset of patients without liver metastases. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05425940). 1325 patients were screened for eligibility; between Sept 7, 2022, and July 15, 2024, 901 patients were randomly assigned to zanzalintinib–atezolizumab (n=451) or regorafenib (n=450). 528 (59%) patients were male and 373 (41%) were female; 485 (54%) were White, 338 (38%) were Asian, 18 (2%) were Black, 24 (3%) were other races, and 36 (4%) had race not reported. At a median follow-up of 18·0 months (IQR 14·6–21·5), zanzalintinib–atezolizumab showed a significant overall survival benefit versus regorafenib in the ITT population (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·80 [95% CI 0·69–0·93]; p=0·0045) with a median overall survival of 10·9 months (95% CI 9·9–12·1) versus 9·4 months (8·5–10·2). At the interim analysis of overall survival in the subset of patients without liver metastases, the stratified HR for zanzalintinib–atezolizumab versus regorafenib was 0·79 (95% CI 0·61–1·03); p=0·087 (median overall survival 15·9 months [95% CI 13·5–17·6] vs 12·7 months [10·9–15·5]). Grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events occurred in 268 (60%) of 446 patients receiving zanzalintinib–atezolizumab and 161 (37%) of 434 patients receiving regorafenib. There were five (1%) treatment-related deaths in the zanzalintinib–atezolizumab group and one (<1%) in the regorafenib group. STELLAR-303 is the first phase 3 trial to show a significant improvement in overall survival with an immunotherapy-based regimen, zanzalintinib–atezolizumab, in patients with relapsed or refractory metastatic colorectal cancer that is not MSI-H or dMMR. This combination represents a chemotherapy-free treatment option with a novel mechanism of action for heavily pretreated patients in need of improved therapies. Exelixis.

Background Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis and few choices of therapy. For patients with adequate performance status, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are preferred first-line treatment. 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)–based therapy (e.g. FOLFIRI, OFF, or FOLFOX) are often used in patients who previously received gemcitabine-based regimens. A systematic review was conducted of the safety and efficacy of FOLFOX for metastatic pancreatic cancer following prior gemcitabine-based therapy. A Bayesian fixed-effect meta-analysis with adjustment of patient performance status (PS) was conducted to evaluate overall survival (OS) and compare outcomes with nanoliposomal irinotecan combination therapy. Methods PubMed.gov , FDA.gov , ClinicalTrials.gov , congress abstracts, Cochrane.org library, and EMBASE database searches were conducted to identify randomized controlled trials of advanced/metastatic disease, prior gemcitabine-based therapy, and second-line treatment with 5-FU and oxaliplatin. The database search dates were January 1, 1990–June 30, 2019. Endpoints were OS and severe treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Trial-level PS scores were standardized by converting Karnofsky grade scores to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Grade, and overall study-weighted PS was calculated based on weighted average of all patients. Results Of 282 studies identified, 11 randomized controlled trials ( N  = 454) were included in the meta-analysis. Baseline weighted PS scores predicted OS in 10 of the 11 studies, and calculated PS scores of 1.0 were associated with a median OS of 6.3 months (95% posterior interval, 5.4–7.4). After adjusting for baseline PS, FOLFOX had a similar treatment effect profile (median OS, range 2.6–6.7 months) as 5-FU/leucovorin plus nanoliposomal irinotecan therapy (median OS, 6.1 months; 95% confidence interval 4.8–8.9). Neutropenia and fatigue were the most commonly reported Grade 3–4 TRAEs associated with FOLFOX. Conclusions Baseline PS is a strong prognostic factor when interpreting the efficacy of 5-FU and oxaliplatin-based therapy of pancreatic cancer after progression on first-line gemcitabine-based regimens. When baseline PS is considered, FOLFOX has a similar treatment effect as 5-FU and nanoliposomal irinotecan therapy and a comparable safety profile. These findings suggest that 5-FU and oxaliplatin-based therapies remain an acceptable and alternative second-line treatment option for patients with pancreatic cancer and adequate PS (e.g. ECOG 0–1) following gemcitabine treatment.

Purpose Sunitinib, an oral multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that inhibits VEGFR, PDGFR, FLT3, KIT, and RET, is currently approved for the treatment of imatinib-refractory GIST and advanced renal cell carcinoma at a dose of 50 mg daily for 4 weeks followed by a 2-week off period (4/2 schedule). This trial was performed to investigate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of sunitinib 50 mg daily for 2 weeks followed by a 1-week off period (2/1 schedule). Experimental design Twelve patients with advanced refractory malignancies were treated with sunitinib on the 2/1 schedule. Intensive safety monitoring included serial measurements of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Extensive pharmacokinetic sampling was performed on days 1 and 14 of course 1, and on day 14 of courses 2 and 3 to evaluate sunitinib and the SU12662 metabolite. Results Twelve patients received a total of 50 courses with an average (±SD) off-drug period of 11.5 ± 5.7 days. Two patients experienced DLT: one patient had asymptomatic grade 4 elevations in lipase and amylase, and another patient had an asymptomatic grade 2 decline in LVEF in course 1. In total, five patients demonstrated asymptomatic grade 2 declines in LVEF. Other principal effects were similar to previous experience with sunitinib, including fatigue, myelosuppression, skin discoloration, and gastrointestinal effects. Pharmacokinetic studies revealed no significant accumulation of sunitinib or SU12662. One patient with papillary thyroid cancer developed a partial response, and was on study for 16 courses, followed by an additional 18 courses on a continuation protocol. Conclusions The 2/1 schedule of sunitinib 50 mg was tolerable, and no significant drug accumulation was demonstrated. The safety profile on this schedule was consistent with the safety profile of sunitinib when administered on a 4-week on, 2-week off schedule.

SummaryBackground Treatment options for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are limited and checkpoint blockade inhibitors have been disappointing in this disease. Pegilodecakin has demonstrated single agent anti-tumor activity in immune-sensitive tumors. Phase 1 and preclinical data indicate synergy of pegilodecakin with 5-FU and platins. We assessed the safety and activity of pegilodecakin+FOLFOX in patients with PDAC. Methods IVY (NCT02009449) was an open-label phase 1b trial in the United States. Here we report on all enrolled patients from cohort C. Heavily pretreated patients were treated with pegilodecakin (self-administered subcutaneously daily at 2.5, 5, or 10 μg/kg) + 5-flurouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), dosed per manufacturers prescribing information, until tumor progression. Eligible patients had measurable disease per immune-related response criteria (irRC), were ≥ 18 years of age, and had ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were evaluated for primary(safety) and secondary (tumor response per irRC) endpoints. Results From 5 August 2014–12 July 2016, 39 patients enrolled in cohort C. All patients were evaluable for safety. In this advanced population, regimen had manageable toxicities with no immune-related adverse events (irAEs) greater than grade 1. The most common grade 3/4/5 TEAEs were thrombocytopenia (21[53.8%] of 39) and anemia (17[43.6%] of 39). In evaluable PDAC patients, the best overall response of pegilodecakin+FOLFOX was 3(14%) with CRs in 2(9%) patients. Conclusions Pegilodecakin+FOLFOX had an acceptable tolerability profile in PDAC, with no substantial irAEs seen, and promising efficacy with the combination yielding a 2-year OS of 24% (95% CI 10–42). These data led to the phase 3 study with pegilodecakin+FOLFOX as second-line therapy of PDAC (SEQUOIA).

Three sites of intense DOTATATE uptake were found (Fig. 1, arrows): (1) terminal ileum (standard uptake value [SUV], 7.0) without associated soft-tissue abnormality; (2) left glossopharyngeal sulcus and left tongue base (SUV, 6.0) associated with asymmetric fullness at this location, mild left oropharyngeal narrowing, and a 2.1-cm left cervical node; and (3) uncinate process of the pancreas (SUV, 10.0) without an associated mass but with fatty atrophy of the pancreatic body and tail. The location and imaging features of the lesion at the tongue base on CT is highly suspicious of squamous cell carcinoma, which is also positive on Gallium-68 somatostatin analogue PET (2). In the absence of a corresponding pancreatic mass identified by CT or magnetic resonance imaging, the pancreatic head uptake is most likely due to pancreatic polypeptide cell pseudohyperplasia, an often overlooked physiologic condition.

To enable interrogation of tumor HLA LOH as a clinical diagnostic for precision oncology, we developed and validated an assay that detects HLA LOH within the context of an FDA-approved clinical diagnostic test, Tempus xT CDx. Validation was conducted via: (1) analytical evaluation of 17 archival patient samples and 42 cell line admixtures and (2) independent clinical evaluation of LOH prevalence in the HLA-A gene ( HLA-A LOH) across 10,982 patients. To evaluate the prognostic relevance of HLA-A LOH we assessed 256 immunotherapy-treated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. To determine the feasibility of prospectively identifying and enrolling HLA-A LOH patients into a clinical trial, we established BASECAMP-1 (NCT04981119). We observed a positive predictive agreement of 97% and a negative predictive agreement of 100% in samples with ≥ 40% tumor purity. We observed HLA-A LOH in 16.1% of patients (1771/10,982), comparable to previous reports. HLA-A LOH was associated with longer survival among NSCLC adenocarcinoma patients (HR = 0.60, 95% CI [0.37, 0.96], p  = 0.032) with a trend towards shorter survival among squamous cell patients (HR = 1.64, 95% CI [0.80, 3.41], p  = 0.183). In 20 months, we prospectively screened 1720 subjects using the Tempus AWARE program, identifying 26 HLA-A*02 LOH patients at 8 sites, with 14 (54%) enrolled into BASECAMP-1. In conclusion, we developed and validated an investigational assay that detects tumor HLA LOH within an FDA-approved clinical diagnostic test, enabling HLA LOH utilization in diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic applications.

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a heterogeneous disease that can evoke discordant responses to therapy among different lesions in individual patients. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria do not take into consideration response heterogeneity. We explored and developed lesion-based measurement response criteria to evaluate their prognostic effect on overall survival (OS). Patients and Methods: Patients enrolled in 17 first-line clinical trials, who had mCRC with ≥ 2 lesions at baseline, and a restaging scan by 12 weeks were included. For each patient, lesions were categorized as a progressing lesion (PL: > 20% increase in the longest diameter (LD)), responding lesion (RL: > 30% decrease in LD), or stable lesion (SL: neither PL nor RL) based on the 12-week scan. Lesion-based response criteria were defined for each patient as follows: PL only, SL only, RL only, and varied responses (mixture of RL, SL, and PL). Lesion-based response criteria and OS were correlated using stratified multivariable Cox models. The concordance between OS and classifications was measured using the C statistic. Results: Among 10,551 patients with mCRC from 17 first-line studies, varied responses were noted in 51.6% of patients, among whom, 3.3% had RL/PL at 12 weeks. Among patients with RL/SL, 52% had stable disease (SD) by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (median OS (mOS) = 19.9 months) than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.81 (0.76, 0.85), p < 0.001), although a shorter OS than those with RL only (mOS = 25.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.42 (1.32, 1.53), p < 0.001). Among patients with SL/PL, 74% had SD by RECIST 1.1, and they had a longer OS (mOS = 9.0 months) than those with PL only (mOS = 8.0 months, HR (95% CI) = 0.75 (0.57, 0.98), p = 0.040), yet a shorter OS than those with SL only (mOS = 16.8 months, HR (95% CI) = 1.98 (1.80, 2.18), p < 0.001). These associations were consistent across treatment regimen subgroups. The lesion-based response criteria showed slightly higher concordance than RECIST 1.1, although it was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Varied responses at first restaging are common among patients receiving first-line therapy for mCRC. Our lesion-based measurement criteria allowed for better mortality discrimination, which could potentially be informative for treatment decision-making and influence patient outcomes.

Background Dual programmed cell death protein (ligand)-1 (PD-[L]1) and lymphocyte-activation gene-3 (LAG-3) blockade has demonstrated improved anti-tumour response in some advanced solid tumours. CITRINO, a two-part, Phase 1 dose-escalation study, evaluated encelimab (TSR-033; novel anti-LAG-3) monotherapy and in combination in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumours. Methods Part 1 (P1) involved dose escalation (20–720 mg Q2W) of encelimab as monotherapy (P1A/B) and with dostarlimab (500 mg Q3W) in patients with previously treated advanced/metastatic solid tumours (P1C). P2 involved cohort expansion in patients with anti-PD-(L)1-naïve microsatellite stable advanced/metastatic colorectal cancer with recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of encelimab with dostarlimab as third/fourth-line therapy (P2A), or with dostarlimab, bevacizumab and mFOLFOX6/FOLFIRI as second-line therapy (P2B). Objectives included RP2D, safety/tolerability, efficacy, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, and exploratory biomarkers. Results Maximum tolerated encelimab dose was not reached; 720 mg Q2W was used for P2 plus dostarlimab 1000 mg Q6W. One dose-limiting toxicity occurred (Grade 2 myasthenia gravis; P1A). No clinical responses were observed in P1; 1 (3%) and 4 (17%) patients achieved partial response in P2A and 2B, respectively. Conclusions Encelimab has a manageable safety profile as a monotherapy and in tested combinations; however, anti-tumour activity was limited. Clinical trial registration NCT03250832.