Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jul 9;15(1):5763.
doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-49915-5.

Circulating KRAS G12D but not G12V is associated with survival in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Affiliations

Circulating KRAS G12D but not G12V is associated with survival in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Jacob E Till et al. Nat Commun. .

Abstract

While high circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) levels are associated with poor survival for multiple cancers, variant-specific differences in the association of ctDNA levels and survival have not been examined. Here we investigate KRAS ctDNA (ctKRAS) variant-specific associations with overall and progression-free survival (OS/PFS) in first-line metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) for patients receiving chemoimmunotherapy ("PRINCE", NCT03214250), and an independent cohort receiving standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy. For PRINCE, higher baseline plasma levels are associated with worse OS for ctKRAS G12D (log-rank p = 0.0010) but not G12V (p = 0.7101), even with adjustment for clinical covariates. Early, on-therapy clearance of G12D (p = 0.0002), but not G12V (p = 0.4058), strongly associates with OS for PRINCE. Similar results are obtained for the SOC cohort, and for PFS in both cohorts. These results suggest ctKRAS G12D but not G12V as a promising prognostic biomarker for mPDAC and that G12D clearance could also serve as an early biomarker of response.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

EMO reports research funding from Genentech/Roche, BioNTech, AstraZeneca, Arcus, Elicio, Parker Institute, NIH/NCI, Digestive Care, Break Through Cancer and consulting/DSMB for Arcus, Ability Pharma, Alligator, Agenus, Boehringer Ingelheim, BioNTech, Ipsen, Merck, Moma Therapeutics, Novartis, Syros, Leap Therapeutics, Astellas, BMS, Fibrogen, Revolution Medicine, Merus, AstraZeneca, BioSapien, Astellas, Thetis, Autem, Novocure, Neogene, Tempus, Fibrogen, Merus, Agios (spouse), Genentech-Roche (spouse), Eisai (spouse). RHV reports he has received consulting fees from BMS, is an inventor on patents relating to cancer cellular immunotherapy, cancer vaccines, and KRAS immune epitopes (10286066, 9555105, 8722400, 7851591, 7754482, and 7385023), and receives royalties from Children’s Hospital Boston for a licensed research-only monoclonal antibody. MHO report grants from the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy (PICI) during the conduct of this study as well as grants from BMS, Celldex, Psioxus, Genmab, Geistlich, Arcus, Elicio; grants and non-financial support from Stand Up To Cancer; and personal fees from Natera, Merus, and Alligator outside the submitted work. OER reports personal fees from Merck, Celgene, Five Prime Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer, Roche/Genentech, Puretech, Imvax and Sobi, as well as employment at and stock ownership of AstraZeneca outside the submitted work and has a patent pending (DFCI 2386.010) for methods that make use of pembrolizumab and trebananib. PFG reports stock ownership in Teiko.bio. TML reports Coherus Biosciences employment; stock ownership in AstraZenca and Coherus Biosciences. ZAW reports grants from PICI during the conduct of this study as well as research funding from BMS, Arcus, and Plexxikon and outside the submitted work and consulting/DSMB from BMS, Pfizer, Merck, Eli Lilly, Daiichi, AstraZeneca, Arcus, Novartis, Ipsen, Seagen, Alligator, Boehringer Ingelheim, Astellas, Eisai and Genentech/Roche. GAF reports personal fees from Merck, Roche/Genentech and CytomX outside the submitted work; and his spouse owns stock in Seattle Genetics. JXY reports stock in and employment with Bristol Myers Squibb. CWA reports Personalis, Inc. employment. JET reports research funding from PICI during the conduct of this study. KAR reports research funding from Clovis Oncology, BMS, GSK, and Lilly Oncology, membership on advisory boards for Carisma Therapeutics (2021), Astrazenca (2022), BMS (2022 and 2024), Synovation (2024), Merus (2024), Guardant (2024), the Medical Affairs Advisory Council for FMI (2023–2025), and consultanting for MOMA (2024). LDM is a current employee of BillionToOne and former employee of Personalis, a company that PICI paid to produce sequence information for some samples reported in this paper as part of a collaboration. He reports stock ownership in Personalis. SSY reports employment with Century Therapeutics. NB reports employment by Prelude Therapeutics, Inc. DMD reports current employment by Sanofi US and no other competing interests related to the work presented. ELC reports research funding or non-financial support from PICI, AstraZeneca, GuardantHealth, United Healthcare Group (UHG), Tempus, C2i, Oncocyte, Merck, ChipDX, Becton Dickinson and NIH/NCI. She received personal fees from BMS and Foundation Medicine. TBK reports grants from Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Eli Lilly Corporation, Genentech, Taiho, Xencor, Tempest Therapeutics, BioNTech, Boehringer Ingelheim, Replimune, Genfit, Totus Medicines, and PMV Pharma outside of the submitted work and personal fees from Incyte, AstraZeneca, Nucorion, Hepatitis B Foundation, Pfizer, Taiho, and Synnovation Therapeutics, all outside of the submitted work. SMB is an employee and shareholder of Personalis Inc, a company which performed genomic sequencing and joint research for the work in this publication. ROC is also an inventor on US patent number 09183496 issued to Personalis, which describes the genomic analyses in the Personalis sequencing platform used to sequence the samples in this study. He is also an employee of Personalis, a company which performed genomic sequencing and joint research for the work in this publication. LJP reports employment with Noetik, Inc. AHK reports research funding (paid directly to his institution) from Apexigen, Astellas, BMS, Celgene, Crystal Genomics, LEAP Therapeutics, Roche/Genentech, Verastem, the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network (PanCAN), and Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy (PICI); and consulting/DSMB for Aadi, Arcus, Eisai, Fibrogen, Grail, Ipsen, Merus, and Roche/Genentech. JRE reports research funding (institutional) from Oncolys, Gilead, Amgen, Hutchmed, Merck, Arcus and consulting/advisory board fees from Merck, Oncolys, Exelixis, Daiichi Sanyko. Additionally, she reports employment and stock for her spouse at Janssen and Merus. PSW, DMM, SMP, CNS, ZW, MY, DB, WL, SC, CC, QL, AAA, URT, PJO, CJS, HS, RAW, JPL and CRC report no competing interests related to the work presented.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. CONSORT diagram showing the PRINCE clinical trial and standard of care (SOC) validation cohorts.
Plasma samples were obtained from 200 total patients, including 115 PRINCE (A) and 85 SOC (B) patients. Altogether, 281 samples were analyzed, including: 115 PRINCE samples at baseline (32 for patients with prior therapy plus 83 for patients with no prior therapy), 41 PRINCE samples at week 8 (for patients with no prior therapy), 85 SOC samples at baseline, and 40 SOC samples at week 8. All SOC patients were therapy-naive. Among the 67 PRINCE patients with ctKRAS detected in baseline plasma, 41 also had a week 8 plasma obtained but 26 were unavailable due to the following reasons: 15 discontinued treatment prior to week 8, 6 died prior to week 8, 3 received a dose at week 8 but there was no blood drawn, and 2 did not receive a dose at week 8 due to an adverse event. Among 69 SOC patients with ctKRAS detected in baseline plasma, 40 also had a week 8 plasma obtained but 29 were unavailable due to the following reasons: 8 either discontinued treatment or were lost to follow-up, 13 died prior to week 8, 5 had a follow-up blood draw outside of the week 8 window, and 3 did not have week 8 samples available at the time of analysis. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. Survival association for baseline ctKRAS variant allele fraction (VAF) by variant for therapy-naive PRINCE patients.
Shown are the Kaplan–Meier curves for baseline VAF dichotomized at the median for overall survival (top, A, B) and progression-free survival (bottom, C, D) for patients with G12D- (left, A, C) or G12V-bearing tumors (right, B, D). Cox regression hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are shown with log-rank p-values. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3. Survival association for baseline ctKRAS variant allele fraction (VAF) by variant for therapy-naive standard of care (SOC) patients.
Shown are the Kaplan–Meier curves for baseline VAF dichotomized at the median for overall survival (top, A, B) and progression-free survival (bottom, C, D) for patients with G12D- (left, A, C) or G12V-bearing tumors (right, B, D). Cox regression hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are shown with log-rank p-values. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4. Survival association with early, on-therapy ctKRAS dynamics by variant for PRINCE cohort.
Shown is the association with one-year survival (alive or dead at one year) for therapy-naive PRINCE patients with any detected baseline ctKRAS mutation as measured by A changes in ctKRAS variant allele fraction (VAF) from baseline to week 8 on therapy (n = 37), or B ctKRAS clearance at week 8 on therapy for G12D only (left) and G12V only (right). Shown in C is Kaplan-Meyer analysis dichotomized by ctKRAS clearance vs no clearance and association with overall survival for G12D only (left), and G12V only (right). Results for progression-free survival shown in D. Among the 39 PRINCE patients with both a baseline and week 8 plasma obtained, 2 had insufficient follow-up to determine 1-year survival and were thus excluded from the results shown in A, B. Mann–Whitney test (two-sided) used for comparisons in A. Fishers exact test (two-sided) used in B. Cox regression hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are shown with log-rank p-values for C, D. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5. Survival association with early, on-therapy ctKRAS dynamics by variant for SOC cohort.
Shown is the association with 1-year survival (alive or dead at one year) for therapy-naive SOC patients with any detected baseline ctKRAS mutation as measured by A changes in ctKRAS variant allele fraction (VAF) from baseline to week 8 on therapy (n = 31), or B ctKRAS clearance at week 8 on therapy for G12D only (left) and G12V only (right,). Shown in C is Kaplan–Meyer analysis dichotomized by ctKRAS clearance vs no clearance and association with overall survival for G12D only (left), and G12V only (right). Results for progression-free survival shown in D. Mann–Whitney test (two-sided) used for comparisons in A. Fishers exact test (two-sided) used in B. Cox regression hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are shown with log-rank p values for C, D. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6. Correlation of clinical variables with baseline ctKRAS variant allele fraction (VAF) levels for therapy-naive PRINCE and standard of care (SOC) patients.
Shown are results for Spearman correlations (two-sided) for all continuous clinical variables with ctKRAS VAF levels for PRINCE patients (top) and SOC patients (bottom). For each variable, the Spearman ρ is shown for patients with ctKRAS G12D (green bars) and G12V (dark gray bars). “Sum of Diameters” and “Count of Lesions” refer to categories of RECIST imaging measurements (see Methods). Among 56 total PRINCE patients analyzed, 33 have ctKRAS G12D and 23 have G12V. For SOC, the number of patients varies slightly by clinical variable (see Supplementary Table 5 for exact patient numbers). Significant p-values are indicated for the bar over which it appears. If only one bar in a pair has a p-value, that indicates significance for the association of the clinical variable with that particular ctKRAS variant (G12D or G12V) VAF levels but not for the other variant. If a p-value appears over both bars in a pair, that indicates that the association of that clinical variant with ctKRAS VAF for both G12D and G12V was significant. ALT alanine transaminase, AST aspartate transaminase, and BUN blood urea nitrogen are used. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

References

    1. Thompson, J. C. et al. Serial monitoring of circulating tumor DNA by next-generation gene sequencing as a biomarker of response and survival in patients with advanced NSCLC receiving pembrolizumab-based therapy. JCO Precis. Oncol.5, PO.20.00321 (2021). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Syeda MM, et al. Circulating tumour DNA in patients with advanced melanoma treated with dabrafenib or dabrafenib plus trametinib: a clinical validation study. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22:370–380. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30726-9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moding EJ, et al. Circulating tumor DNA dynamics predict benefit from consolidation immunotherapy in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Nat. Cancer. 2020;1:176–183. doi: 10.1038/s43018-019-0011-0. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Anagnostou V, et al. Dynamics of tumor and immune responses during immune checkpoint blockade in non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Res. 2019;79:1214–1225. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-1127. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kruger S, et al. Repeated mutKRAS ctDNA measurements represent a novel and promising tool for early response prediction and therapy monitoring in advanced pancreatic cancer. Ann. Oncol. 2018;29:2348–2355. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy417. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms