Anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody panitumumab for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: an overview of current practice and future perspectives

References

• Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67:7–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferlay J, Steliarova-Foucher E, Lortet-Tieulent J, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:1374–1403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cremolini C, Schirripa M, Antoniotti C, et al. First-line chemotherapy for mCRC-a review and evidence-based algorithm. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2015;12:607–619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Cutsem E, Cervantes A, Adam R, et al. ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:1386–1422.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Colon Cancer. Version 1.2017. [cited 2017 Feb 28]. Avalable from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/colon.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Allegra CJ, Rumble RB, Hamilton SR, et al. Extended RAS gene mutation testing in metastatic colorectal carcinoma to predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody therapy: American Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion update 2015. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:179–185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Therkildsen C, Bergmann TK, Henrichsen-Schnack T, et al. The predictive value of KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA and PTEN for anti-EGFR treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Oncol. 2014;53:852–864.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The PANDA study. US National Library of Medicine. Identifier: NCT02904031. [cited 2017 Feb 28]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02904031
   Google Scholar
• The TRIPLETE Study. EU Clinical Trials Register. EudraCT identifier: 2016-004394-40.
   Google Scholar
• The APOLLON Study. US National Library of Medicine. Identifier: NCT02613221. [cited 2017 Feb 28]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02613221
   Google Scholar
• Erbitux® (cetuximab). ImClone systems incorporated and bristol-myers Squibb company. Princeton, NJ; 2015. [Cited 2017 Feb 28]. Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/125084s0228lbl.pdf 
   Google Scholar
• Vectibix® (panitumumab). Thousand Oaks, CA: Amgen Inc; 2017. [cited 2017 Jul 6]. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/125147s207lbl.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vectibix® (panitumumab). European public assessment report. [cited 2017 Feb 28]. Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Product_Information/human/000741/WC500047710.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sepulveda AR, Hamilton SR, Allegra CJ, et al. Molecular biomarkers for the evaluation of colorectal cancer: Guideline from the American Society for Clinical Pathology, College of American Pathologists, Association for Molecular Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Mol Diagn. 2017;19:187–225.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsiatis AC, Norris-Kirby A, Rich RG, et al. Comparison of Sanger sequencing, pyrosequencing, and melting curve analysis for the detection of KRAS mutations: diagnostic and clinical implications. J Mol Diagn. 2010;12:425–432.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price TJ, Peeters M, Kim TW, et al. Panitumumab versus cetuximab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (ASPECCT): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:569–579.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabernero J, Ciardiello F, Rivera F, et al. Cetuximab administered once every second week to patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a two-part pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic phase I dose-escalation study. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:1537–1545.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elez E, Argiles G, Tabernero J. First-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: interpreting FIRE-3, PEAK, and CALGB/SWOG 80405. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2015;16:52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hynes NE, Lane HA. ERBB receptors and cancer: the complexity of targeted inhibitors. Nat Rev Cancer. 2005;5:341–354.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Citri A, Yarden Y. EGF-ERBB signalling: towards the systems level. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2006;7:505–516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang BB, Lum P, Chen A, et al. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic perspectives on the clinical drug development of panitumumab. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2010;49:729–740.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giannopoulou E, Antonacopoulou A, Matsouka P, et al. Autophagy: novel action of panitumumab in colon cancer. Anticancer Res. 2009;29:5077–5082.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lo L, Patel D, Townsend AR, et al. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of panitumumab in the treatment of colorectal cancer. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2015;11:1907–1924.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Cutsem E, Peeters M, Siena S, et al. Open-label phase III trial of panitumumab plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1658–1664.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amado RG, Wolf M, Peeters M, et al. Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1626–1634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karapetis CS, Khambata-Ford S, Jonker DJ, et al. K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1757–1765.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeters M, Price TJ, Cervantes A, et al. Randomized phase III study of panitumumab with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) compared with FOLFIRI alone as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:4706–4713.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeters M, Price TJ, Cervantes A, et al. Final results from a randomized phase 3 study of FOLFIRI {±} panitumumab for second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2014;25:107–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douillard JY, Siena S, Cassidy J, et al. Randomized, phase III trial of panitumumab with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) versus FOLFOX4 alone as first-line treatment in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: the PRIME study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:4697–4705.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohne CH, Hofheinz R, Mineur L, et al. First-line panitumumab plus irinotecan/5-fluorouracil/leucovorin treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2012;138:65–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeters M, Oliner KS, Parker A, et al. Massively parallel tumor multigene sequencing to evaluate response to panitumumab in a randomized phase III study of metastatic colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:1902–1912.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim TW, Elme A, Kusic Z, et al. A phase 3 trial evaluating panitumumab plus best supportive care vs best supportive care in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS or RAS metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer. 2016;115:1206–1214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeters M, Oliner KS, Price TJ, et al. Analysis of KRAS/NRAS mutations in a phase III study of panitumumab with FOLFIRI compared with FOLFIRI alone as second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:5469–5479.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hecht JR, Cohn A, Dakhil S, et al. SPIRITT: a randomized, multicenter, phase II study of panitumumab with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab with FOLFIRI as second-line treatment in patients with unresectable wild type KRAS metastatic colorectal cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2015;14:72–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douillard JY, Oliner KS, Siena S, et al. Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1023–1034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karthaus M, Hofheinz RD, Mineur L, et al. Impact of tumour RAS/BRAF status in a first-line study of panitumumab + FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer. 2016;115:1215–1222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartzberg LS, Rivera F, Karthaus M, et al. PEAK: a randomized, multicenter phase II study of panitumumab plus modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFOX6) or bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in patients with previously untreated, unresectable, wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2240–2247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abad A, Massuti B, Gravalos C, et al. Phase II trial of panitumumab plus FOLFOX4 or FOLFIRI in subjects with KRAS wild-type colorectal cancer and liver-limited disease: the PLANET study. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:5s (suppl; abstr 3560).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abad A, Massuti B, Grávalos C, et al. RAS analyses of the PLANET study: phase II trial of panitumumab (P) plus FOLFOX4 or FOLFIRI in subjects with wild-type (WT) KRAS colorectal cancer (CRC) and liver-limited disease (LLD). Ann Oncol. 2014;25(suppl_4):iv189–551P.
   Google Scholar
• Linardou H, Dahabreh IJ, Kanaloupiti D, et al. Assessment of somatic k-RAS mutations as a mechanism associated with resistance to EGFR-targeted agents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and metastatic colorectal cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:962–972.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drugs@FDA: FDA Approved Drugs Product. Vectibix® (panitumumab). [cited 2017 Jul 6]. Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.cfm?event=overview.process&applno=125147
   Google Scholar
• Di Nicolantonio F, Martini M, Molinari F, et al. Wild-type BRAF is required for response to panitumumab or cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:5705–5712.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loupakis F, Ruzzo A, Cremolini C, et al. KRAS codon 61, 146 and BRAF mutations predict resistance to cetuximab plus irinotecan in KRAS codon 12 and 13 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer. 2009;101:715–721.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Roock W, Claes B, Bernasconi D, et al. Effects of KRAS, BRAF, NRAS, and PIK3CA mutations on the efficacy of cetuximab plus chemotherapy in chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective consortium analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:753–762.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bokemeyer C, Van Cutsem E, Rougier P, et al. Addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: pooled analysis of the CRYSTAL and OPUS randomised clinical trials. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:1466–1475.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowland A, Dias MM, Wiese MD, et al. Meta-analysis of BRAF mutation as a predictive biomarker of benefit from anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy for RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer. 2015;112:1888–1894.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pietrantonio F, Petrelli F, Coinu A, et al. Predictive role of BRAF mutations in patients with advanced colorectal cancer receiving cetuximab and panitumumab: a meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:587–594.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Brummelen EMJ, de Boer A, Beijnen JH, et al. BRAF mutations as predictive biomarker for response to anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies. Oncologist. 2017.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenz H, Niedzwiecki D, Innocenti F, et al. CALGB/SWOG 80405: phase III trial of irinotecan/5-FU/leucovorin (FOLFIRI) or oxaliplatin/5-FU/leucovorin (mFOLFOX6) with bevacizumab (BV) or cetuximab (CET) for patients (pts) with expanded RAS analyses untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum (MCRC). Ann Oncol. 2014;25(mdu438.413).
   Google Scholar
• Stintzing S, Modest DP, Rossius L, et al. FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer (FIRE-3): a post-hoc analysis of tumour dynamics in the final RAS wild-type subgroup of this randomised open-label phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:1426–1434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fornaro L, Lonardi S, Masi G, et al. FOLFOXIRI in combination with panitumumab as first-line treatment in quadruple wild-type (KRAS, NRAS, HRAS, BRAF) metastatic colorectal cancer patients: a phase II trial by the Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest (GONO). Ann Oncol. 2013;24:2062–2067.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Dwyer PJ, Manola J, Valone FH, et al. Fluorouracil modulation in colorectal cancer: lack of improvement with N -phosphonoacetyl- l -aspartic acid or oral leucovorin or interferon, but enhanced therapeutic index with weekly 24-hour infusion schedule–an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Study. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:2413–2421.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venook A, Niedzwiecki D, Innocenti F, et al. Impact of primary (1º) tumor location on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): analysis of CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance). J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(suppl; abstr 3504).
   Google Scholar
• Venook A, Niedzwiecki D, Ou F-S. et al. Impact of primary tumor location on overall survival and progression free survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of all RAS wt subgroup on CALGB/SWOG 80405 (Alliance). Presented at: ESMO 2016 Congress, Special session; 2016 Oct 7–11; Copenhagen, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Peeters M. Outcome according to left vs. right side in the panitumumab studies. Presented at: ESMO 2016 Congress, Special session; 2016 Oct 7–11; Copenhagen, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Heinemann V. Relevance of tumor location in mCRC: results from FIRE-3 (AIO KRK0306). Presented at: ESMO 2016 Congress, Special session; 2016 Oct 7–11; Copenhagen, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Van Cutsem E. Prognostic and predictive relevance of primary tumor location in patients with RAS-wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Retrospective evidence from the randomized phase 3 CRYSTAL trial. Presented at: ESMO 2016 Congress, Special session; 2016 Oct 7–11; Copenhagen, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Holch JW, Ricard I, Stintzing S, et al. The relevance of primary tumour location in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of first-line clinical trials. Eur J Cancer. 2017;70:87–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold D, Lueza B, Douillard JY. et al. Prognostic and predictive value of primary tumour side in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy and EGFR directed antibodies in six randomised trials. Ann Oncol. 2017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenz HJ. Whose side are you on? Presented at: ESMO 2016 Congress, Special session; 2016 October 7-11; Copenhagen, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Bertotti A, Papp E, Jones S, et al. The genomic landscape of response to EGFR blockade in colorectal cancer. Nature. 2015;526:263–267.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertotti A, Migliardi G, Galimi F, et al. A molecularly annotated platform of patient-derived xenografts (“xenopatients”) identifies HER2 as an effective therapeutic target in cetuximab-resistant colorectal cancer. Cancer Discov. 2011;1:508–523.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The HERACLES Trial. EU Clinical Trials Register. EudraCT identifier: 2012-002128-33. [cited 2017 Feb 28]. Available from: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2012-002128-33/IT
   Google Scholar
• Sartore-Bianchi A, Trusolino L, Martino C, et al. Dual-targeted therapy with trastuzumab and lapatinib in treatment-refractory, KRAS codon 12/13 wild-type, HER2-positive metastatic colorectal cancer (HERACLES): a proof-of-concept, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:738–746.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Townsend A, Tebbutt N, Karapetis C, et al. A phase IB/II study of second-line therapy with panitumumab, irinotecan and everolimus (PIE) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with KRAS wild type (WT). Ann Oncol. 2016;27(suppl_6):471P.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arena S, Bellosillo B, Siravegna G, et al. Emergence of multiple EGFR extracellular mutations during cetuximab treatment in colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:2157–2166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russo M, Siravegna G, Blaszkowsky LS, et al. Tumor heterogeneity and lesion-specific response to targeted therapy in colorectal cancer. Cancer Discov. 2016;6:147–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Misale S, Di Nicolantonio F, Sartore-Bianchi A, et al. Resistance to anti-EGFR therapy in colorectal cancer: from heterogeneity to convergent evolution. Cancer Discov. 2014;4:1269–1280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US National Library of Medicine. Identifier: NCT01927341. [cited 2017 Feb 28]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01927341
   Google Scholar
• Montagut C, Dalmases A, Bellosillo B, et al. Identification of a mutation in the extracellular domain of the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor conferring cetuximab resistance in colorectal cancer. Nat Med. 2012;18:221–223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esposito C, Rachiglio AM, La Porta ML, et al. The S492R EGFR ectodomain mutation is never detected in KRAS wild-type colorectal carcinoma before exposure to EGFR monoclonal antibodies. Cancer Biol Ther. 2013;14:1143–1146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voigt M, Braig F, Gothel M, et al. Functional dissection of the epidermal growth factor receptor epitopes targeted by panitumumab and cetuximab. Neoplasia. 2012;14:1023–1031.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price TJ, Newhall K, Peeters M, et al. Prevalence and outcomes of patients (pts) with EGFR S492R ectodomain mutations in ASPECCT: panitumumab (pmab) vs. cetuximab (cmab) in pts with chemorefractory wild-type KRAS exon 2 metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). J Clin Oncol. 2015; 33(suppl 3):740–740.
   Google Scholar
• Kearns JD, Bukhalid R, Sevecka M, et al. Enhanced targeting of the EGFR network with MM-151, an oligoclonal anti-EGFR antibody therapeutic. Mol Cancer Ther. 2015;14:1625–1636.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arena S, Siravegna G, Mussolin B, et al. MM-151 overcomes acquired resistance to cetuximab and panitumumab in colorectal cancers harboring EGFR extracellular domain mutations. Sci Transl Med. 2016;8:324ra314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dienstmann R, Patnaik A, Garcia-Carbonero R, et al. Safety and activity of the first-in-class Sym004 anti-EGFR antibody mixture in patients with refractory colorectal cancer. Cancer Discov. 2015;5:598–609.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US National Library of Medicine. Identifier: NCT02083653. [cited 2017 Jul 6]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02083653
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell EP, Piperdi B, Lacouture ME, et al. The efficacy and safety of panitumumab administered concomitantly with FOLFIRI or Irinotecan in second-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: the secondary analysis from STEPP (Skin Toxicity Evaluation Protocol with Panitumumab) by KRAS status. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2011;10:333–339.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lacouture ME, Mitchell EP, Piperdi B, et al. Skin toxicity evaluation protocol with panitumumab (STEPP), a phase II, open-label, randomized trial evaluating the impact of a pre-Emptive Skin treatment regimen on skin toxicities and quality of life in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1351–1357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peeters M, Siena S, Van Cutsem E, et al. Association of progression-free survival, overall survival, and patient-reported outcomes by skin toxicity and KRAS status in patients receiving panitumumab monotherapy. Cancer. 2009;115:1544–1554.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa A, Tejpar S, Prenen H, et al. Hypomagnesaemia and targeted anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agents. Target Oncol. 2011;6:227–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vincenzi B, Galluzzo S, Santini D, et al. Early magnesium modifications as a surrogate marker of efficacy of cetuximab-based anticancer treatment in KRAS wild-type advanced colorectal cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:1141–1146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The VALENTINO Study. US National Library of Medicine. Identifier: NCT02476045. [cited 2017 Feb 28]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02476045
   Google Scholar
• Dienstmann R, Vermeulen L, Guinney J, et al. Consensus molecular subtypes and the evolution of precision medicine in colorectal cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2017;17:79–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cremolini C, Morano F, Moretto M, et al. Dissecting primary resistance to anti-EGFRs in RAS and BRAF wt metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): a case-control study. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(suppl; abstr 11508).
   Google Scholar
• Corcoran RB, Ebi H, Turke AB, et al. EGFR-mediated re-activation of MAPK signaling contributes to insensitivity of BRAF mutant colorectal cancers to RAF inhibition with vemurafenib. Cancer Discov. 2012;2:227–235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prahallad A, Sun C, Huang S, et al. Unresponsiveness of colon cancer to BRAF(V600E) inhibition through feedback activation of EGFR. Nature. 2012;483:100–103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaeger R, Cercek A, O’Reilly EM, et al. Pilot trial of combined BRAF and EGFR inhibition in BRAF-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:1313–1320.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US National Library of Medicine. Identifier: NCT01750918. [cited 2017 Feb 28]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01750918
   Google Scholar
• Pietrantonio F, Oddo D, Gloghini A, et al. MET-driven resistance to dual EGFR and BRAF blockade may be overcome by switching from EGFR to MET Inhibition in BRAF-mutated colorectal cancer. Cancer Discov. 2016;6:963–971.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oddo D, Sennott EM, Barault L, et al. Molecular landscape of acquired resistance to targeted therapy combinations in BRAF-mutant colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 2016;76:4504–4515.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corcoran RB, André T, Yoshino T, et al. Efficacy and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis of the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (D), MEK inhibitor trametinib (T), and anti-EGFR antibody panitumumab (P) in patients (pts) with BRAF V600E–mutated (BRAFm) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Annals of Oncology. 2016;27:149–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bettegowda C, Sausen M, Leary RJ, et al. Detection of circulating tumor DNA in early- and late-stage human malignancies. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6:224ra224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diaz LA Jr., Williams RT, Wu J, et al. The molecular evolution of acquired resistance to targeted EGFR blockade in colorectal cancers. Nature. 2012;486:537–540.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siravegna G, Mussolin B, Buscarino M, et al. Clonal evolution and resistance to EGFR blockade in the blood of colorectal cancer patients. Nat Med. 2015;21:795–801.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohan S, Heitzer E, Ulz P, et al. Changes in colorectal carcinoma genomes under anti-EGFR therapy identified by whole-genome plasma DNA sequencing. PLoS Genet. 2014;10:e1004271.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morelli MP, Overman MJ, Dasari A, et al. Characterizing the patterns of clonal selection in circulating tumor DNA from patients with colorectal cancer refractory to anti-EGFR treatment. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:731–736.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The CHRONOS Study. EU Clinical Trials Register. EudraCT identifier: 2016-002597-12.
   Google Scholar