Wakabayashi, Masashi

Abstract Background Early tumor shrinkage and depth of response have emerged as potential prognostic indicators in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). However, their associations with overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), and postprogression survival in patients receiving anti–epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies or bevacizumab remain unclear. Methods We analyzed 3219 treatment-naive patients with RAS wild-type metastatic CRC from 8 randomized studies (CRYSTAL, OPUS, PRIME, CAIRO2, CALGB80405, WJOG4407G, ATOM, PARADIGM) in the Aid and Research in Digestive Cancerology database. Early tumor shrinkage was defined as a 20% or more reduction in tumor size at 8 ± 2 weeks, whereas depth of response was assessed by maximum tumor shrinkage at nadir. Cox regression models evaluated the associations of early tumor shrinkage and depth of response with overall survival, PFS, and postprogression survival, adjusting for confounders. A 2-sided test was conducted with a significance level of .05. Results Early tumor shrinkage and depth of response substantially stratified overall survival, PFS, and postprogression survival outcomes across all treatment groups. Early tumor shrinkage positivity was associated with improved overall survival, PFS, and postprogression survival in anti-EGFR and bevacizumab-based therapies, with a trend toward better outcomes in the anti-EGFR group. The depth of response analysis revealed optimal cutoff values of 0.55 for anti-EGFR–based therapy and 0.47 for bevacizumab-based therapy to achieve a median overall survival of approximately 32 months. Conclusions Early tumor shrinkage and depth of response serve as valuable prognostic markers in RAS wild-type metastatic CRC, particularly for patients treated with anti-EGFR antibodies. These findings highlight the potential role of early tumor shrinkage and depth of response in guiding treatment strategies and improving outcomes for patients with CRC.

115 Background: Randomized clinical trials provide the best evidence for the effects of a new treatment. However, the use of a placebo control arm may present practical and ethical concerns for enrolled patients and treating providers. The CRC ARCAD global database includes a total of 1,673 individual patient data (IPD) treated with placebo plus best supportive care in a salvage-line setting for refractory mCRC. By using placebo IPD, we have proposed to construct a synthetic control arm for clinical trials (Yoshino T. et al., Nature Medicine 2023). Methods: From 40,889 IPD from 59 studies in ARCAD mCRC database, 723 placebo pts were selected from 4 placebo-controlled randomized studies in a salvage-line setting (CORRECT, RECOURSE, CONCUR and TERRA). We analyzed the impact of baseline patient characteristics and various prognostic factors on outcome in the placebo control. Results: The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) (95% confidence interval [CI]) were 0.52 (0.40-0.67) for the number of metastatic sites (1 vs 2+), 0.71 (0.59-0.84) for ECOG performance status (PS) (0 vs 1), 0.54 (0.45-0.66) for liver metastases (No vs Yes), 0.54 (0.40-0.71) for peritoneal metastases (No vs Yes), and 0.51 (0.38-0.70) for Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) Score (consisting of albumin level, number of metastatic sites, and LDH level) (0-1 vs 2-3). Conclusions: Number of metastatic sites, ECOG PS, liver metastasis, peritoneal metastasis and RMH Score were significant prognostic factors in patients with mCRC receiving placebo in a salvage-line setting. Further prognostic factors should be investigated to increase the accuracy of the proposed synthetic control arm. [Table: see text]

107 Background: The "No Placebo Initiative" demonstrated that the survivals of patients (pts) receiving placebo in a salvage-line setting, exhibited no significant difference across trials (CORRECT, RECOURSE, CONCUR and TERRA). Therefore, we believe that a nomogram can be generated using the ARCAD database to predict survival of pts who completed standard therapy. Methods: Of 40,889 Individual patient data (IPD) from 59 studies, 723 pts received placebo from 4 randomized studies were pooled. The potential prognostic factors considered include BMI and Age. Imputed datasets were constructed by a multiple imputation method since the original dataset contains some missing values. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models for OS were estimated based on the variables showing clinically and statistically significant by univariate analysis. Prediction performance of the final model was evaluated using the concordance index for survival data and calibration plots. Results: From univariate and multivariate analysis, ECOG performance status, Royal Marsden Hospital score (calculated by albumin level, LDH level, and number of metastatic site), primary site location, liver meta, peritoneal meta were selected as variables. We successfully developed a highly accurate nomogram to predict post-standard treatment prognosis for pts with mCRC. Concordance index for OS was 0.66. Conclusions: Although further validation in other cohorts is needed, this nomogram could be very useful to estimate the survival for clinical practice and enrolling in clinical trials. [Table: see text]

3588 Background: Although anti-EGFR antibody plus doublet chemotherapy has become the standard of first-line treatment for RAS wild-type (wt), left sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the optimal molecular-targeted therapy for RAS wt, right-sided mCRC is not clear. Methods: To evaluate the efficacy between anti-EGFR antibody vs. bevacizumab combination therapy, from 40,889 Individual patient (pt) data from 59 studies in ARCAD mCRC database, 723 pts with RAS wt, right-sided mCRC who received a first-line molecular-targeted therapy with backbone chemotherapy (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI when anti-EGFR antibody combination, and FOLFOX/FOLFIRI/CAPOX/FOLFOXIRI when bevacizumab combination) were selected from 10 randomized studies (FIRE-3, CALGB80495, CRYSTAL, PRIME, CAIRO2, OPUS, TRIBE, TRIBE2, ATOM, and CCOG1201). Primary objective was overall survival (OS), and secondary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR); Hazard ratio (HR) and Odds ratio (OR) were adjusted for ECOG-PS, age, and gender. Propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) as sensitivity analysis were also performed. Secondary analyses were limited to BRAF wt pts. Results: Anti-EGFR antibody and bevacizumab were administrated in 329 and 394 pts, respectively, of whom 162 and 151 pts were BRAF wt, respectively. Baseline characteristics were as follows (anti-EGFR antibody/bevacizumab): median age, 63.0 years both; female, 47.1/46.4%; and ECOG-PS 0, 53.2/65.2%. The OS and PFS were significantly prolonged in pts receiving bevacizumab combination therapy compared to those receiving anti-EGFR antibody combination therapy (Table). These trends were more pronounced when limited to BRAF wt pts (Table). There were no significant differences in ORR for both overall and BRAF wt pts. These results were similar in the sensitivity analysis (Table). Conclusions: For patients with RAS wt or RAS/ BRAF wt, right-sided mCRC, bevacizumab combination therapy is preferred first-line treatment. [Table: see text]

3566 Background: According to the various types of clinical trials for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), ETS and DpR are suggested as the surrogates of OS. Whereas associations between ETS/DpR and OS/PPS in the era of chemotherapy (chemo) +anti-EGFR antibody (ab)/bevacizumab (bev) in 1st line therapy have not been elucidated. Methods: From 40,889 Individual patient data (IPD) from 59 studies in ARCAD mCRC database, 2,138 treatment-naïve pts with RAS wild-type (wt) mCRC were selected from 7 randomized studies (PRIME, CAIRO2, CRYSTAL, OPUS, CALGB80495, WJOG4407G, ATOM) of chemo with/without anti-EGFR ab or bev. The ETS was defined as 20%≥ tumor shrinkage at 8 ± 2wks (ETS+: ≥20%, ETS-: <20%). Multivariate Cox regression models for OS/PPS were performed to investigate associations between ETS+ and ETS- by primary tumor location (overall/left-sided/right-sided), adjusting for potential confounders. DpR was defined as tumor shrinkage at nadir. OS/PPS were evaluated across quartile limits of DpR by multivariate Cox regression models. Results: In pts with overall or left-sided RAS wt mCRC, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of OS/PPS between ETS- and ETS+ for chemo +anti-EGFR ab, chemo +bev, and chemo alone showed great improvement, respectively (Table). In pts with overall or left-sided RAS wt mCRC, HRs of ETS for OS/PPS are higher in pts treated with chemo +anti-EGFR ab compared to those treated with chemo +bev or chemo alone. Compared to the pts with highest quartile (defined as ≥ 75th percentile (Q3)) of DpR, HRs of OS/PPS for lower quartile groups showed upward trends in pts with RAS wt & overall (Table). Conclusions: ETS/DpR in pts with RAS wt mCRC might be a potential prognostic marker of OS/PPS regardless of targeted therapy and primary tumor location. Superior prognostic values of ETS+ are expected in pts treated with anti-EGFR ab. [Table: see text]