Literature DB >> 22972628

KRAS p.G13D mutation and codon 12 mutations are not created equal in predicting clinical outcomes of cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chen Mao1, Ya-Fang Huang, Zu-Yao Yang, Da-Yong Zheng, Jin-Zhang Chen, Jin-Ling Tang.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine whether patients who had metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with the v-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) p.G13D mutation (an amino acid substitution at position 13 in KRAS from a glycine to an aspartic acid) and received cetuximab treatment had better clinical outcomes than patients who had mCRC tumors with KRAS codon 12 mutations.
METHODS: Relevant studies were identified by a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Chinese Biomedical Database, and Wan Fang Digital Journals from inception to October 2011. The primary clinical outcomes included the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The pooled relative risk (RR) or hazard ratio (HR) was estimated by using fixed-effects or random-effects models according to heterogeneity between studies.
RESULTS: Ten studies were considered eligible that included 1487 patients with mCRC. Patients who had tumors with the KRAS p.G13D mutation had a significantly higher ORR (10 studies; RR, 1.642; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.131-2.384), longer PFS (1 study; HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.81), and longer OS (1 study; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33-0.80) than patients who had tumors with KRAS codon 12 mutations. Compared with patients who had KRAS wild-type tumors, patients with the p.G13D mutation had a significantly lower ORR (9 studies; RR, 0.540; 95% CI, 0.381-0.765) and nonsignificantly shorter PFS (1 study; HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.68-1.45) and OS (1 study; HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.66-1.54).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who had mCRC with the KRAS p.G13D mutation appeared to benefit more from cetuximab than patients who had tumors with KRAS codon 12 mutations. However, because of the limited sample sizes in the current meta-analysis, these results should be interpreted with caution.
Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22972628     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27804

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  40 in total

1.  Arginine methylation of EGFR: a new biomarker for predicting resistance to anti-EGFR treatment.

Authors:  Krittiya Korphaisarn; Chao-Kai Chou; Wei-Ya Xia; Callisia N Clarke; Riham Katkhuda; Jennifer S Davis; Kanwal Ps Raghav; Hsin-Wei Liao; Ji-Yuan Wu; David G Menter; Dipen M Maru; Mien-Chie Hung; Scott Kopetz
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 6.166

Review 2.  Anti-EGFR and anti-VEGF agents: important targeted therapies of colorectal liver metastases.

Authors:  Qing-Yang Feng; Ye Wei; Jing-Wen Chen; Wen-Ju Chang; Le-Chi Ye; De-Xiang Zhu; Jian-Min Xu
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 3.  KRAS Alleles: The Devil Is in the Detail.

Authors:  Kevin M Haigis
Journal:  Trends Cancer       Date:  2017-09-12

Review 4.  Standard chemotherapy with cetuximab for treatment of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Xin-Xiang Li; Lei Liang; Li-Yong Huang; San-Jun Cai
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-06-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 5.  Current evidence and controversies in the incorporation of biologics for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Kristen K Ciombor; Richard M Goldberg
Journal:  Hepat Oncol       Date:  2014-09-09

Review 6.  Molecular Biomarkers for the Evaluation of Colorectal Cancer: Guideline From the American Society for Clinical Pathology, College of American Pathologists, Association for Molecular Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Authors:  Antonia R Sepulveda; Stanley R Hamilton; Carmen J Allegra; Wayne Grody; Allison M Cushman-Vokoun; William K Funkhouser; Scott E Kopetz; Christopher Lieu; Noralane M Lindor; Bruce D Minsky; Federico A Monzon; Daniel J Sargent; Veena M Singh; Joseph Willis; Jennifer Clark; Carol Colasacco; R Bryan Rumble; Robyn Temple-Smolkin; Christina B Ventura; Jan A Nowak
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2017-02-06       Impact factor: 5.568

7.  KRAS G13D Mutation and Sensitivity to Cetuximab or Panitumumab in a Colorectal Cancer Cell Line Model.

Authors:  Shalini Sree Kumar; Timothy J Price; Omar Mohyieldin; Matthew Borg; Amanda Townsend; Jennifer E Hardingham
Journal:  Gastrointest Cancer Res       Date:  2014-01

8.  Low percentage of KRAS mutations revealed by locked nucleic acid polymerase chain reaction: implications for treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Mariella Dono; Carlotta Massucco; Silvana Chiara; Claudia Sonaglio; Marco Mora; Anna Truini; Giannamaria Cerruti; Gabriele Zoppoli; Alberto Ballestrero; Mauro Truini; Manlio Ferrarini; Simona Zupo
Journal:  Mol Med       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 6.354

9.  PRMT1-mediated methylation of the EGF receptor regulates signaling and cetuximab response.

Authors:  Hsin-Wei Liao; Jung-Mao Hsu; Weiya Xia; Hung-Ling Wang; Ying-Nai Wang; Wei-Chao Chang; Stefan T Arold; Chao-Kai Chou; Pei-Hsiang Tsou; Hirohito Yamaguchi; Yueh-Fu Fang; Hong-Jen Lee; Heng-Huan Lee; Shyh-Kuan Tai; Mhu-Hwa Yang; Maria P Morelli; Malabika Sen; John E Ladbury; Chung-Hsuan Chen; Jennifer R Grandis; Scott Kopetz; Mien-Chie Hung
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2015-11-16       Impact factor: 14.808

10.  A Phase II Efficacy and Safety, Open-Label, Multicenter Study of Imprime PGG Injection in Combination With Cetuximab in Patients With Stage IV KRAS-Mutant Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Neil H Segal; Purvi Gada; Neil Senzer; Michele A Gargano; Myra L Patchen; Leonard B Saltz
Journal:  Clin Colorectal Cancer       Date:  2016-02-13       Impact factor: 4.481

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.