Clinical and technical validation of a genomic classifier (ColoPrint) for predicting outcome of stage II colon cancer patients Josep Tabernero, Vall d’Hebron.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Oncotype DX® Breast Cancer Assay Clinical Data Review
Advertisements

Chemotherapy Prolongs Survival for Isolated Local or Regional Recurrence of Breast Cancer: The CALOR Trial (Chemotherapy as Adjuvant for Locally Recurrent.
DEBATE: What is the Optimal Sequence of Therapies for Stage II-III Adenocarcinoma of the Proximal Stomach? Michael A. Choti, MD Department of Surgery UT.
Integration of Capecitabine into Anthracycline- and Taxane-Based Adjuvant Therapy for Triple Negative Early Breast Cancer: Final Subgroup Analysis of the.
Breast Cancer in Pregnancy
Clinical Trial Designs for the Evaluation of Prognostic & Predictive Classifiers Richard Simon, D.Sc. Chief, Biometric Research Branch National Cancer.
D. Haller, 1 J. Cassidy, 2 J. Tabernero, 3 J. Maroun, 4 F. de Braud, 5 T. Price, 6 E. Van Cutsem, 7 M. Hill, 8 F. Gilberg, 9 H-J. Schmoll 10 1 University.
The 70-Gene Profile and Chemotherapy Benefit in 1,600 Breast Cancer Patients Bender RA et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract 512. (Oral Presentation)
Laura J. Van ‘t Veer Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center University of California, San Francisco Biology of disease Who is at risk for what.
Departments - Surgery - Gerontology and Geriatrics Department of SurgeryDepartment of Gerontology & Geriatrics Prof. dr. C.J.H. van de VeldeProf. dr. R.G.J.
Expression profiles for prognosis and prediction Laura J. Van ‘t Veer The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam.
Clinical Relevance of HER2 Overexpression/Amplification in Patients with Small Tumor Size and Node-Negative Breast Cancer Curigliano G et al. J Clin Oncol.
MammaPrint, the story of the 70-gene profile
Dr. LP Si Tseung Kwan O Hospital. Introduction CA stomach is the 4 th most commonly diagnosed malignancy worldwide 2 nd most common cause of cancer-related.
Hot topics in breast radiotherapy Mark Beresford.
References 1.Salazar R, Roepman P, Capella G et al. Gene expression signature to improve prognosis prediction of stage II and III colorectal cancer. J.
Biomarker-driven treatment decisions in stage II colon cancer - making sense of what we know June 7, 2010 Neal J. Meropol, M.D. Chief, Division of Hematology.
These slides were released by the speaker for internal use by Novartis.
Neoadjuvant versus Adjuvant Systemic Treatment in Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis J. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97(3):
Taiwan 2000 PETACC 3 ASCO 2009 Molecular markers in colon cancer have a stage specific prognostic value. Results of the translational study on the PETACC.
Tang G et al. Proc SABCS 2010;Abstract S4-9.
The 70 gene Mammaprint ™ signature: a comparison with traditional clinico-pathological parameters. Patrizia Querzoli 1, Massimo Pedriali 1, Gardenia Munerato.
A 14-gene prognosis signature predicts metastasis risk in node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive, Tamoxifen-treated breast cancer in different ethnogeographic.
N ational S urgical A djuvant B reast and B owel P roject.
Are there benefits from chemotherapy to early endometrial cancer
Discussion abstracts Alberto Sobrero MD Ospedale San Martino Genoa, Italy.
Sgroi DC et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract S1-9.
Colorectal cancer intrinsic subtypes are associated with prognosis, chemotherapy response, deficient mismatch repair and epithelial to mesenchymal transition.
The Carry-Over Effect of Adjuvant Zoledronic Acid: Comparison of 48- and 62-Month Analyses of ABCSG-12 Suggests the Benefits of Combining Zoledronic Acid.
Adjuvant Therapy of Colon Cancer 2005 Daniel G. Haller, M.D. Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA.
A Quantitative Multi-Gene RT-PCR Assay for Prediction of Recurrence in Stage II Colon Cancer (CC): Selection of the Genes in 4 Large Studies and Results.
Genomic Health, Inc. Yuko Soneoka, Ph.D., J.D. Senior Corporate Counsel, IP Director of Intellectual Property January 31, 2013.
Capecitabine versus Bolus 5-FU/Leucovorin as Adjuvant Therapy for Colon Cancer: X-ACT Trial Results James Cassidy, MD Colorectal Cancer Update Think Tank.
Dubsky P et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract S4-3.
Prospective Phase I/II Trial of Carbon Ion Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Abstract title: CIRT for Locally Advanced.
Guanylyl Cyclase C (GCC) Lymph Nodes (LN) Classification as a Prognostic Marker in Patients with Stage II Colon Cancer: A Pooled Analysis Daniel J. Sargent,
This house believes that FOLFIRINOX is the best treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma Pro Marc YCHOU Montpellier.
NSABP C08 adjuvant colon cancer Best of ASCO, Beirut, July 2009 Prof Eric Van Cutsem, MD, PhD Digestive Oncology Leuven, Belgium.
Gene Expression Signatures for Prognosis in NSCLC, Coupled with Signatures of Oncogenic Pathway Deregulation, Provide a Novel Approach for Selection of.
Outcomes Following Adjuvant 5-FU based Treatment (AT) for Colon Cancer vs Impact on Recurrence Rate, Time from Recurrence to Death.
T Andre, E Quinaux, C Louvet, E Gamelin, O Bouche, E Achille, P Piedbois, N Tubiana-Mathieu, M Buyse and A de Gramont. Updated results at 6 year of the.
Validation of four gene-expression risk scores in a large colon cancer cohort and contribution to an improved prognostic method Antonio F. Di Narzo 1,
Abstracts #338 and 339 Jordan Berlin, MD Ingram Professor of Cancer Research.
Effect of 21-Gene Reverse- Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction Assay on Treatment Recommendations in Patients with Lymph Node-Positive and Estrogen.
on behalf of the ACOSOG Z4032 Investigators
0 Adjuvant FOLFIRI +/- Cetuximab in Patients with Resected Stage III Colon Cancer NCCTG Intergroup Phase III Trial N0147 Jocelin Huang, Daniel J Sargent,
Individualizing Adjuvant Therapy on the Basis of Molecular Markers Charles S. Fuchs, MD Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Harvard Medical School Boston, MA.
Extended adjuvant treatment with anastrozole: results from the ABCSG Trial 6a R Jakesz, H Samonigg, R Greil, M Gnant, M Schmid, W Kwasny, E Kubista, B.
KRAS status and efficacy in the first- line treatment of patients with mCRC treated with FOLFOX with or without cetuximab: The OPUS experience Carsten.
Use of Oncotype Dx® Testing Breast SSG meeting 10 th July 2015 Dr Rebecca Bowen.
Cetuximab plus FOLFIRI in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: the influence of KRAS and BRAF biomarkers on outcome: updated data from the CRYSTAL.
Lymph Node (LN) Ratio (LNR) Based Risk Classification (RC) in Stage III Colon Cancer (CC) with Internal and External Validation: Finding from the ACCENT.
Mamoun A. Rahman Surgical SHO Mr Osborne’s team. Introduction Blood transfusion: -Preoperative ( elective) -Intra/postoperative ( urgent) Blood transfusion.
Adjuvant treatment for endometrial cancer Ameri A Associate Professor of Radiation Oncology Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences Dec Pars.
Scott Kopetz, MD, PhD Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology
Effect of multiple-phase regional intra-arterial infusion chemotherapy on patients with resectable pancreatic head adenocarcinoma JIN Chen, YAO Lie, LONG.
S1207: Phase III Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial Evaluating the Use of Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy +/- One Year of Everolimus in Patients.
Patterns of Care in Medical Oncology Treatment of Metastatic Colon Cancer.
Taiwan 2000 PETACC 3 ASCO 2009 PETACC 3 ASCO 2010 Molecular and clinical determinants of survival following relapse after curative treatment of stage II-
Results Abstract Analysis of Prognostic Web-based Models for Stage II and III Colon Cancer: A Population-based Validation of Numeracy and Adjuvant! Online.
Complete pathologic responses in the primary of rectal or colon cancer treated with FOLFOX without radiation A. Cercek, M. R. Weiser, K. A. Goodman, D.
2 years versus 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer (HERA): an open-label, randomised controlled trial Aron Goldhirsch, Richard.
Risk Stratification in Stage II Colon Cancer Patients Ramzi Amri, MD, PhD; Liliana G Bordeianou, MD, MPH; and David L Berger, MD Massachusetts General.
Presented By Shin Fujita at 2016 ASCO Annual Meeting
Mamounas EP et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract S1-10.
CCO Independent Conference Highlights
Colon Cancer Stages I-III
Adjuvant chemotherapy after potentially curative resection of metastases from colorectal cancer. A meta-analysis of two randomized trials E Mitry, A Fields,
Presentation transcript:

Clinical and technical validation of a genomic classifier (ColoPrint) for predicting outcome of stage II colon cancer patients Josep Tabernero, Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain and Victor Moreno 2, Robert Rosenberg 3, Ulrich Nitsche 3, Thomas Hoffmann-Bachleitner 4, Giovanni Lanza 5, Jeroen van Akker 6, Paul Roepman 6, Iris Simon 6, Ramon Salazar 2 2 IDIBELL, Institut Català d'Oncologia, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; 3 Department of Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar,T echnische University Munich, Munich, Germany; 4 Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; 5 Istituto di Anatomia e Istologia Patologica, University di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy; 6 Agendia BV, Amsterdam, Netherlands and Agendia Inc., Irvine, CA, US

Treatment of stage II patients is still debatable Quasar Collaborative Group, Lancet. 2007; 370(9604): ChemoObservation 5 year survival82.5%80.6%

ASCO recommendation “direct evidence from randomized controlled trials does not support the routine use of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage II colon cancer. Features associated with an increased risk of recurrence include inadequate lymph node sampling, T4 disease, perforation and a poorly differentiated histology NCCN guidelines consider 5FU or clinical trial or observation for low risk patients (T3, no high risk features) Consider 5FU/oxaliplatin or clinical trial or observation for high risk patients High risk features: T4, less than 12 LN assessed, perforation, obstructions, positive margins, high grade, lymphatic/vascular invasion Guidelines for Risk Assessment

Whole Genome Array Training Set (stage I-IV) (n=188) Netherlands Cancer Institute, Leiden Medical Center, Slotervaart Selection of Final 18-Gene Set & Algorithm Clinical Validation Study 1 (stage I-III) Institut Catala d’Oncologia Barcelona (J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:17-24) Standardization of Analytical Methods In-silico Validation Study (stage I-III) public datasets (n=322) Development Validation of ColoPrint Clinical Validation Study 2 (stage II) Munich Hospital Rechts der Isar (J Clin Oncol 28:15s (abstract 3513) Clinical Validation Study 3 (stage II) Vall d’Hebron, MedUni Vienna, University of Ferrara PARSC Prospective Study (stage II + III) - ongoing US, Asian, and European Center (N ~600 stage II) Clinical Validation Study 4 (stage II-III) MD Anderson (ongoing) Stage II pooled analysis

STAGE II PATIENTS (N=320) Pooled Analysis

Patient Characteristics *MSI-status based on PCR (n=170) and Genomic Profile (n=150) – see Poster BRD.B37 (R. Salazar et al)

Patient Characteristics (cont’)

ColoPrint identifies patients at risk of distant and local-regional relapse (RFS) Local, Regional and Distant Relapse 5-year RFS Low Risk = 88% (83-93%) High Risk = 71% ( %) 3-year RFS Low Risk = 91% (86-95%) High Risk = 74% (64-83%)

Univariate analysis: 3-yr Relapse-free Survival

Clinical Risk Factors distinguish risk groups but are not sufficient p-value for uncensored time

Subgroup analysis in T3-MSS patients (n=227) VariableHR95% CIP-value ColoPrint Age Localization Grade Gender LN > Univariate Analysis of 3-year RFS 3-year RFS Low Risk = 91% (86-96%) High Risk = 73% (63-83%)

Clinical risk factors are even less sufficient to distinguish low and high risk patients in the T3-MSS subgroup

ColoPrint in combination with clinical factors might give best risk stratification 3-year RFS 93 % Low Risk ColoPrint, low risk NCCN 88 % Low Risk ColoPrint, high risk NCCN 76 % High Risk ColoPrint, low risk NCCN 71 % High Risk ColoPrint, high risk NCCN ColoPrint + NCCN clinical factors All patients T3 MSS 3-year RFS 93% 89% 76% 70%

ColoPrint and MSI-status MSI-High patients have a better prognosis than MSS patients and may suffer worse adverse effects from 5-FU ColoPrint indentifies low risk patients beyond MSI- high status – 67 patients were classified as MSI-H (20.9%) – MSI-H patients are mainly ColoPrint Low Risk (53/67 = 80%)

Technical Validation of ColoPrint as a reproducible and standardized test ColoPrint uses the same technology, methods and QC as FDA-cleared MammaPrint assay Repeated runs of three samples over 20 days performed by different operators = less than 5% variation

Summary The 18-gene genomic signature for patients with colon cancer distinguishes populations with different outcomes The signature was validated in an in-silico study and with independent cohorts In stage II patients: – Over 60% of patients were identified as Low Risk with a 3-year RFS of 91% – It identifies patients at High Risk of developing metastases and who are more likely to benefit from adjuvant CTx – It is better at identifying High Risk patients than any clinical risk factor alone ColoPrint complements clinical-pathological factors for better treatment decisions

PARSC: Prospective Assessment of Risk Stratification by ColoPrint Aim 575 eligible stage 2 patients Status January 2012: – 32 sites open (EU 15, Asia 2, US 15) – 340 eligible stage 2 – 300 eligible stage 3 Expected last patient enrollment: Dec’12 Patient Information & Informed Consent Surgery RNARetain Sample Agendia Treatment at discretion of investigator Quality check sample CRF If eligible: CRF1 Year 1 Year 3 Year 5 ColoPrint analysis ± 4 weeks after surgery See also Poster BRD. G15

Acknowledgements To all patients and participating Institutions