Quiz Ref ID Cancer predisposition gene testing is useful for identifying individuals who may benefit from screening, prevention, and early detection of breast, ovarian, and colorectal cancer^1,2 and may be beneficial for individuals at risk of pancreatic cancer.^3,4 Family members of those with germline predisposition gene mutations may also benefit from enhanced cancer screening and prevention strategies. For instance, screening of CDKN2A (RefSeq NM_000077 .4) mutation carriers has been associated with early detection of resectable pancreatic tumors.³

Purpose: Molecular diagnostic testing has become an integral part of the evaluation of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Expanded mutational testing, such as next-generation sequencing (NGS), often identifies mutations with unclear clinical or prognostic implications. One such example is BRAF mutations that occur outside of codon 600 (^non-V600 BRAF mutations). Methods: We conducted this multicenter, retrospective cohort study to characterize the clinical, pathologic, and survival implications of ^non-V600 BRAF mutations in metastatic CRC. We pooled patients in whom ^non-V600 BRAF mutations were identified from NGS databases at three large molecular genetics reference laboratories. Results: A total of 9,643 patients with metastatic CRC underwent NGS testing. We identified 208 patients with ^non-V600 BRAF mutations, which occurred in 2.2% of all patients tested and accounted for 22% of all BRAF mutations identified. Cancers with ^non-V600 BRAF mutations, compared with cancers with V600E BRAF (^V600E BRAF) mutations, were found in patients who were significantly younger (58 v 68 years, respectively), fewer female patients (46% v 65%, respectively), and patients who had fewer high-grade tumors (13% v 64%, respectively) or right-sided primary tumors (36% v 81%, respectively). Median overall survival was significantly longer in patients with ^non-V600 BRAF-mutant metastatic CRC compared with those with both ^V600E BRAF-mutant and wild-type BRAF metastatic CRC (60.7 v 11.4 v 43.0 months, respectively; P < .001). In multivariable analysis, ^non-V600 BRAF mutation was independently associated with improved overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.18; P < .001). Conclusion: ^Non-V600 BRAF mutations occur in approximately 2.2% of patients with metastatic CRC and define a clinically distinct subtype of CRC with an excellent prognosis.

There exists a tremendous opportunity in identifying and determining the appropriate predictive and prognostic biomarker(s) for risk stratification of patients with colorectal cancers (CRCs). Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as a promising prognostic and possibly predictive biomarker in the personalized management of patients with CRCs. The disease is particularly suited to a liquid biopsy–based approach since there is a great deal of shedding of circulating tumor fragments (cells, DNA, methylation markers, etc). ctDNA has been shown to have several potential applications, including detecting minimal residual disease (MRD), monitoring for early recurrence, molecular profiling, and therapeutic response prediction. The utility of ctDNA has broadened from its initial use in the advanced/metastatic setting for molecular profiling and detection of acquired resistance mechanisms, toward identifying MRD, as well as early detection. Prospective studies such as CIRCULATE, COBRA, Dynamic II/III, and ACT3 are underway in the MRD setting to further understand how ctDNA may be used to inform clinical decision making using both tumor-informed and tumor-agnostic platforms. These prospective studies use ctDNA to guide management of patients with CRC and will be critical to help guide how and where ctDNA should or should not be used in clinical decision making. It is also important to understand that there are different types of ctDNA liquid biopsy platforms, each with advantages and disadvantages in different clinical indications. This review provides an overview of the current and evolving use of ctDNA in CRC.

Pancreatic and colorectal cancers are often KRAS mutated and are incurable when tumor DNA or protein persists or recurs after curative intent therapy. Cancer vaccine ELI-002 2P enhances lymph node delivery and immune response using amphiphile (Amph) modification of G12D and G12R mutant KRAS (mKRAS) peptides (Amph-Peptides-2P) together with CpG oligonucleotide adjuvant (Amph-CpG-7909). We treated 25 patients (20 pancreatic and five colorectal) who were positive for minimal residual mKRAS disease (ctDNA and/or serum tumor antigen) after locoregional treatment in a phase 1 study of fixed-dose Amph-Peptides-2P and ascending-dose Amph-CpG-7909; study enrollment is complete with patient follow-up ongoing. Primary endpoints included safety and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). The secondary endpoint was tumor biomarker response (longitudinal ctDNA or tumor antigen), with exploratory endpoints including immunogenicity and relapse-free survival (RFS). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed, and the RP2D was 10.0 mg of Amph-CpG-7909. Direct ex vivo mKRAS-specific T cell responses were observed in 21 of 25 patients (84%; 59% both CD4⁺ and CD8⁺); tumor biomarker responses were observed in 21 of 25 patients (84%); biomarker clearance was observed in six of 25 patients (24%; three pancreatic and three colorectal); and the median RFS was 16.33 months. Efficacy correlated with T cell responses above or below the median fold increase over baseline (12.75-fold): median tumor biomarker reduction was −76.0% versus −10.2% (P < 0.0014), and the median RFS was not reached versus 4.01 months (hazard ratio = 0.14; P = 0.0167). ELI-002 2P was safe and induced considerable T cell responses in patients with immunotherapy-recalcitrant KRAS-mutated tumors. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04853017.

Purpose: To analytically and clinically validate microsatellite instability (MSI) detection using cell-free DNA (cfDNA) sequencing. Experimental Design: Pan-cancer MSI detection using Guardant360 was analytically validated according to established guidelines and clinically validated using 1,145 cfDNA samples for which tissue MSI status based on standard-of-care tissue testing was available. The landscape of cfDNA-based MSI across solid tumor types was investigated in a cohort of 28,459 clinical plasma samples. Clinical outcomes for 16 patients with cfDNA MSI-H gastric cancer treated with immunotherapy were evaluated. Results: cfDNA MSI evaluation was shown to have high specificity, precision, and sensitivity, with a limit of detection of 0.1% tumor content. In evaluable patients, cfDNA testing accurately detected 87% (71/82) of tissue MSI-H and 99.5% of tissue microsatellite stable (863/867) for an overall accuracy of 98.4% (934/949) and a positive predictive value of 95% (71/75). Concordance of cfDNA MSI with tissue PCR and next-generation sequencing was significantly higher than IHC. Prevalence of cfDNA MSI for major cancer types was consistent with those reported for tissue. Finally, robust clinical activity of immunotherapy treatment was seen in patients with advanced gastric cancer positive for MSI by cfDNA, with 63% (10/16) of patients achieving complete or partial remission with sustained clinical benefit. Conclusions: cfDNA-based MSI detection using Guardant360 is highly concordant with tissue-based testing, enabling highly accurate detection of MSI status concurrent with comprehensive genomic profiling and expanding access to immunotherapy for patients with advanced cancer for whom current testing practices are inadequate. See related commentary by Wang and Ajani, p. 6887

The advent of biologic agents has provided a more specific and targeted approach to the treatment of various hematological malignancies and other autoimmune disorders. Such biologic agents have been relatively well tolerated with fewer adverse events reported as compared with many other chemotherapeutic agents. Rituximab is a monoclonal antibody to the B-cell marker CD20 and is a common biologic agent widely used for the treatment of B-cell lymphoma, lymphoproliferative disorders, and inflammatory conditions that are refractory to conventional treatment, including rheumatoid arthritis and some vasculitides. However, through randomized controlled trials and post-marketing surveillance, an increasing number of serious adverse events are being associated with the use of rituximab, often leading to or complicating an intensive care unit admission. The purpose of this review is to focus on the severe complications that are associated with the use of rituximab and that require critical care. Management and prevention strategies for the most common complications along with some examples of its uses within the critical care setting are also discussed.