Taihei Oshiro1, Keisuke Uehara2, Toshisada Aiba1, Toshiki Mukai1, Tomoki Ebata1, Masato Nagino1. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65, Tsurumai-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Japan. 2. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65, Tsurumai-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya, 466-8550, Japan. kuehara@med.nagoya-u.ac.jp.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Our sincere hope is to establish the predictive factors of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) response and provide patients with greater certainty regarding treatment outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess the response to NAC and survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) according to their RAS/BRAF mutation status. METHODS: Data on 57 patients with LARC who received NAC between 2009 and 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were classified into two groups based on their mutation status: wild-type in both RAS and BRAF (WT) or mutant-type in either RAS or BRAF (MT). RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were classified as WT, and the remaining 34 patients were MT. Histological response to NAC was similar in both groups. In responders, the 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) was better compared with the non-responders (92 and 66%, respectively). In the WT group, the 3-year RFS was 95% which was significantly better than that in the MT group (59%, p = 0.011). The MT group was further subdivided into the following 2 groups by the pathological response; the MT responders (n = 10) and MT non-responders (n = 24). The 3-year RFS was 50% in the MT non-responders, which was significantly worse compared to that in the remaining patients (92%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: RAS/BRAF mutations did not affect the response to NAC. However, the RFS was likely to be poor for those in the MT group who did not achieve favorable pathological response. In contrast, the RFS was favorable in the WT group regardless of the pathological response.
PURPOSE: Our sincere hope is to establish the predictive factors of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) response and provide patients with greater certainty regarding treatment outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess the response to NAC and survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) according to their RAS/BRAF mutation status. METHODS: Data on 57 patients with LARC who received NAC between 2009 and 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were classified into two groups based on their mutation status: wild-type in both RAS and BRAF (WT) or mutant-type in either RAS or BRAF (MT). RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were classified as WT, and the remaining 34 patients were MT. Histological response to NAC was similar in both groups. In responders, the 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) was better compared with the non-responders (92 and 66%, respectively). In the WT group, the 3-year RFS was 95% which was significantly better than that in the MT group (59%, p = 0.011). The MT group was further subdivided into the following 2 groups by the pathological response; the MT responders (n = 10) and MT non-responders (n = 24). The 3-year RFS was 50% in the MT non-responders, which was significantly worse compared to that in the remaining patients (92%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: RAS/BRAF mutations did not affect the response to NAC. However, the RFS was likely to be poor for those in the MT group who did not achieve favorable pathological response. In contrast, the RFS was favorable in the WT group regardless of the pathological response.
Entities:
Keywords:
BRAF; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; RAS; Rectal cancer
Authors: A Fariña-Sarasqueta; G van Lijnschoten; E Moerland; G-J Creemers; V E P P Lemmens; H J T Rutten; A J C van den Brule Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2010-05-25 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Deborah Schrag; Martin R Weiser; Karyn A Goodman; Mithat Gonen; Ellen Hollywood; Andrea Cercek; Diane L Reidy-Lagunes; Marc J Gollub; Jinru Shia; Jose G Guillem; Larissa K F Temple; Philip B Paty; Leonard B Saltz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-01-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jose G Guillem; David B Chessin; Alfred M Cohen; Jinru Shia; Madhu Mazumdar; Warren Enker; Philip B Paty; Martin R Weiser; David Klimstra; Leonard Saltz; Bruce D Minsky; W Douglas Wong Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Jochen Gaedcke; Marian Grade; Klaus Jung; Markus Schirmer; Peter Jo; Christoph Obermeyer; Hendrik A Wolff; Markus K Herrmann; Tim Beissbarth; Heinz Becker; Thomas Ried; Michael Ghadimi Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2009-11-11 Impact factor: 6.280