Wei-Dong Shen1, Hong-Lin Chen1, Peng-Fei Liu1. 1. 1 Department of Gastroenterology, the Affiliated Jiangyin Hospital of Nantong University, Shoushan Road 163#, Jiangyin 214400, China ; 2 Nantong University, Qixiu Road 19#, Nantong 226019, China .
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) have already shown the therapeutic effectiveness in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). But many patients resist to the treatment. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess EGFR gene copy number (GCN) as a candidate predictive biomarker for resistance to anti-EGFR MoAbs in mCRC treatment. METHODS: Systematic computerized searches of the PubMed, EMBase and Cochrane Library were performed. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). The second endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The pooled odd ratio (OR) and pooled sensitivity, specificity, and summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) for ORR were estimated. The pooled hazard ratios (HR) for PFS and OS were also calculated. RESULTS: Fourteen studies with 1,021 patients were included. Increased EGFR GCN was associated with increased ORR (OR=6.905; 95% CI: 4.489-10.620). It was also found in wild-type KRAS mCRC patients, with the pooled OR of 8.133 (95% CI: 4.316-15.326). GCN has medium value for predicting ORR, with the pooled sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73-0.84), the pooled specificity of 0.59 (95% CI: 0.55-0.62). In wild-type KRAS mCRC patients, the sensitivity and the specificity were 0.80 (95% CI: 0.70-0.87) and 0.60 (95% CI: 0.53-0.66), respectively. Increased EGFR GCN was associated with increased PFS (HR=0.557; 95% CI: 0.382-0.732) and OS (HR=0.579; 95% CI: 0.422-0.737). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that EGFR GCN represents a predictive biomarker for tumor response in mCRC patients treated with MoAbs regardless of KRAS mutation. mCRC patients with increased EGFR GCN are more likely to have a better response, PFS, and OS when treated with cetuximab or panitumumab.
OBJECTIVE: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) have already shown the therapeutic effectiveness in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). But many patients resist to the treatment. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess EGFR gene copy number (GCN) as a candidate predictive biomarker for resistance to anti-EGFR MoAbs in mCRC treatment. METHODS: Systematic computerized searches of the PubMed, EMBase and Cochrane Library were performed. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). The second endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The pooled odd ratio (OR) and pooled sensitivity, specificity, and summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) for ORR were estimated. The pooled hazard ratios (HR) for PFS and OS were also calculated. RESULTS: Fourteen studies with 1,021 patients were included. Increased EGFR GCN was associated with increased ORR (OR=6.905; 95% CI: 4.489-10.620). It was also found in wild-type KRAS mCRC patients, with the pooled OR of 8.133 (95% CI: 4.316-15.326). GCN has medium value for predicting ORR, with the pooled sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73-0.84), the pooled specificity of 0.59 (95% CI: 0.55-0.62). In wild-type KRAS mCRC patients, the sensitivity and the specificity were 0.80 (95% CI: 0.70-0.87) and 0.60 (95% CI: 0.53-0.66), respectively. Increased EGFR GCN was associated with increased PFS (HR=0.557; 95% CI: 0.382-0.732) and OS (HR=0.579; 95% CI: 0.422-0.737). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that EGFR GCN represents a predictive biomarker for tumor response in mCRC patients treated with MoAbs regardless of KRAS mutation. mCRC patients with increased EGFR GCN are more likely to have a better response, PFS, and OS when treated with cetuximab or panitumumab.
Entities:
Keywords:
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC); epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR); gene copy number (GCN); meta-analysis
Authors: J-P Spano; C Lagorce; D Atlan; G Milano; J Domont; R Benamouzig; A Attar; J Benichou; A Martin; J-F Morere; M Raphael; F Penault-Llorca; J-L Breau; R Fagard; D Khayat; P Wind Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Astrid Lièvre; Jean-Baptiste Bachet; Delphine Le Corre; Valérie Boige; Bruno Landi; Jean-François Emile; Jean-François Côté; Gorana Tomasic; Christophe Penna; Michel Ducreux; Philippe Rougier; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Pierre Laurent-Puig Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2006-04-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Shirin Khambata-Ford; Christopher R Garrett; Neal J Meropol; Mark Basik; Christopher T Harbison; Shujian Wu; Tai W Wong; Xin Huang; Chris H Takimoto; Andrew K Godwin; Benjamin R Tan; Smitha S Krishnamurthi; Howard A Burris; Elizabeth A Poplin; Manuel Hidalgo; Jose Baselga; Edwin A Clark; David J Mauro Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-08-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: F Cappuzzo; G Finocchiaro; E Rossi; P A Jänne; C Carnaghi; C Calandri; K Bencardino; C Ligorio; F Ciardiello; T Pressiani; A Destro; M Roncalli; L Crino; W A Franklin; A Santoro; M Varella-Garcia Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2007-10-31 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Pooneh Mokarram; Mohammed Albokashy; Maryam Zarghooni; Mohammad Amin Moosavi; Zahra Sepehri; Qi Min Chen; Andrzej Hudecki; Aliyeh Sargazi; Javad Alizadeh; Adel Rezaei Moghadam; Mohammad Hashemi; Hesam Movassagh; Thomas Klonisch; Ali Akbar Owji; Marek J Łos; Saeid Ghavami Journal: Autophagy Date: 2017-02-23 Impact factor: 16.016
Authors: T Kondo; S Ozawa; T Ikoma; X-Y Yang; K Kanamori; K Suzuki; H Iwabuchi; Y Maehata; C Miyamoto; T Taguchi; T Kiyono; E Kubota; R-I Hata Journal: Oncogenesis Date: 2016-07-11 Impact factor: 7.485