Cargando…

Comprehensive molecular analysis to predict the efficacy of chemotherapy containing bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND: Although bevacizumab is an important treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), not all patients with CRC benefit from it; in unselected patient populations, only modest survival benefits have been reported. METHODS: We evaluated clinical outcomes in 110 patients using comprehensi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: LIM, SUNG HEE, CHO, HEE JIN, KIM, KYOUNG-MEE, LIM, HO YEONG, KANG, WON KI, LEE, JEEYUN, PARK, YOUNG SUK, KIM, HEE CHEOL, KIM, SEUNG TAE
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Tech Science Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10513961/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37744267
http://dx.doi.org/10.32604/or.2023.030374
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Although bevacizumab is an important treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), not all patients with CRC benefit from it; in unselected patient populations, only modest survival benefits have been reported. METHODS: We evaluated clinical outcomes in 110 patients using comprehensive molecular characterization to identify biomarkers for a response to bevacizumab-containing treatment. The molecular analysis comprised whole-exome sequencing, ribonucleic acid sequencing, and a methylation array on patient tissues. RESULTS: Genomic and molecular characterization was successfully conducted in 103 patients. Six of 103 CRC samples were hypermutated, and none of the non-hypermutant tumors were microsatellite unstable. Among those 103 patients, 89 had adenocarcinoma (ADC), 15 were diagnosed with mucinous ADC, and six had signet-ring cell carcinoma (SRCC). Consensus molecular subtype (CMS) 2 was unique to ADC. Of the four SRCCs, two were CMS1, one was CMS4, and the other was CMS3. APC mutation status was a significantly enriched factor in responders to bevacizumab treatment. Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) 1/2 signaling was upregulated in non-responders, whereas cell cycle, transfer ribonucleic acid processing, nucleotide excision repair, and oxidative phosphorylation pathways were enriched in responders. In addition, IGF1 was differentially expressed in non-responders (log2 fold change = −1.43, p = 4.11 × 10(−5), false discovery rate = 0.098), and FLT1 was highly methylated in non-responders (p = 7.55 × 10(−3)). When the molecular pathways were reanalyzed separately according to the backbone chemotherapy (FOLFOX vs. FOLFIRI), the significance of the molecular pathways varied according to the backbone chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: This study sought a subset of CRC patients with a distinct clinical response to chemotherapy containing bevacizumab. Our results need to be validated in a large group of homogenous patient cohort and examined according to the different chemotherapy backbones to create personalized therapeutic opportunities in CRC.