Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Topic or Issue
Home Search/Browse Subscriptions PDA Services My JCO Customer Service

Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2007 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting Edition).
Vol 25, No 18S (June 20 Supplement), 2007: 4132
© 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRights & Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by De Roock, W.
Right arrow Articles by Tejpar, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by De Roock, W.
Right arrow Articles by Tejpar, S.

Abstract

KRAS mutations preclude tumor shrinkage of colorectal cancers treated with cetuximab

W. De Roock, J. De Schutter, G. De Hertogh, M. Janssens, B. Biesmans, N. Personeni, K. Geboes, C. Verslype, E. Van Cutsem and S. Tejpar

KUL, Leuven, Belgium; University Hospitals KUL, Leuven, Belgium; Independent biostatistician, Mechelen, Belgium

4132

Background: A recent study has shown that the presence of a KRAS mutation is associated with the absence of objective response to cetuximab (CTX) in advanced colorectal cancers (mCRC). Our hypothesis was that CTX cannot induce any tumor shrinkage in KRAS mutant mCRC. Methods: We analyzed KRAS exon 2 mutation status by Taqman, PCR and sequencing on 37 available tumor samples from patients with mCRC progressive on chemotherapy. Twenty patients received CTX combined with irinotecan (BOND) and 17 received CTX in monotherapy (7 BOND, 10 SALVAGE). We measured the change in tumor size between baseline and the consecutive evaluations. At week 12 and at week 24, we statistically tested the change from baseline between the groups with KRAS wild type (WT) and KRAS mutation (MUT) using the t-test. RECIST criteria for tumor response were used. Results: 3 patients had progressive disease (PD), 26 stable disease (SD), 8 partial response (PR) and 0 complete response. A KRAS MUT was found in 17 tumors (46%): 2 in PD (66.7%), 15 in SD (57.7%) and none in PR patients (p<0.01; responders vs. non responders). At 12 weeks there was a mean decrease in tumor size of 23.1% (SE=7.38) in the KRAS WT and an increase of 2.6% (SE=4.13) in the KRAS MUT mCRC. At 24 weeks KRAS WT and MUT mCRC had a 45.8% (SE=8.61) and a 1.3% (SE=6.67) mean decrease respectively (p= 0.0081 at 12 weeks; p=0.0015 at 24 weeks). The mean tumor size of the KRAS WT did not decrease further after 24 weeks. In the subgroup of SD tumor size regression was observed but only in WT patients. Mean time to progression was 32 (range 12–96) and 30 weeks (range 12–84) for KRAS WT (SD + PR) and MUT respectively. Conclusion: We confirmed KRAS MUT precludes objective response to CTX in mCRC. In addition we found tumor size regression in SD patients being restricted to WT patients. We observed rapid onset of these differences suggesting an important role of KRAS MUT status in early tumor shrinkage. However the onset of progression was not different according to KRAS MUT status.


Author Disclosure
Employment or Leadership Consultant or Advisory Stock Ownership Honoraria Research Expert Testimony Other Remuneration

Merck Merck

Abstract presentation from the 2007 ASCO Annual Meeting




About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions

Copyright © 2007 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online