AbstractThe rechallenge strategy is based on the concept that a subset of patients withRASwild‐type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) could still benefit of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition, after progression to an anti‐EGFR based‐therapy. We performed a pooled analysis of two‐phase II prospective trials to determine the role of rechallenge in third‐line mCRC patients withRAS/BRAFWT baseline circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Individual data of 33 and 13 patients from CAVE and CRICKET trials that received as third‐line therapy cetuximab rechallenge were collected. Overall survival (OS), Progression‐free survival (PFS), Overall response rate (ORR), Stable disease (SD) >6 months were calculated. Adverse events were reported. For the whole 46 patient population, median PFS (mPFS) was 3.9 months (95% Confidence Interval, CI 3.0–4.9) with median OS (mOS) of 16.9 months (95% CI 11.7–22.1). For CRICKET patients, mPFS was 3.9 months (95% CI 1.7–6.2); mOS was 13.1 months (95% CI 7.3–18.9) with OS rates at 12, 18, and 24 months of 62%, 23%, and 0%, respectively. For CAVE patients, mPFS was 4.1 months (95% CI 3.0–5.2); mOS was 18.6 months (95% CI 11.7–25.4) with OS rates at 12, 18, 24 months of 61%, 52%, 21%, respectively. Skin rash was more frequently reported in CAVE trial (87.9% vs. 30.8%;p= 0.001), whereas a increased incidence of hematological toxicities was observed in CRICKET trial (53.8%% vs. 12.1%;p= 0.003). Third‐line cetuximab rechallenge in combination with either irinotecan or avelumab inRAS/BRAFWT ctDNA mCRC patients represents a promising therapy.