Negative hyperselection as a predictive biomarker of benefit from first-line doublets + anti-EGFRs/bevacizumab (bev) in microsatellite stable (pMMR/MSS) <i>RAS</i> and <i>BRAF</i> wild-type (wt) and HER2− metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): An individual patient data pooled analysis of seven clinical trials (CTs).

M Marco Maria Germani (Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy) R Roberto Moretto (Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy) T Tadayoshi Hashimoto (National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan) V Volker Heinemann F Filippo Pietrantonio Y Yoshiaki Nakamura S Sebastian Stintzing F Francesca Bergamo K Kei Muro (Department of Clinical Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Nagoya, Japan) A Alan P. Venook (University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA) L Lena Weiss G Giulia Martini F Francesca Battaglin (Division of Medical Oncology, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA) J Jumpei Soeda (Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Chuo-Ku, Japan) E Eva Blondeaux (U.O. Epidemiologia Clinica, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliera Metropolitana, Genova, Italy) D Davide Ciardiello H Heinz-Josef Lenz T Takayuki Yoshino (National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan) D Dominik Paul Modest C Chiara Cremolini

Abstract

3550 Background: Primary tumor sidedness is nowadays a major driver for the choice of biologics in the first line of pMMR/MSS RAS and BRAF wt mCRC patients (pts). It has been suggested that it might be replaced by a broader molecular profiling, but the evidence provided by individual trials is uncertain for the adoption of different panels and underrepresentation of gene-altered cases. We recently showed that HER2+ status does not predict resistance to first-line doublets + anti-EGFRs. Methods: We collected individual patient data from 7 CTs in first-line mCRC: TRIBE2, TRIPLETE, VALENTINO, CAPRI-2, FIRE-3, PARADIGM and CALGB/SWOG80405. pMMR/MSS RAS and BRAF wt and HER2− cases treated with doublets + anti-EGFRs/bev with available NGS data were included. Hyperselected tumors were those without MET+ status, ALK/ROS1/NTRKs/RET fusions, and HER2/PIK3CAexon20/PTEN/AKT1 mutations. Propensity score adjustment was used to assess clinical outcomes (aHR and aOR) according to first-line doublets + anti-EGFRs/bev. Results: Out of 1198 included pts, 990 (83%) had left-sided and 208 (17%) right-sided tumors. Anti-EGFR based regimens were associated with numerically longer OS (aHR: 0.86) in left-sided tumors, but not in right-sided ones (aHR: 0.98), with an insignificant p for interaction [int] = 0.60). Hyperselected and gene-altered cases were 1077 (91%) and 121 (9%), respectively. The anti-EGFR benefit in OS was magnified in hyperselected pts (aHR: 0.83), with an aHR of 1.16 in gene-altered ones (p int =0.11, adjusted also for tumor sidedness). As reported in the table, there was no interaction between the effect of biologics and primary tumor location either in the hyperselected (p int =0.86) or in the gene-altered group (p int =0.41). Conclusions: Hyperselection outperforms tumor sidedness as a predictive marker of benefit from doublets + anti-EGFR/bev in pMMR/MSS RAS/BRAF wt and HER2− mCRC. The OS benefit from anti-EGFR-based regimens is restricted to pts with hyperselected tumors, independently of primary tumor location. Therefore, in hyperselected mCRC, doublets + anti-EGFRs remain the standard for left-sided pts and may deserve consideration in right-sided ones. Hyperselected Gene-altered Left Right P int Left Right P int Anti-EGFRs N=537 Bev N=365 Anti-EGFRs N=87 Bev N=88 Anti-EGFRs N=57 Bev N=31 Anti-EGFRs N=19 Bev N=14 ORR (%) 81 67 72 65 74 52 58 57 aOR [95% CI] 2.29 [1.67 – 3.14] 1.44 [0.75 – 2.77] 0.24 3.48 [1.29 – 9.97] 1.02 [0.25 – 4.20] 0.23 mPFS* 13.2 12.9 11.1 10.2 11.2 11.3 8.0 8.8 aHR [95% CI] 1.02 [0.88 – 1.19] 1.01 [0.73 – 1.39] 0.73 1.06 [0.63 – 1.77] 1.23 [0.57 – 2.66] 0.75 mOS* 38.8 35.5 34.6 29.2 30.2 27.4 20.2 32.1 aHR [95% CI] 0.84 [0.71 – 0.98] 0.85 [0.61 – 1.17] 0.86 1.05 [0.63 – 1.75] 1.46 [0.66 – 3.22] 0.41 *Months.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 16_suppl
Published June 01, 2026
Pages 3550-3550
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (20)

M

Marco Maria Germani

Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy

R

Roberto Moretto

Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy

T

Tadayoshi Hashimoto

National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan

V

Volker Heinemann

F

Filippo Pietrantonio

Y

Yoshiaki Nakamura

S

Sebastian Stintzing

F

Francesca Bergamo

K

Kei Muro

Department of Clinical Oncology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, Nagoya, Japan

A

Alan P. Venook

University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA

L

Lena Weiss

G

Giulia Martini

F

Francesca Battaglin

Division of Medical Oncology, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA

J

Jumpei Soeda

Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Chuo-Ku, Japan

E

Eva Blondeaux

U.O. Epidemiologia Clinica, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliera Metropolitana, Genova, Italy

D

Davide Ciardiello

H

Heinz-Josef Lenz

T

Takayuki Yoshino

National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa, Japan

D

Dominik Paul Modest

C

Chiara Cremolini