Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Consensus Molecular Subtypes as Biomarkers of First-Line Treatment in <i>RAS</i> Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.
meta_analysis · Level I
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 41252656.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1200/JCO-25-00596.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Consensus molecular subtypes (CMSs) of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are debatable biomarkers. An individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was performed to test for impact on objective response rates (ORRs), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and treatment interaction. IPD (<i>RAS</i> wild-type [WT] tumors treated per protocol [fluorouracil/capecitabine, irinotecan/oxaliplatin, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor {VEGF}/anti-epidermal growth factor receptor {EGFR} antibodies] and with evaluable CMSs) were collected from five trials identified in PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, and proceedings of ASCO/European Society for Medical Oncology: FIRE1 (no identifier), FIRE3 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00433927), XELAVIRI (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01249638), PanaMa (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01991873), and TRIBE2 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02339116). The one-step IPD meta-analysis approach assessed data taking the clustering of patients in the studies into account (ORR: generalized estimating equations models; PFS/OS: Cox models). Seven hundred ninety patients were included: CMS1, n = 77 (9.7%); CMS2, n = 345 (43.7%); CMS3, n = 74 (9.4%); and CMS4, n = 294 (37.2%). Between-study heterogeneity was negligible (variance < 1 × 10<sup>-6</sup>). Compared with CMS1, CMS2 and CMS4 tumors had numerically higher odds ratios (OR) for ORR (CMS2: OR, 1.668 [95% CI, 0.982 to 2.836]; <i>P</i> = .059; CMS4: OR, 1.369 [95% CI, 0.874 to 2.146]; <i>P</i> = .170), and longer PFS (CMS2: hazard ratios [HR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.85]; <i>P</i> = .002; CMS4: HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.50 to 0.91]; <i>P</i> = .009) and OS (CMS2: HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.80]; <i>P</i> < .001; CMS4: HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.49 to 0.92]; <i>P</i> = .01). The use of anti-EGFR versus anti-VEGF antibodies meaningfully improved PFS (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.46 to 0.97]; <i>P</i> = .03) and OS (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.72]; <i>P</i> < .001) in CMS4 tumors and was consistently observed for CMS4 <i>RAS</i>/<i>BRAF</i> WT (HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.83]; <i>P</i> = .004) or microsatellite stable status (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.86]; <i>P</i> = .01). The interaction test of antibody treatment with CMSs was significant for PFS (<i>P</i> < .001) and OS (<i>P</i> < .001) in all patients and for OS in patients with <i>RAS</i>/<i>BRAF</i> WT tumors (<i>P</i> = .02). CMS4 might be an additional biomarker of anti-EGFR treatment efficacy in <i>RAS</i> (and <i>BRAF</i>) WT mCRC.
Medical subject headings
- Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
- Biomarkers, Tumor
- Colorectal Neoplasms
- ras Proteins