The TEOGIC study project: a comprehensive characterization of early onset gastrointestinal cancer in the Northern area of Spain.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal cancers represent one of the most prevalent diseases worldwide. Strikingly, the incidence of Early Onset Gastrointestinal Cancer (EOGIC) has been rising during the last decades and changes in lifestyle and environmental exposure seem to play a role. EOGIC has been defined as a different entity compared to on-average gastrointestinal cancer, with distinct clinical and molecular characteristics. Inherent to the particularities of younger age, there is an unmet need for a tailored approach for the management of these patients. The TEOGIC proposes a comprehensive study to characterize EOGIC patients in the northern of Spain. METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed new diagnosis of colorectal, gastroesophageal and pancreatic adenocarcinoma will be considered for two cohorts: EOGIC (≤ 50 years old) and non-EOGIC (60-75 years old), with a ratio of 1:2. Two hundred and forty patients will be recruited in 4 Public Hospitals from northern Spain. After receiving unified informed consent, demographic and clinical data of the patients will be collected in a REDCap database. Lifestyle related data will be obtained in questionnaires assessing diet, physical activity and the general quality of life of the patients before diagnosis. Biological samples prior to any onco-specific treatment will be obtained for the analyses of circulating inflammatory proteins, gut microbiota, and the proteome of the tumor microenvironment. Histologic characteristics and routine biomarkers will be also collected. Thereafter, data will be integrated and analyzed to assess tumor specific, pan-tumor and sex-associated differential characteristics of EOGIC. DISCUSSION: The underlying risk factors and differential characteristics of EOGIC remain poorly studied, particularly in our geographical area. Although limited by the exploratory nature and the small sample size estimated to be recruited, TEOGIC represents the first attempt to comprehensively characterize these young patients, and thus attend to their special needs. Findings derived from this study could contribute to raise awareness and preventive behaviors in the population. In parallel, molecular studies could lead to the identification of potential novel non-invasive biomarkers and therapeutic targets that would help in the development of the tailored clinical management of these patients, focusing on screening programs for early diagnosis and precision medicine.

Plasmatic BRAF-V600E allele fraction as a prognostic factor in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with BRAF combinatorial treatments.

BACKGROUND: Combination of a BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) and an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), with or without a MEK inhibitor (MEKi), improves survival in BRAF-V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) over standard chemotherapy. However, responses are heterogeneous and there are no available biomarkers to assess patient prognosis or guide doublet- or triplet-based regimens. In order to better characterize the clinical heterogeneity observed, we assessed the prognostic and predictive role of the plasmatic BRAF allele fraction (AF) for these combinations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective discovery cohort including 47 BRAF-V600E-mutant patients treated with BRAFi-anti-EGFR ± MEKi in clinical trials and real-world practice was evaluated. Results were validated in an independent multicenter cohort (n= 29). Plasmatic BRAF-V600E AF cut-off at baseline was defined in the discovery cohort with droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). All patients had tissue-confirmed BRAF-V600E mutations. RESULTS: Patients with high AF have major frequency of liver metastases and more metastatic sites. In the discovery cohort, median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 4.4 and 10.1 months, respectively. Patients with high BRAF AF (≥2%, n = 23) showed worse PFS [hazard ratio (HR) 2.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.55-5.69; P = 0.001] and worse OS (HR 3.28, 95% CI 1.58-6.81; P = 0.001) than low-BRAF AF patients (<2%, n = 24). In the multivariable analysis, BRAF AF levels maintained independent significance. In the validation cohort, high BRAF AF was associated with worse PFS (HR 3.83, 95% CI 1.60-9.17; P = 0.002) and a trend toward worse OS was observed (HR 1.86, 95% CI 0.80-4.34; P = 0.15). An exploratory analysis of predictive value showed that high-BRAF AF patients (n = 35) benefited more from triplet therapy than low-BRAF AF patients (n = 41; PFS and OS interaction tests, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Plasmatic BRAF AF determined by ddPCR is a reliable surrogate of tumor burden and aggressiveness in BRAF-V600E-mutant mCRC treated with a BRAFi plus an anti-EGFR with or without a MEKi and identifies patients who may benefit from treatment intensification. Our results warrant further validation of plasmatic BRAF AF to refine clinical stratification and guide treatment strategies.

Phase I/IIa study evaluating the safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of lucitanib in advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Lucitanib is a potent, oral inhibitor fibroblast growth factor receptor types 1 and 2 (FGFR), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor types 1, 2, and 3 (VEGFR), platelet-derived growth factor receptor types α and ß (PGFRα/ß), which are essential kinases for tumor growth, survival, migration, and angiogenesis. Several tumor types, including breast carcinoma, demonstrate amplification of fibroblast growth factor (FGF)-related genes. There are no approved drugs for molecularly defined FGF-aberrant (FGFR1- or FGF3/4/19-amplified) tumors. METHODS: This open-label phase I/IIa study involved a dose-escalation phase to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended dose (RD), and pharmacokinetics of lucitanib in patients with advanced solid tumors, followed by a dose-expansion phase to obtain preliminary evidence of efficacy in patients who could potentially benefit from treatment (i.e. with tumors harboring FGF-aberrant pathway or considered angiogenesis-sensitive). RESULTS: Doses from 5 to 30 mg were evaluated with dose-limiting toxic effects dominated by vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibition-related toxic effects at the 30 mg dose level (one case of grade 4 depressed level of consciousness and two cases of grade 3 thrombotic microangiopathy). The most common adverse events (all grades, all cohorts) were hypertension (91%), asthenia (42%), and proteinuria (57%). Exposure increased with dose and t½ was 31-40 h, suitable for once daily administration. Seventy-six patients were included. All but one had stage IV; 42% had >3 lines of previous chemotherapy. Sixty-four patients were assessable for response; 58 had measurable disease. Clinical activity was observed at all doses tested with durable Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) partial responses in a variety of tumor types. In the angiogenesis-sensitive group, objective RECIST response rate (complete response + partial response) was 26% (7 of 27) and progression-free survival (PFS) was 25 weeks. In assessable FGF-aberrant breast cancer patients, 50% (6 of 12) achieved RECIST partial response with a median PFS of 40.4 weeks for all treated patients. CONCLUSION: Lucitanib has promising efficacy and a manageable side-effect profile. The spectrum of activity observed demonstrates clinical benefit in both FGF-aberrant and angiogenesis-sensitive populations. A comprehensive phase II program is planned.