colon cancer: combining molecular diagnostics and the art of medicine in the long term management of...
TRANSCRIPT
Colon cancer: Combining molecular diagnostics and the
art of medicine in the long term management of advanced colon cancer
J. Randolph Hecht, MD
Professor of Clinical Medicine
Director, UCLA GI Oncology Program
David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA
Median Overall Survival in First-Line MCRC: The Golden Age
BSC
0 6 12 18 24Median OS (mo)
~4-6 mo
12-14 mo
~ 15-16 mo
20.3 mo
?
19-20 mo
5-FU/LV
FOLFOX4 or CAPEOX
IFL + bevacizumab
IFL or FOLFIRI
21.5 moFOLFOX6
FOLFIRI + bevacizumab
BSC = best supportive care.*FOLFOX6 followed by FOLFIRI.
24 mo
BSC 5-FU IFL FOLFOX/IRI
BSC 5-FU IFL FOLFOX/IRI
Modern Chemotherapy for Unresectable Metastatic Disease: 50 Years of Work
• Infusional 5-FU is better than bolus (? Capecitabine)
• Irinotecan and Oxaliplatin: ? Equivalent
• 3 drug hypothesis (Grothey)
• Almost all the improvement in mCRC survival is due to better cytotoxic therapies, not biologic therapies
1st Line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
• Irinotecan• IFL > 5-FU
• Oxaliplatin• FOLFOX > 5-FU• FOLFOX > IFL
• FOLFOX = FOLFIRI
Treatment: Chemotherapy
• 1st line therapy: CPT-11+5FU/LV (Saltz)– Median survival 14.8 vs. 12.6 mo.– Similar to Douillard, Lancet 2000
NEJM, 2000
1st Line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
• Irinotecan• IFL > 5-FU
• Oxaliplatin• FOLFOX > 5-FU• FOLFOX > IFL
• FOLFOX = FOLFIRI
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 1 2Years
% A
live
IFL (med 15.0 mo)
FOLFOX4 (med 19.5 mo)
IROX (med 17.4 mo)
FOLFOX4 vs IFL (P=.0001; HR=0.66) IROX vs IFL (P=.04)
N9741: Overall Survival
Goldberg et al. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:23.
1st Line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
• Irinotecan• IFL > 5-FU
• Oxaliplatin• FOLFOX > 5-FU• FOLFOX > IFL
• FOLFOX = FOLFIRI
Colucci, G. et al., J Clin Oncol; 23:4866-4875 2005.
FOLFOX n = 172, 34% RRFOLFIRI n = 164, 31% RRP = 0.60
Copyright © American Society of Clinical Oncology
FOLFOX vs. FOLFIRIin First-Line Metastatic CRC:
Overall Survival
Access to Chemotherapy Improves Survival
Grothey J Clin Oncol 2005;23:9441–9442
Capecitabine
• Converted to systemic 5-FU
• Single agent trials comparable to 5-FU
• CapeOx = FOLFOX (Cassidy)
• ? CapeIRI– Some trials with excessive toxicity– ? Reduced efficacy BICC-C (Fuchs)
Modern Synthesis of Chemotherapy for mCRC 2012
• Combination chemotherapy if possible
• “Continuum of Care”
• Chose for toxicity, not efficacy
• 2nd Line ChemotherapyWhatever they didn’t get 1st line
Molecular Markers
• Colorectal cancers are molecularly heterogeneous– MSI, KRAS, CIMP
– We already do this in other cancers
– Cytotoxics have targets too!
– And yet we treat them all the same!
– Still no validated markers for efficacy or toxicity (sorry Response Genetics!)
Eng at al. BMC Cancer 2010
Advanced Disease: “Standard” Biological Therapies
• Angiogenesis inhibitors– Cancers need new vasculature to grow beyond a certain size
(Folkman)– Multiple angiogenic factors– Hypoxia
• Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antagonists– Member of HER (ErbB) family of tyrosine kinases– Multiple ligands:
TGF-, EGF, amphiregulin, betacellulin, HB-EGF, and epiregulin
– Undergoes hetero and homodimerization– Activation of multiple downstream pathways including Ras, ERK1/2,
PI3K/AKT, and STAT pathways– Leads to proliferation, survival, angiogenesis, and metastasis
The VEGF and VEGF-Receptor Family
• VEGF regulates angiogenesis via interaction with receptor tyrosine kinases – VEGFR-2/KDR and VEGFR-1/Flt-1
VEGFR-1
(Flt-1)
VEGF-A
Receptorisoforms
Ligandisoforms
VEGFR-2
(KDR)
VEGF-B
VEGFR-1s
Angiogenesis
VEGF-E VEGF-C VEGF-D
VEGFR-3
(Flt-4)
Lymph angiogenesis
tumor metastases
Extracellular
Intracellular
VEGF-A 165
NRP-1
PlGF
Agents Targeting the Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF)
Pathway
VEGFR-2VEGFR-1P
PPPP
PPP
Endothelial cellSmall-molecule
VEGFR inhibitors (regorafenib, PTK787,
sunitinib)
Anti-VEGFR antibodies(IMC-1121b)
Soluble VEGF
receptors(aflibercept)
VEGFAnti-VEGF antibodies
(bevacizumab)
First-Line Irinotecan/5-FU/LV + Bevacizumab
Hurwitz H et al. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:2335-2342.
HR = 0.66, P <.001
Per
cen
t S
urv
ivin
g
Duration of Survival (months)
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 10 20 30 40
IFL/bevacizumab IFL/placebo 20.315.6
10.6
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30
Pro
gre
ssio
n-f
ree
Su
rviv
al (
%)
Progression-Free Survival (months)
6.2
(n = 402)
(n = 411)
HR = 0.54, P <.001
How was this information processed by the oncology community?
• FOLFOX/bevacizumab became the standard of care– FOLFOX > IFL– IFL+bev > IFL– Ergo, FOLFOX+bev must be > FOLFOX alone, right?
• What was the FOLFOX/ bevacizumab data?– Giantonio E3200 second line– TREE phase II trials– NO16966
PFS chemotherapy + bevacizumab superiority: primary objective met
0 5 10 15 20 25
Months
PF
S e
stim
ate
HR = 0.83 [97.5% CI 0.72–0.95] (ITT)p = 0.0023
9.48.0
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
FOLFOX+placebo/XELOX+placebo N=701; 547 events FOLFOX+bevacizumab/XELOX+bevacizumab N=699; 513 events
Second Line Bevacizumab: E3200
FOLFOX4 +Bevacizumab
(10 mg/kg, q 2 weeks)
FOLFOX4
Bevacizumab (10mg/kg, q 2 wks)
Previously treated metastatic CRC
PD
PD
PD
• Stratification factors:– ECOG PS: 0 vs 1, 2
– Prior XRT
Giantonio PASCO 2005
E3200: Overall SurvivalP
r o
b a
b i
l i
t y
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
OS (months)
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36
ALIVEALIVEDEADDEAD MEDIANMEDIANTOTALTOTAL
A:FOLFOX4 + bevacizumabA:FOLFOX4 + bevacizumab 289289 246246 4343 12.912.9B:FOLFOX4B:FOLFOX4 290290 257257 3333 10.810.8C:bevacizumabC:bevacizumab 243243 216216 2727 10.210.2
HR = 0.76
A vs B: p = 0.0018
B vs C: p = 0.95
Giantonio BJ, et al. ASCO 2005
Bevacizumab Beyond Progression
• Bevacizumab Approved• “in combination with intravenous 5-fluorouracil–
based chemotherapy, is indicated for first- OR second-line treatment of patients with metastatic carcinoma of the colon or rectum.” (PI)
• What is the data supporting second-line bevacizumab in bevacizumab failures?• BRITE Registry: Nonrandomized!• ML 18147/AIO Trial FOLFIRI +bev > FOLFIRI OS PR 1/26/12
Aflibercept (VEGF-TRAP)• Fully human fusion protein and
soluble recombinant decoy VEGF receptor composed of Domain 2 of VEGFR1 and Domain 3 of VEGFR2 fused to the Fc of IgG1
• Higher affinity for VEGF-A than bevacizumab and also blocks PlGF; T1/2 17 days
• Where has it been?
EFC10262: VELOURPhase III Trial 2nd Line FOLFIRI +/-
VEGF-TRAP (Aflibercept)
Stratification factors:Prior bevacizumab (Y/N)ECOG PS (0 vs 1 vs 2)
1:1
mCRC afterfailure of an oxaliplatin
based regimenR
600 ptsAflibercept 4 mg/kg
IV+ FOLFIRI q 2 weeks
600 pts Placebo + FOLFIRIq 2 weeks
26
30% of patients had prior BEVPI: Allegra
N=1226
VELOUR: Results
Van Cutsem, et al. WCGC 2011
VELOUR Discussion
• 30% had received bev, reportedly similar results
• How does this compare to bev 2nd line?• What about EGFR Ab in KRAS WT:
SPIRITT?• Does bev treatment change the tumor?
Regorafenib: What A Difference a F Makes!
Regorafenib:• Small molecule inhibitor of VEGFR and FGFR-1
• CORRECT Trial Grothey et al. 760 pts 2:1
• Chemorefractory mCRC vs BSC, interim analysis
• PFS: 1.9 v 1.7m (HR=0.493) p<0.000001
• OS: 6.4 v 5.0m (HR=0.773) p=0.0051
• Statistically positive but is it clinically significant?
Overall survival (primary endpoint)
Primary endpoint met prespecified stopping criteria at interim analysis (1-sided p<0.009279 at approximately 74% of events required for final analysis)
1.00
0.50
0.25
0
0.75
200100500 150 300250 400350 450
Days from randomization
Sur
viva
l dis
trib
utio
n fu
nctio
n
Placebo N=255Regorafenib N=505
Median 6.4 mos 5.0 mos95% CI 5.9–7.3 4.4–5.8
Hazard ratio: 0.77 (95% CI: 0.64–0.94)
1-sided p-value: 0.0052
Regorafenib Placebo
Why these results?
• Possibly benefit from long term anti-VEGF inhibition (BRITE)
• Can anti-VEGF therapy worsen post-therapy outcome? (Bevacizumab Addiction)
– Bevacizumab only leads to modest improvement in OS– VEGF inhibition may up-regulate other parts of pathway and other pathways– Preclinical models of increased metastasis with VEGFR-2 inhibition (Rip-
TAG Paez-Ribes, 2009 and sunitinib conditioning Ebos, 2009)– Differences between PFS and OS with PTK/ZK (Hecht ECCO 2007)
Yarden & Sliwkowski Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2001
BOND Trial: Randomized Phase II Study With Cetuximab and Irinotecan
% RR for cetuximab alone (n)
% RR for cetuximab + irinotecan (n) P-value
All patients 11 (111) 23 (218) 0.007
Irinotecan-oxaliplatin
failure11 (44) 24 (80) 0.09
Irinotecan refractory
15 (69) 26 (132 0.07
Cetuximab PI. February 2004
What About Earlier in Treatment?
• 1st Line– High RR in phase II trials– CRYSTAL: FOLFIRI +/- cetuximab
• 2nd Line– EPIC: irinotecan +/- cetuximab PFS not OS
• But– Clearly, only some helped – Significant toxicities, particularly with long-term use in most
Why Do We Try to Predict Response?
• Modestly effective drugs that help a subset
• Toxicity
• Expense
Predictors of Response
Predictors of Response
• NSCLC CancerEGFR mutation, K-ras wt correlate with response
• CRCMutations rare
EGFR staining not helpful (Hecht, 2010)
EGFR copy # (Moroni, 2005)
Ligands: amphiregulin, epiregulin (Ford 2007)
K-ras (Lievre, 2006; DiFiore 2007)
Extracellular
Intracellular
Ligand
EGFR
PI3K
Akt
Ras
Raf
MEK
MAPK
Cell motility
MetastasisAngiogenesis
Proliferation
Cell survivalDNA
PTEN
KRAS as a Biomarker for Panitumumab Response in Metastatic CRC
• PFS log HR significantly different depending on KRAS status (p < .0001)• Percentage decrease in target lesion greater in patients with wild-type KRAS receiving
panitumumab• Approved in EU in KRAS WT
Patients With Mutant KRAS
Meanin Wks
Stratified log rank test: P < .0001
115/124 (93)
Patients With Wild-Type KRAS
1.0
0.9
Pro
po
rtio
n W
ith
PF
S
0.8
0.70.60.50.4
0.3
0.20.1
00 2 4 6 8 10
Events/N (%)Medianin Wks
Pmab + BSCBSC alone
114/119 (96)
12.37.3
19.09.3
HR: 0.45 (95% CI: 0.34–0.59)
12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 3436 38 4042 44 46 48 50 52
Weeks
Pro
po
rtio
n W
ith
PF
S
1.0
0.90.8
0.70.60.50.4
0.30.20.1
00 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 2830 32 3436 38 4042 44 46 48 50
Weeks
Pmab + BSCBSC alone Mean
in Wks
76/84 (90)
Events/N (%)Medianin Wks
95/100 (95)
7.47.3
9.910.2
HR: 0.99 (95% CI: 0.73–1.36)
52
Amado et al., JCO 2008.
EGFR Abs Earlier in Treatment in the Era of KRAS
• CRYSTAL positive, but others (COIN, NORDIC VII) negative
• Second line trials (EPIC, 181) negative for OS
• SPIRITT: FOLFIRI+bev vs FOLFIRI+Pmab 2012
• Role in second line remains unclear
Other Biomarkers For Anti-EGFR Abs?
BRAF
KRAS G13D
BRAF Background
• BRAF is a serine/threonine kinase downstream of KRAS
• V600E mutation is found in 5-10% of CRCs• Mutation mutually exclusive with KRAS mut• Correlatated with poor prognosis
– Ogino, Gut, 2009– Tol, NEJM, 2009 (letter)
• Retrospective studies correlated with lack of response– Di Nicolantonio, JCO, 2008
Does BRAF Mutation Identify Nonresponders?
Extracellular
Intracellular
Ligand
EGFR
PI3K
Akt
Ras
Raf
MEK
MAPK
Cell motility
MetastasisAngiogenesis
Proliferation
Cell survivalDNA
PTEN
Clinical efficacy in KRAS wild-type tumors by BRAF mutation status: CRYSTAL
KRAS wt/BRAF wt (n=566)
KRAS wt/BRAF mt (n=59)
FOLFIRI
(n= 289)
Cetuximab +FOLFIRI (n= 277)
FOLFIRI
(n=33)
Cetuximab +FOLFIRI
(n=26)
Median OS mo[95% CI]
21.6[20.0–24.9]
25.1[22.5–28.7]
10.3[8.4–14.9]
14.1[8.5–18.5]
HR [95% CI]p-valuea
0.830 [0.687–1.004]0.0549
0.908 [0.507–1.624]0.7440
Median PFS mo[95% CI]
8.8[7.6–9.4]
10.9[9.4–11.8]
5.6[3.5–8.1]
8.0[3.6–9.1]
HR [95% CI]p-valuea
0.679 [0.533–0.864]0.0016
0.934 [0.425–2.056]0.8656
OR rate (%)[95% CI]
42.6[36.8–48.5]
61.0[55.0–66.8]
15.2[5.1–31.9]
19.2[6.6–39.4]
p-valueb <0.0001 0.9136
CI, confidence interval; OR, best overall response; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; mo, months; mt, mutant; wt, wild-type
aStratified log-rank test; bCochran-Mantel-Haenszel test
Van Cutsem GI ASCO 2010
KRAS G13D mutations: Effect on outcome in pts with mCRC treated with First Line Chemotherapy +/- cetuximab
Tejpar et al . Abs 3511 ASCO 2011.
Once Again Larger Numbers Needed: Peeters GI ASCO 2012
• Analysis of PRIME, 181, 408 data sets: 2606 pts!
• 40-45% KRAS codon 12 or 13 mutations
• No allele prognostic for PFS or OS
• G13D worse prognosis in PRIME
• Would not treat G13D pts with an anti-EGFR Ab
What is the treatment of mCRC in 2012?
• 1st Line– FP/Ox +bevacizumab (timing of reintroduction?)– FOLFIRI+ bevacizumab
• 2nd Line– If FP/OX+bevacizumab 1st line
• FOLFIRI+bevacizumab• ? FOLFIRI+aflibercept• (FP)+IRI+panitumumab or cetuximab (KRAS WT)
– IF FOLFIRI+bevacizumab 1st line• FP/Ox+bevacizumab• (FP)+IRI+panitumumab or cetuximab (KRAS WT)
• 3rd Line (KRAS WT)– Whatever wasn’t used
• Salvage– ? Regorafenib