RET fusions in a small subset of advanced colorectal cancers at risk of being neglected.

RET fusions in a small subset of advanced colorectal cancers at risk of being neglected.

Ann Oncol. 2018 Mar 10;:

Authors: Pietrantonio F, Di Nicolantonio F, Schrock AB, Lee J, Morano F, Fucà G, Nikolinakos P, Drilon A, Hechtman JF, Christiansen J, Gowen K, Frampton GM, Gasparini P, Rossini D, Gigliotti C, Kim ST, Prisciandaro M, Hodgson J, Zaniboni A, Chiu VK, Milione M, Patel R, Miller V, Bardelli A, Novara L, Wang L, Pupa S, Sozzi G, Ross J, Di Bartolomeo M, Bertotti A, Ali S, Trusolino L, Falcone A, de Braud F, Cremolini C

Abstract
Background: Recognition of rare molecular subgroups is a challenge for precision oncology and may lead to tissue-agnostic approval of targeted agents. Here we aimed to comprehensively characterize the clinical, pathological and molecular landscape of RET rearranged metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).
Patients and methods: In this case series, we compared clinical, pathological and molecular characteristics of 24 RET rearranged mCRC patients with those of a control group of 291 patients with RET negative tumors. RET rearranged and RET negative mCRCs were retrieved by systematic literature review and by taking advantage of three screening sources: 1) Ignyta's phase 1/1b study on RXDX-105 (NCT01877811); 2) cohorts screened at two Italian and one South Korean Institutions; 3) Foundation Medicine Inc. database. Next generation sequencing data were analyzed for RET rearranged cases.
Results: RET fusions were more frequent in older patients (median age of 66 vs. 60 years, p = 0.052), with ECOG PS 1-2 (90% vs. 50%, p = 0.02), right-sided (55% vs. 32%, P=0.013), previously unresected primary tumors (58% vs. 21%, P<0.001), RAS and BRAF wild-type (100% vs. 40%, p < 0.001) and MSI-high (48% vs. 7%, P<0.001). Notably, 11 (26%) out of 43 patients with right-sided, RAS and BRAF wild-type tumors harbored a RET rearrangement. At a median follow-up of 45.8 months, patients with RET fusion-positive tumors showed a significantly worse OS when compared with RET-negative ones (median OS 14.0 vs. 38.0 months, HR: 4.59; 95% CI, 3.64-32.66; P<0.001). In the multivariable model, RET rearrangements were still associated with shorter OS [HR: 2.97; 95% CI, 1.25-7.07; P=0.014], while primary tumor location, RAS and BRAF mutations and MSI status were not.
Conclusions: Though very rare, RET rearrangements define a new subtype of mCRC that shows poor prognosis with conventional treatments and is therefore worth of a specific management.

PMID: 29538669 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

http://ift.tt/2FLhCJJ