2021
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-21-0180
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clinical and Functional Characterization of Atypical KRAS/NRAS Mutations in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Abstract: Purpose: Mutations in KRAS/NRAS (RAS) predict lack of anti-EGFR efficacy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, it is unclear if all RAS mutations have similar impact, and atypical mutations beyond those in standard guidelines exist. Experimental Design: We reviewed 7 tissue and 1 cell-free DNA cohorts of 9,485 patients to characterize atypical RAS variants. Using an in vitro cell-based assay (functional annotation … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
1
9
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We find that concurrent BRAF V600E and RAS hotspot mutations are extremely rare and are only seen in MSI-H CRC. Four cases (9%) showed co-occurrence between a typical KRAS mutation and an atypical KRAS V14I of cases, as has also been seen by Pietrantonio et al 18 This mutation likely confers higher MAPK activity than wild-type KRAS , as recently proposed by Loree et al 19 Furthermore, we show that dual MAPK pathway driver mutations co-occur within the same tumor cell at a relatively high frequency. Our findings contradict the classic belief that MAPK pathway driver mutations such as RAS hotspot mutations and BRAF V600E occur only in mutual exclusivity of each other.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…We find that concurrent BRAF V600E and RAS hotspot mutations are extremely rare and are only seen in MSI-H CRC. Four cases (9%) showed co-occurrence between a typical KRAS mutation and an atypical KRAS V14I of cases, as has also been seen by Pietrantonio et al 18 This mutation likely confers higher MAPK activity than wild-type KRAS , as recently proposed by Loree et al 19 Furthermore, we show that dual MAPK pathway driver mutations co-occur within the same tumor cell at a relatively high frequency. Our findings contradict the classic belief that MAPK pathway driver mutations such as RAS hotspot mutations and BRAF V600E occur only in mutual exclusivity of each other.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…We interrogated the clinical significance of candidate genes identified in human Chr 2, Chr X, Chr 6 and Chr 19 ( Table S2 ) by analyzing their association with breast cancer outcome using the Real World Outcomes data (Caris Life Sciences). 38 The analysis was conducted in a cohort of 3,533 women with primary breast cancer and a second cohort of 4,870 women with metastatic breast cancer. Whole transcriptome sequencing was performed with mRNA isolated from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor samples using the Illumina NextSeq 600 platform (Illumina, Inc., San Diego, CA) in a CAP-accredited, CLIA certificated laboratory (Caris Life Sciences).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We queried the deidentified real-world evidence (RWE) dataset from the Caris Life Sciences using CODEai, a real-word clinic-genomic data platform that integrates patient’s molecular data with cancer treatment and clinical information obtained from insurance claims data. 38 Breast cancer patients with whole transcriptome sequencing performed on mRNA isolated from a formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor sample using the Illumina NovaSeq platform (Illumina, Inc., San Diego, CA) were included in the analysis. Cohorts included 4,920 patients with metastatic disease and 3,568 patients with primary tumors.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interestingly, at first line disease progression (PD1), our targeted NGS panel detected an ‘atypical’ KRAS mutation, namely L19F. This mutation has been described to have a potential intermediate phenotype, associated with increased RAS pathway signaling, but limited oncogenic potential and continued response to cetuximab [ 41 ]. This ‘anti-EGFR naïve’ patient was challenged with anti-EGFR at second line, based on the baseline RAS wild-type status, and was progression-free at 4 months of treatment before being lost to follow-up.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%