KRAS Sequence Variation as Prognostic Marker in Patients With Young- vs Late-Onset Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: The understanding of the association between KRAS sequence variation status and clinical outcomes in colorectal cancer (CRC) has evolved over time. Objective: To characterize the association of age at onset, tumor sidedness, and KRAS sequence variation with survival among patients diagnosed with CRC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum from 2010 through 2015 were included and were classified as having young-onset (YO) cancer if diagnosed between ages 20 to 49 years and late-onset (LO) cancer if diagnosed at age 50 years or older. Data were analyzed from April 2021 through August 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: CRC cause-specific survival (CSS) was summarized using Fine and Gray cumulative incidence and Kaplan-Meier curves. Estimation of subdistribution hazard ratios (sHRs) for the association of KRAS status, age at onset, and tumor location with CRC CSS was conducted using the Fine and Gray competing risk model. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate and compare HRs. Results: Among 21 661 patients with KRAS sequence variation status (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 62.50 [13.78] years; 9784 females [45.2%]), 3842 patients had YO CRC, including 1546 patients with KRAS variants, and 17 819 patients had LO CRC, including 7311 patients with KRAS variants. There was a significant difference in median CSS time between patients with variant vs wild-type KRAS (YO: 3.0 years [95% CI, 2.8-3.3 years] vs 3.5 years [95% CI, 3.3-3.9 years]; P = .02; LO: 2.5 years [95% CI, 2.4-2.7 years] vs 3.4 years [95% CI, 3.3-3.6 years]; P < .001). Tumors with variant compared with wild-type KRAS were associated with higher risk of CRC-related death (YO: sHR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.01-1.18]; P = .03; LO: sHR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.09]; P = .002). Among patients with YO cancer, mortality hazards increased by location, from right (sHR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.88-1.17) to left (sHR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.02-1.29) and rectum (sHR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.99-1.36), but no trend by tumor location was seen for LO cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of patients diagnosed with CRC, KRAS sequence variation was associated with increased mortality among patients with YO and LO tumors. In YO cancer, variant KRAS-associated mortality risk was higher in distal tumors than proximal tumors.

Impact of Breast Reconstruction on Time to Definitive Surgical Treatment, Adjuvant Therapy, and Breast Cancer Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Delays in surgery and adjuvant treatment for breast cancer are associated with decreased survival. However, the time between diagnosis and surgery is rising, partly attributed to the added complexity of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). We sought to investigate time to treatment and survival outcomes in breast cancer patients undergoing IBR. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 2004-2014 California Cancer Registry data for stage 0-III breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy. Time to surgery, adjuvant systemic therapy and radiation therapy, propensity score, and covariate-adjusted overall mortality hazard ratios (HRs) were assessed by IBR status. RESULTS: Of 56,782 patients, 13,738 (24.2%) underwent IBR, with a median follow-up of 68.8 months. Median time between diagnosis and surgery was increased for patients undergoing IBR compared with those without {49 days (interquartile range [IQR] 34-73) vs. 35 days (IQR 21-56), p < 0.001}. IBR did not affect the interval from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation, but prolonged time to endocrine therapy by 5 days (p = 0.014). Significantly lower survival was observed when time to surgery exceeded 120 days (vs. 0-30 days; HR 1.14 [1.02-1.28], p = 0.023), and improved survival with IBR (vs. without; HR 0.67 [0.61-0.74], p < 0.001). The benefit associated with reconstruction persisted for all age groups except age 80 + years, while surgical delay > 120 days demonstrated significantly lower survival in women < 60 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: While IBR delays time to definitive surgery, its use did not substantially affect time to adjuvant treatment or survival outcomes. Further research is ongoing to mitigate the effects of potential selection bias in favor of IBR.

High-Risk Stage II Colon Cancer: Not All Risks Are Created Equal.

INTRODUCTION: Adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended in patients with stage II colon cancer with high-risk features (HRF). However, there is no quantification of the amount of risk conferred by each HRF or the overall survival (OS) benefit gained by chemotherapy based on the risk factor. OBJECTIVE: To assess survival benefits associated with adjuvant chemotherapy among stage II colon cancer patients having one or more HRF [T4 tumors, less than 12 lymph nodes examined (< 12LN), positive margins, high-grade tumor, perineural invasion (PNI), and lymphovascular invasion (LVI)]. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with stage II colon cancer between 2010 and 2013 were identified from California Cancer Registry. Propensity score weighted all-cause mortality hazard ratios (HR) were calculated for combinations of HRF. RESULTS: A total of 5160 stage II colon cancer patients were identified, of which 2398 had at least one HRF and 510 of 2398 (21%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. Compared with patients with a single HRF, presence of any 2 or ≥ 3 HRF showed increasingly poorer survival [HR 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-1.73 and HR 2.50, 95% CI 1.96-3.20, respectively]. Chemotherapy was associated with improved overall survival only among patients with T4 as the single HRF (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34-0.78) or combinations involving T4 as T4/< 12 LN (HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.90), T4/high grade (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.61), and T4/LVI (HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04-0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Not all high-risk features have similar adverse effects on OS. T4 tumors and their combination with other HRF achieve the most survival benefit with adjuvant therapy. Type and number of high-risk features should be taken into consideration when recommending adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer.

Association of Primary Tumor Site With Mortality in Patients Receiving Bevacizumab and Cetuximab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: Biologic therapy (BT) (eg, bevacizumab or cetuximab) is increasingly used to treat metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Recent investigations have suggested that right- or left-sided primary tumor origin affects survival and response to BT. Objective: To evaluate the association of tumor origin with mortality in a diverse population-based data set of patients receiving systemic chemotherapy (SC) and bevacizumab or cetuximab for mCRC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based nonconcurrent cohort study of statewide California Cancer Registry data included all patients aged 40 to 85 years diagnosed with mCRC and treated with SC only or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2014. Patients were stratified by tumor origin in the left vs right sides. Interventions: Treatment with SC or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality hazards by tumor origin (right vs left sides) were assessed for patients receiving SC alone or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab. Subgroup analysis for patients with wild-type KRAS tumors was also performed. Results: A total of 11 905 patients with mCRC (6713 men [56.4%] and 5192 women [43.6%]; mean [SD] age, 60.0 [10.9] years) were eligible for the study. Among these, 4632 patients received SC and BT. Compared with SC alone, SC plus bevacizumab reduced mortality among patients with right- and left-sided mCRC, whereas SC plus cetuximab reduced mortality only among patients with left-sided tumors and was associated with significantly higher mortality for right-sided tumors (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.14-1.51; P < .001). Among patients treated with SC plus BT, right-sided tumor origin was associated with higher mortality among patients receiving bevacizumab (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.25-1.36; P < .001) and cetuximab (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.68-2.12; P < .001) BT, compared with left-sided tumor origin. In patients with wild-type KRAS tumors (n = 668), cetuximab was associated with reduced mortality among only patients with left-sided mCRC compared with bevacizumab (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.90; P = .002), whereas patients with right-sided mCRC had more than double the mortality compared with those with left-sided mCRC (HR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.83-3.25, P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Primary tumor site is associated with response to BT in mCRC. Right-sided primary tumor location is associated with higher mortality regardless of BT type. In patients with wild-type KRAS tumors, treatment with cetuximab benefited only those with left-sided mCRC and was associated with significantly poorer survival among those with right-sided mCRC. Our results underscore the importance of stratification by tumor site for current treatment guidelines and future clinical trials.