Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
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
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Clinical and technical validation of a genomic classifier (ColoPrint) for predicting outcome of stage II colon cancer patients Josep Tabernero, Valld’Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain and Victor Moreno2, Robert Rosenberg3, Ulrich Nitsche3, Thomas Hoffmann-Bachleitner4, Giovanni Lanza5, Jeroen van Akker6, Paul Roepman6, Iris Simon6, Ramon Salazar2 2IDIBELL, Institut Català d'Oncologia, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; 3Department of Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar,T echnische University Munich, Munich, Germany; 4Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; 5Istituto di Anatomia e Istologia Patologica, University di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy; 6Agendia BV, Amsterdam, Netherlandsand Agendia Inc. , Irvine, CA, US
Treatment of stage II patients is still debatable Quasar Collaborative Group, Lancet. 2007; 370(9604):2020-9
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 Development Selection of Final 18-Gene Set & Algorithm Standardization of Analytical Methods In-silico Validation Study (stage I-III) public datasets (n=322) Clinical Validation Study 1 (stage I-III) Institut Catala d’Oncologia Barcelona (J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:17-24) Clinical Validation Study 2 (stage II) Munich Hospital RechtsderIsar(J ClinOncol 28:15s (abstract 3513) Stage II pooled analysis Validation of ColoPrint Clinical Validation Study 3 (stage II) Vall d’Hebron, MedUni Vienna, University of Ferrara Clinical Validation Study 4 (stage II-III) MD Anderson (ongoing) PARSC Prospective Study (stage II + III) - ongoing US, Asian, and European Center (N ~600 stage II)
Pooled Analysis Stage II patients (n=320)
Patient Characteristics *MSI-status based on PCR (n=170) and Genomic Profile (n=150) – see Poster BRD.B37 (R. Salazar et al)
ColoPrint identifies patients at risk of distant and local-regional relapse (RFS) Local, Regional and Distant Relapse 3-year RFS Low Risk = 91% (86-95%) High Risk = 74% (64-83%) 5-year RFS Low Risk = 88% (83-93%) High Risk = 71% (62-80.5%)
Clinical Risk Factors distinguish risk groups but are not sufficient p-value for uncensored time
Subgroup analysis in T3-MSS patients (n=227) 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 ColoPrint + NCCN clinical factors All patients T3 MSS 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 3-year RFS 93% 89% 76% 70%
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%) ColoPrint and MSI-status
Technical Validation of ColoPrint as a reproducible and standardized test Repeated runs of three samples over 20 days performed by different operators = less than 5% variation ColoPrint uses the same technology, methods and QC as FDA-cleared MammaPrint assay
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
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 Treatment at discretion of investigator If eligible: CRF1 CRF 2 - 4 RNARetain Sample Agendia Year 1 Year 3 Year 5 Quality check sample ColoPrint analysis PARSC: Prospective Assessment of Risk Stratification by ColoPrint ± 4 weeks after surgery Seealso Poster BRD. G15
Acknowledgements • To all patients and participating Institutions