@entity470 related mutational status and association to clinical outcome of third-line cetuximab- @entity2600 in metastatic XXXX .

@entity1 @entity2600 @entity984 @entity470 @entity983 @entity14 @entity817 @entity10160
BACKGROUND: As supplement to @entity984 mutational analysis, @entity817 and @entity10160 mutations as well as expression of @entity983 may account for additional non-responders to anti- @entity470 -MoAbs treatment. The aim of the present study was to investigate the utility as biomarkers of these mutations in a uniform cohort of @entity1 with metastatic @entity14 treated with third-line cetuximab/ @entity2600 . METHODS: One-hundred-and-seven @entity1 were prospectively included in the study. Mutational analyses of @entity984 , @entity817 and @entity10160 were performed on DNA from confirmed malignant tissue using commercially available kits. Loss of @entity983 and @entity470 was assessed by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: DNA was available in 94 @entity1 . The frequency of @entity984 , @entity817 and @entity10160 mutations were 44%, 3% and 14%, respectively. All were non-responders. EGF receptor status by IHC and loss of @entity983 failed to show any clinical importance. @entity984 and @entity817 were mutually exclusive. Supplementing @entity984 analysis with @entity817 and @entity10160 identified additional 11% of non-responders. @entity1 with any mutation had a high risk of early progression, whereas triple-negative status implied a response rate (RR) of 41% (p<0.001), a disease control (DC) rate of 73% (p<001), and a significantly higher PFS of 7.7(5.1-8.6 95%CI) versus 2.3 months (2.1-3.695%CI) (p<0.000). CONCLUSION: Triple-negative status implied a clear benefit from treatment, and we suggest that @entity1 selection for third-line combination therapy with cetuximab/ @entity2600 could be based on triple mutational testing.
