NeoRAS: Incidence of RAS reversion from RAS mutated to RAS wild type.

180 Background: RAS mutations are found in ~50% of patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and associated with resistance to anti-EGFR. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) enables detection of resistant RAS MUT arising from RAS WT . Recently there has been interest in defining the converse: RAS MUT tumors that revert to RAS WT , with early results suggesting rates of ~7%. Clinical trials in this population are in development, though the incidence has not been validated with robust methodologies. Methods: 1) We identified 74 mCRC pts with baseline RAS MUT and longitudinal ctDNA or tissue data enrolled in ATTACC (NCT01196130), a prospective genomic matching protocol utilizing paired tissue/ctDNA samples at baseline. We evaluated serial samples for RAS loss. 2) Using an external cohort of pts with mCRC and serial ctDNA with a targeted NGS assay sequencing all KRAS/ NRAS exons (Guardant360, Guardant Health), we screened pts for baseline RAS MUT with no evidence of prior anti-EGFR exposure and evaluated for RAS loss. Results: 74 pts met criteria of RAS MUT CRC with serial samples in ATTACC. Of these, 51 retained RAS MUT . 22 pts had very low or absent levels of other clonal alterations such as APC or TP53 and are therefore unable to reliably detect RAS loss. One patient had true RAS loss with NRAS G13R, APC and TP53 mutations at baseline and persistent high-level APC and TP53 mutations without a detectable NRAS mutation, for an overall rate of RAS loss of 2% (1/52). In the second cohort we identified 162 pts, 34 of which had insufficient ctDNA to assess RAS loss on the serial sample as defined by loss of clonal alterations like APC and TP53. Of the remaining 128 patients, 11 had RAS loss (8.5%, with 1 NRAS, 10 KRAS). We next compared the relative mutant allele frequency (rMAF) between RAS retainers and RAS loss. The median baseline rMAF for pts who lost RAS was 0.74, compared to 0.86 in pts retaining RAS (p = 0.045). Conclusions: RAS reversion in mCRC from RAS MUT to RAS WT is uncommon and occurs at a rate between 2-8% in our two cohorts. RAS reversion is associated with a lower rMAF at baseline, suggesting subclonality. Liquid biopsies must be interpreted carefully, such that a determination of RAS mutation status is most informative in the presence of truncal APC and/or TP53 mutations.