Abstract 2258P
Background
Currently, response to cancer treatment cannot be predicted upfront, hampering treatment efficacy. There is a need for effective biomarkers to select patients for optimal treatment. A promising predictive biomarker is response testing on patient-derived organoids (PDOs). For metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), it is unclear what drug screening method is optimal and if PDOs predict response for all treatment types.
Methods
Drug screens were performed by exposing 23 PDOs to a concentration range of systemic drugs for 5 days. The following standard mCRC treatments were evaluated: 5-fluorouracil (n = 6), oxaliplatin (n = 14) and irinotecan (n = 10). Drug sensitivity was measured by cell viability and quantified by calculating the area under the curve (AUC). We compared in vitro sensitivity to patient response, evaluated using progression-free survival (PFS) and % change in the size of target lesions on CT scans.
Results
Drug screen methods regarding medium composition (with/without N-acetylcysteine), combination treatment ratios and read-outs were optimized, as they impact the correlation with clinical response. Correlations were seen between PDO response (AUC) and patient response (% change) for all chemotherapies (Spearman r = 0.3-0.6, ns). PFS was evaluable for patients treated with oxaliplatin (n=14). Median PFS of patients with organoids classified as resistant to oxaliplatin-based treatment - based on AUC - was relevantly shorter than for organoids classified as sensitive (3.4 vs 10.1 months, log rank p = 0.07). PDOs from patients previously exposed to chemotherapy showed increased resistance to chemotherapy with a significantly higher AUC (median 0.9 vs 0.4, Mann-Whitney U p = 0.005).
Conclusions
After drug screen optimization, we show that PDO response correlates with patient response to commonly used systemic mCRC treatments. This suggests that PDOs can serve as a predictive biomarker and guide personalized cancer treatment. PDOs adequately reflect prior treatment effect, supporting their use for modeling mCRC. Our findings and optimized screening method will be validated in the ongoing OPTIC trial (NL61668.041.17), to facilitate implementation of PDOs in clinical treatment.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
University Medical Center Utrecht.
Funding
HUB Organoids.
Disclosure
L. Valkenburg-van Iersel: Financial Interests, Advisory Role, Also travel/accommodations paid or reimbursed: Servier, Pierre Fabre; Financial Interests, Advisory Role: Roche, Amgen. M. Koopman: Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board, advisory board and speaker: Pierre Fabre; Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: MSD, Bayer; Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board, Advisory Board, speaker: Servier; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: Merck, BMS; Financial Interests, Institutional, Trial Chair: Servier; Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Servier, Roche, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Personal Genomics Diagnostics, Sirtex, Pierre Fabre; Financial Interests, Institutional, Funding: Pierre Fabre, Amgen, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Merck, Servier, BMS; Non-Financial Interests, Leadership Role, vice-chair of DCCG: Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group; Non-Financial Interests, Advisory Role, Member of KWF scientific board: KWF; Non-Financial Interests, Other, ESMO faculty member for the Gastro-Intestinal Tumours – colorectal cancer: ESMO; Non-Financial Interests, Advisory Role, expert member of committee “regie op registers dure geneesmiddelen” ZINNL; Non-Financial Interests, Advisory Role, CRC expert on Kanker.nl platform for answering online CRC questions of CRC (non) patients: Patient representative organisation (Kanker.nl); Non-Financial Interests, Leadership Role, chair of RWD & DH working group: ESMO; Other, PI of the Dutch Prospective Colorectal Cancer Cohort study: PLCRC project. J.M.L. Roodhart: Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: Bayer, BMS, Merck-Serono, Pierre Fabre, Servier, Amgen; Financial Interests, Institutional, Funding: HUB Organoids, Cleara Biotech, BMS, Pierre Fabre, Servier; Financial Interests, Institutional, Member of Board of Directors: Foundation Hubrecht Organoid Biobank. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
2315P - Clinical and blood immune-inflammatory profiling to decode different patterns of acquired resistance in immunotherapy treated NSCLC patients
Presenter: Giulia Mazzaschi
Session: Poster session 08
2316P - Integrating comprehensive cancer genome profiling into clinical practice in an Italian referral center: Results of the first year of the fpg500 programme
Presenter: Camilla Nero
Session: Poster session 08
2317P - Mutational landscape and therapeutic implications in squamous cell carcinomas
Presenter: Laila Belcaid
Session: Poster session 08
2318P - Value of broad molecular profiling for cancer diagnosis
Presenter: Lars Volker Anton Werstein
Session: Poster session 08
2319P - CADSP: A web tool for comprehensive drug sensitivity analysis in pan-cancer
Presenter: Kexin Li
Session: Poster session 08
2320P - Detection of gene fusion-induced neoepitopes in dedifferentiated liposarcoma
Presenter: Peter Horak
Session: Poster session 08
2321TiP - TEMPLE: Thiopurine enhanced mutations for PD-1/ligand-1 efficacy: A phase Ib/II clinical trial
Presenter: Christine Federspiel Secher
Session: Poster session 08
2322TiP - SOUND: A phase II trial evaluating the efficacy of molecular profiling of circulating ± tumor tissue DNA for salvage-therapy matching in patients with advanced and refractory carcinoma
Presenter: Jakob Riedl
Session: Poster session 08