The molecular evolution of acquired resistance to targeted EGFR blockade in colorectal cancers

By L. Diaz, R. Williams, Jian Wu, I. Kinde, J. Hecht, J. Berlin, Benjamin Allen, I. Bozic, Johannes G. Reiter, Martin A. Nowak and 3 more. Nature, 2012

1,671 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Colorectal tumours that are wild type for KRAS are often sensitive to EGFR blockade, but almost always develop resistance within several months of initiating therapy. The mechanisms underlying this acquired resistance to anti-EGFR antibodies are largely unknown. This situation is in marked contrast to that of small-molecule targeted agents, such as inhibitors of ABL, EGFR, BRAF and MEK, in which mutations in the genes encoding the protein targets render the tumours resistant to the effects of the drugs. The simplest hypothesis to account for the development of resistance to EGFR blockade is that rare cells with KRAS mutations pre-exist at low levels in tumours with ostensibly wild-type KRAS genes. Although this hypothesis would seem readily testable, there is no evidence in pre-clinical models to support it, nor is there data from patients. To test this hypothesis, we determined whether mutant KRAS DNA could be detected in the circulation of 28 patients receiving monotherapy with panitumumab, a therapeutic anti-EGFR antibody. We found that 9 out of 24 (38%) patients whose tumours were initially KRAS wild type developed detectable mutations in KRAS in their sera, three of which developed multiple different KRAS mutations. The appearance of these mutations was very consistent, generally occurring between 5 and 6 months following treatment. Mathematical modelling indicated that the mutations were present in expanded subclones before the initiation of panitumumab treatment. These results suggest that the emergence of KRAS mutations is a mediator of acquired resistance to EGFR blockade and that these mutations can be detected in a non-invasive manner. They explain why solid tumours develop resistance to targeted therapies in a highly reproducible fashion.

Subfields: Cancer Research, Oncology, Pathology and Forensic Medicine

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d75df1d710fefe226a8c382cbb48f9ba96838db2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cancer Research

In Oncology

In Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Citations in the corpus

Circulating tumor cells: liquid biopsy of cancer. (2013, background): “In addition, there is still a great interest in studying cell-free tumor DNA in parallel with CTCs (44, 45).”
Liquid biopsy: a step closer to transform diagnosis, prognosis and future of cancer treatments (2022, background): “CRC KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations Predicting panitumumab and cetuximab response [122, 123]”
Noninvasive detection of response and resistance in EGFR-mutant lung cancer using quantitative next-generation genotyping of cell-free plasma DNA (2014, positive): “Several studies have now suggested that highly sensitive genotyping assays can detect mutations in cell-free plasma DNA (cfDNA) from cancer patients, potentially reflecting the biology of a patient’s cancer (7-10).”
Dynamics of genomic clones in breast cancer patient xenografts at single cell resolution (2014, neutral): “T X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 Cluster (n) 1 (66) 2 (12) 3 (10) 4 (8) 5 (5) 6 (3) SA500 (Prim.”
Circulating tumor DNA analysis detects minimal residual disease and predicts recurrence in patients with stage II colon cancer (2016, methodology): “Primers were designed and sequencing results were analyzed as previously described (25, 26, 39).”
Biological and therapeutic impact of intratumor heterogeneity in cancer evolution. (2015, background): “For this reason, it could be argued that efforts to both understand the biology of cytotoxic response and to improve understanding of DNA damage response pathways should be prioritized as a means to address tumor heterogeneity.”