English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A number of previous studies have reported that 30-50% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) harbor Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) mutations, which is a major predictive biomarker of resistance to epidermal growth factor (EGFR)-targeted therapy. Treatment with an anti-EGFR inhibitor is recommended for patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). A recent retrospective study of cetuximab reported that patients with KRAS p.G13D mutations had better outcomes compared with those with other mutations. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the prevalence of KRAS p.G13D mutations and evaluate the effectiveness of cetuximab in mCRC patients with KRAS p.G13D or other KRAS mutations. We reviewed the clinical records of 98 mCRC patients with KRAS mutations who were treated between August, 2004 and January, 2011 in four hospitals located in Tokyo and Kyushu Island. We also investigated KRAS mutation subtypes and patient characteristics. In the patients who received cetuximab, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the effect of KRAS p.G13D mutations on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Of the 98 patients, 23 (23.5%) had KRAS p.G13D-mutated tumors, whereas 75 (76.5%) had tumors harboring other mutations. Of the 31 patients who received cetuximab, 9 (29.0%) had KRAS p.G13D mutations and 22 (71.0%) had other mutations. There were no significant differences in age, gender, primary site, pathological type, history of chemotherapy, or the combined use of irinotecan between either of the patient subgroups. The univariate analysis revealed no significant difference in PFS or OS between the patients with KRAS p.G13D mutations and those with other mutations (median PFS, 4.5 vs. 2.8 months, respectively; P=0.65; and median OS, 15.3 vs. 8.9 months, respectively; P=0.51). However, the multivariate analysis revealed a trend toward better PFS among patients harboring p.G13D mutations (PFS: HR=0.29; 95% CI: 0.08-1.10; P=0.07; OS: HR=0.23; 95% CI: 0.04-1.54; P=0.13). In conclusion, treatment with cetuximab may be more clinically beneficial in mCRC patients with a KRAS p.G13D mutation, compared with those harboring other mutations. However, further investigation is required to clearly determine the benefits of cetuximab treatment in patients with KRAS p.G13D mutation-positive mCRC.

Cetuximab treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer with KRAS p.G13D mutations improves progression-free survival