Plasma ctDNA RAS mutation analysis for the diagnosis and treatment monitoring of metastatic colorectal cancer patients

Vidal Barrull, Joana; Albanell Mestres, Joan; Montagut Viladot, Clara

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx125

Plasma ctDNA RAS mutation analysis for the diagnosis and treatment monitoring of metastatic colorectal cancer patients

License

Citation

Vidal J, Muinelo L, Dalmases A, Jones F, Edelstein D, Iglesias M, et al. Plasma ctDNA RAS mutation analysis for the diagnosis and treatment monitoring of metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2017 Jun;28(6):1325-32. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdx125

Abstract

Background. RAS assessment is mandatory for therapy decision in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. This determination is based on tumor tissue, however, genotyping of circulating tumor (ct)DNA offers clear advantages as a minimally invasive method that represents tumor heterogeneity. Our study aims to evaluate the use of ctDNA as an alternative for determining baseline RAS status and subsequent monitoring of RAS mutations during therapy as a component of routine clinical practice. Patients and methods. RAS mutational status in plasma was evaluated in mCRC patients by OncoBEAM™ RAS CRC assay. Concordance of results in plasma and tissue was retrospectively evaluated.RAS mutations were also prospectively monitored in longitudinal plasma samples from selected patients. Results. Analysis of RAS in tissue and plasma samples from 115 mCRC patients showed a 93% overall agreement. Plasma/tissue RAS discrepancies were mainly explained by spatial and temporal tumor heterogeneity. Analysis of clinico-pathological features showed that the site of metastasis (i.e. peritoneal, lung), the histology of the tumor (i.e. mucinous) and administration of treatment previous to blood collection negatively impacted the detection of RAS in ctDNA. In patients with baseline mutant RAS tumors treated with chemotherapy/antiangiogenic, longitudinal analysis of RAS ctDNA mirrored response to treatment, being an early predictor of response. In patients RAS wt, longitudinal monitoring of RAS ctDNA revealed that OncoBEAM was useful to detect emergence of RAS mutations during anti-EGFR treatment. Conclusion. The high overall agreement in RAS mutational assessment between plasma and tissue supports blood-based testing with OncoBEAM™ as a viable alternative for genotyping RAS of mCRC patients in routine clinical practice. Our study describes practical clinico-pathological specifications to optimize RAS ctDNA determination. Moreover, OncoBEAM™ is useful to monitor RAS in patients undergoing systemic therapy to detect resistance and evaluate the efficacy of particular treatments.