Clinical Validation of a Multiplex Kit for RAS Mutations in Colorectal Cancer: Results of the RASKET (RAS KEy Testing) Prospective, Multicenter Study

AbstractBackgroundRAS (KRAS and NRAS) testing is required to predict anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) treatment efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Although direct sequencing (DS) with manual microdissection (MMD) is widely used, a diagnostic kit providing rapid detections of RAS mutations would be clinically beneficial. We evaluated the MEBGENTM RASKET KIT (RASKET KIT), a multiplex assay using PCR-reverse sequence specific oligonucleotide and xMAP® technology to concurrently detect exon 2, 3, and 4 RAS mutations in a short turnaround time (4.5h/96-specimens).MethodsFormalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues were obtained from 308 consenting patients with histologically-confirmed CRC at six hospitals in Japan. For the RASKET KIT, we used only 50–100ng DNA from each FFPE specimen not processed by MMD. The primary endpoint was the concordance rate between RAS mutations identified with the RASKET KIT and two reference assays (DS with MMD and TheraScreen® K-RAS Mutation Kit). As the secondary endpoints, we evaluated the concordance rate between DS and the RASKET KIT for RAS mutations in the wild-type KRAS exon 2 population and the genotyping performance of the RASKET KIT compared with DS.FindingsAmong 307 analyzable specimens, the reference assays detected 140 (45.6%, 140/307) RAS mutations: 111 KRAS exon 2 and 29 other (minor) RAS mutations. The RASKET KIT detected 143 (46.6%, 143/307) mutations: 114 KRAS exon 2 and 29 minor RAS mutations. The between-method concordance rate was 96.7% (297/307) (95% CI: 94.1–98.4%). Minor RAS mutations were detected in 15.7% (30/191) of the wild-type KRAS exon 2 population (n=191); the concordance rate was 98.4% (188/191) (95% CI: 95.5–99.7%). The concordance rate of RAS genotyping was 100% (139/139) (95% CI: 97–100%).InterpretationThe RASKET KIT provides rapid and precise detections of RAS mutations and consequently, quicker and more effective anti-EGFR therapy for CRC (Study ID: UMIN000011784).FundingMedical & Biological Laboratories Co., Ltd. (MBL). MBL had roles in study design, data collection, data analysis, and writing of the report for the study

Convolutional neural network can recognize drug resistance of single cancer cells

It is known that single or isolated tumor cells enter cancer patients' circulatory systems. These circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are thought to be an effective tool for diagnosing cancer malignancy. However, handling CTC samples and evaluating CTC sequence analysis results are challenging. Recently, the convolutional neural network (CNN) model, a type of deep learning model, has been increasingly adopted for medical image analyses. However, it is controversial whether cell characteristics can be identified at the single-cell level by using machine learning methods. This study intends to verify whether an AI system could classify the sensitivity of anticancer drugs, based on cell morphology during culture. We constructed a CNN based on the VGG16 model that could predict the efficiency of antitumor drugs at the single-cell level. The machine learning revealed that our model could identify the effects of antitumor drugs with ~0.80 accuracies. Our results show that, in the future, realizing precision medicine to identify effective antitumor drugs for individual patients may be possible by extracting CTCs from blood and performing classification by using an AI system

Is the Importance of Achieving Stable Disease Different between Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Cytotoxic Agents in the Second-Line Setting for Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer?

BackgroundIt is controversial whether achieving stable disease leads to a survival benefit and whether the importance of achieving stable disease differs between cytotoxic agents and molecular targeted agents. To examine these questions, the authors retrospectively reviewed phase II and III studies in the second-line setting for advanced non-small cell lung cancer using epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and cytotoxic agents separately.MethodsThe authors chose 45 trials for the chemotherapy group and nine for the EGFR TKI group by searching the PubMed database. All nine trials in the EGFR TKI group concern gefitinib and erlotinib.ResultsThe median survival time increased 0.0375 month with each 1% increase in stable disease rate (p = 0.039), and each 1% increase in response rate resulted in 0.0744 (p < 0.001) month of median survival time in the analysis combined with both cytotoxic agents and EGFR TKIs. Main and interaction terms for EGFR TKI treatment were not statistically significant. With respect to time to progression, only response rate showed a statistically significant relationship with survival.ConclusionsTo obtain response seems to be more important than to achieve stable disease for both cytotoxic agents and EGFR TKIs, although achieving stable disease is still valuable. The relationship between survival and response or stable disease appears similar for cytotoxic agents and EGFR TKIs

Pancreatic Cancer Research beyond DNA Mutations

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is caused by genetic mutations in four genes: KRAS proto-oncogene and GTPase (KRAS), tumor protein P53 (TP53), cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A), and mothers against decapentaplegic homolog 4 (SMAD4), also called the big 4. The changes in tumors are very complex, making their characterization in the early stages challenging. Therefore, the development of innovative therapeutic approaches is desirable. The key to overcoming PDAC is diagnosing it in the early stages. Therefore, recent studies have investigated the multifaced characteristics of PDAC, which includes cancer cell metabolism, mesenchymal cells including cancer-associated fibroblasts and immune cells, and metagenomics, which extend to characterize various biomolecules including RNAs and volatile organic compounds. Various alterations in the KRAS-dependent as well as KRAS-independent pathways are involved in the refractoriness of PDAC. The optimal combination of these new technologies is expected to help treat intractable pancreatic cancer

Tislelizumab vs Sorafenib as First-Line Treatment for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality, and additional first-line treatments are needed. The programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor tislelizumab demonstrated efficacy and a tolerable safety profile as second-line HCC treatment. // Objective: To investigate efficacy and safety of tislelizumab vs sorafenib tosylate for first-line treatment of unresectable HCC. // Design, Setting, and Participants: The open-label, global, multiregional phase 3 RATIONALE-301 randomized clinical trial enrolled systemic therapy–naive adults with histologically confirmed HCC, Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C disease, disease progression following (or patient was not amenable to) locoregional therapy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, and Child-Pugh class A, between December 27, 2017, and October 2, 2019. Data cutoff was July 11, 2022. // Intervention: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive tislelizumab, 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks, or sorafenib tosylate, 400 mg orally twice daily. // Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included objective response rate, progression-free survival, duration of response, and safety. // Results: A total of 674 patients were included in the analysis (570 men [84.6%]; median age, 61 years [range, 23-86 years]). As of July 11, 2022, minimum study follow-up was 33 months. The primary end point of OS noninferiority of tislelizumab vs sorafenib was met in the intention-to-treat population (n = 674); median overall survival was 15.9 (95% CI, 13.2-19.7) months vs 14.1 (95% CI, 12.6-17.4) months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85 [95.003% CI, 0.71-1.02]), and superiority of tislelizumab vs sorafenib was not met. The objective response rate was 14.3% (n = 49) for tislelizumab vs 5.4% (n = 18) for sorafenib, and median duration of response was 36.1 (95% CI, 16.8 to not evaluable) months vs 11.0 (95% CI, 6.2-14.7) months, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 2.1 (95% CI, 2.1-3.5) months vs 3.4 (95% CI, 2.2-4.1) months with tislelizumab vs sorafenib (HR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.92-1.33]). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) was 96.2% (325 of 338 patients) for tislelizumab and 100% (n = 324) for sorafenib. Grade 3 or greater treatment-related AEs were reported in 75 patients (22.2%) receiving tislelizumab and 173 (53.4%) receiving sorafenib. There was a lower incidence of treatment-related AEs leading to drug discontinuation (21 [6.2%] vs 33 [10.2%]) and drug modification (68 [20.1%] vs 187 [57.7%]) with tislelizumab vs sorafenib. // Conclusions and Relevance: In RATIONALE-301, tislelizumab demonstrated OS benefit that was noninferior vs sorafenib, with a higher objective response rate and more durable responses, while median progression-free survival was longer with sorafenib. Tislelizumab demonstrated a favorable safety profile vs sorafenib. // Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0341277

Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of the afucosylated, humanized anti-EPHA2 antibody DS-8895a: a first-in-human phase I dose escalation and dose expansion study in patients with advanced solid tumors

BACKGROUND:Erythropoietin-producing hepatocellular receptor A2 (EPHA2) is overexpressed on the cell surface in many cancers and predicts poor prognosis. DS-8895a is a humanized anti-EPHA2 IgG1 monoclonal antibody afucosylated to enhance antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity activity. We conducted a two-step, phase I, multicenter, open-label study to determine the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of DS-8895a in patients with advanced solid tumors.METHODS:Step 1 was a dose escalation cohort in advanced solid tumor patients (six dose levels, 0.1-20 mg/kg) to determine Step 2 dosing. Step 2 was a dose expansion cohort in EPHA2-positive esophageal and gastric cancer patients. DS-8895a was intravenously administered every 2 weeks for the duration of the study, with a 28-day period to assess dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Safety, pharmacokinetics, tumor response, and potential biomarkers were evaluated.RESULTS:Thirty-seven patients (Step 1: 22, Step 2: 15 [9: gastric cancer, 6: esophageal cancer]) were enrolled. Although one DLT (Grade 4 platelet count decreased) was observed in Step 1 (dose level 6, 20 mg/kg), the maximum tolerated dose was not reached; the highest dose (20 mg/kg) was used in Step 2. Of the 37 patients, 24 (64.9%) experienced drug-related adverse events (AEs) including three (8.1%) with Grade ≥ 3 AEs. Infusion-related reactions occurred in 19 patients (51.4%) but were manageable. All patients discontinued the study (evident disease progression, 33; AEs, 4). Maximum and trough serum DS-8895a concentrations increased dose-dependently. One gastric cancer patient achieved partial response and 13 patients achieved stable disease. Serum inflammatory cytokines transiently increased at completion of and 4 h after the start of DS-8895a administration. The proportion of CD16-positive natural killer (NK) cells (CD3-CD56+CD16+) decreased 4 h after the start of DS-8895a administration, and the ratio of CD3-CD56+CD137+ to CD3-CD56+CD16+ cells increased on day 3.CONCLUSIONS:Twenty mg/kg DS-8895a infused intravenously every 2 weeks was generally safe and well tolerated in patients (n = 21) with advanced solid tumors. The exposure of DS-8895a seemed to increase dose-dependently and induce activated NK cells

Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of sorafenib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer

Objectives Unsatisfactory efficacy of current treatments for advanced lung cancer has prompted the search for new therapies, with sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor, being one candidate drug. This phase I trial was conducted to evaluate drug safety and pharmacokinetics as well as tumor response of sorafenib in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods Eligible patients received paclitaxel (200 mg/m2) and carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC]of 6 mg min mL−1) on day 1 and sorafenib (400 mg, twice daily) on days 2 through 19 of a 21-day cycle. Results Four of the initial six patients (cohort 1) experienced dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), resulting in amendment of the treatment protocol. An additional seven patients (cohort 2) were enrolled, two of whom developed DLTs. DLTs included erythema multiforme, hand-foot skin reaction, and elevated plasma alanine aminotransferase in cohort 1 as well as gastrointestinal perforation at a site of metastasis and pneumonia in cohort 2. Most adverse events were manageable. One complete and six partial responses were observed among the 12 evaluable patients. Coadministration of the three drugs had no impact on their respective pharmacokinetics. Conclusion The present study confirmed that sorafenib at 400 mg once daily in combination with carboplatin AUC 5 mg min mL−1 and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 is feasible in Japanese patients with advanced NSCLC. The results of this study also showed that this combination therapy had encouraging antitumor activity and was not associated with relevant pharmacokinetic interaction in Japanese NSCLC patients