Li, Daneng

Abstract Introduction: Next generation of Theranostics studies are looking at novel combinations with radiation sensitizers to enhance PRRT’s efficacy. Here, we present safety and efficacy data from a multi-center phase 1 study of a [¹⁷⁷Lu]lutetium-dotatate -triapine combination in patients with GEP-NETs. Methods: The study consisted of two phases (dose escalation and expansion) administering the recommended phase 2 doses (RP2D) for the two agents. All patients received 200 mCi of [¹⁷⁷Lu]lutetium-dotatate on day 1 of four 8-week cycles, in combination with oral triapine administered at assigned dose levels (100 mg, 150 mg or 200mg) from days 1 to 14 of each cycle. Results: A total of 31 (A: 15 ; B: 16 ) patients received treatment. Nine patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities; Grade 3 anemia (n=1), Grade 5 cardiac arrest (n=1), and Grade 4 neutropenia (n=7). Based on the overall safety and pharmacokinetics data, a [¹⁷⁷Lu]lutetium-dotatate (200 mCi) plus triapine (150 mg) dose was selected as the RP2D for the expansion phase. Grade ≥3 treatment related adverse events were observed in 77% patients: anemia (23%), nausea and vomiting (3% ), lymphopenia ( 58%), neutropenia ( 35%) and leukopenia ( 39%). The majority of cytopenias were transient and resolved within two weeks. Among the 28 evaluable patients, the objective response rate (ORR) was 21.4% and the median progression-free survival (mPFS) has not been reached (median follow-up period: 23.7 months). Conclusions: The combination of [¹⁷⁷Lu]lutetium-dotatate (200 mCi) and oral triapine (150 mg D1-14) was well tolerated and demonstrated preliminary activity in patients with well-differentiated GEP-NETs. (NCT04234568).

Abstract Purpose: The addition of MEK inhibition (MEKi) to programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) blockade improves progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. Although MEK inhibitors may increase tumor cell immunogenicity, they can impair T-cell priming/effector function, limiting combination efficacy. We hypothesized that the addition of a CD27 agonist could restore T-cell function and enhance antitumor immunity in this combination. Patients and Methods: We conducted a randomized, phase II trial evaluating atezolizumab (840 mg, intravenously, days 1 and 15) in combination with the CD27 costimulatory monoclonal antibody [CDX-1127/varlilumab (3 mg/kg, intravenously, days 1 and 15)], with/without the addition of an MEK inhibitor [cobimetinib (60 mg, orally, daily, days 1–21, off days 22–28)] in unresectable biliary tract cancer following at least one metastatic therapy. Overall response rate (ORR) and PFS were coprimary endpoints. Treatment-related changes in CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) were the primary correlative outcomes. Results: The trial was closed early following interim preplanned ORR analysis. At closure, 57 patients had been enrolled [n = 29 in the cobimetinib + atezolizumab + varlilumab (CAV) arm; n = 28 in the atezolizumab + varlilumab (AV) arm]. A majority (67%) had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and 32% were immunotherapy experienced. Both regimens were well tolerated without new safety signals. Objective responses were rare [0% (CAV); 3.8% (AV)]. The median PFS (mPFS) was 2.40 (CAV) and 1.84 (AV) months [hazard ratio (HR), 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.38–1.18]. Among immunotherapy-experienced patients, the mPFS was 3.62 (CAV) and 1.84 (AV) months (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.18–1.62). Treatment with CAV increased intratumoral CD8+ T-cell density compared with treatment with AV. Conclusions: The combinations of atezolizumab and varlilumab with/without cobimetinib were safe, but neither meaningfully improved outcomes in biliary tract cancer treated in the later lines. Correlative tissue studies validated preclinical work that MEKi increases CD8+ TILs.

566 Background: FGFR inhibitors (FGFRi) have an established role in treating FGFR2-altered (alt) cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). Tinengotinib, a novel FGFRi, has shown promising activity overcoming acquired resistance to prior FGFRi. We present biomarker analyses evaluating tinengotinib’s ability to overcome prior FGFRi resistance and to elucidate mechanism of resistance to tinengotinib. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) with advanced/metastatic CCA who had received ≥ 1 prior systemic chemotherapy were treated with tinengotinib 10 mg daily across 4 Cohorts: A1: FGFR2 fusion (fus) with primary progressive disease (PD) on prior FGFRi; A2: FGFR2 fus with PD after prior response to FGFRi; B: FGFR alt without FGFR2 fus; C: FGFR wild-type. Efficacy was assessed by RECIST v1.1. All pts underwent liquid biopsy for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) at baseline; additional timepoints include cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), time of PD, and end of treatment (EOT). Samples were analyzed using FoundationOne Liquid panel. Results: 27 out of 55 enrolled pts had biomarker samples collected at baseline and C3D1. Among them, pts in A1 (n=10, 107 mutations (mut)), B (n=8, 90 mut) and C (n=5, 74 mut) showed a significant decrease in short variant allele frequencies (VAF) from baseline to C3D1 by a median relative VAF reduction of 100% (p<0.0001) for each of the three cohorts. Although a median relative VAF reduction of 33.3% was seen in A2 (n=4, 15 mut), this was not significant (p=0.6093) likely due to low baseline mutation burden. A ≥50% reduction in ctDNA was associated with improved progression free survival (p<0.0014). Additionally, 100% of median relative reductions in FGFR2 kinase domain (KD) mut were seen in A1 and B (p<0.0001, 95% CI 100-100% and p=0.0156, 95% CI 83.6-100%, respectively), with 92% and 57% clearance of initial FGFR2 KD mut by C3D1. In a subgroup of 10 pts with biomarker sampling at baseline and EOT, 3 pts in A1 with acquired resistance showed emergence of novel FGFR2 mut, loss of FGFR-sensitive mut and new mut in alternate pathways (e.g., AKT, EGFR, RAS/MAPK) while retaining the original FGFR2 fus. 1 pt from B developed resistance due to new FGFR2 rearrangements and FGFR2 mut. 4 FGFR wild-type pts from C developed resistance involving mut in TP53, KRAS, and other oncogenic drivers. Conclusions: These findings provide genomic evidence that tinengotinib may overcome resistance to prior FGFRi treatment in FGFR2 fus-positive CCA, as reflected by significantly reductions in ctDNA VAFs and frequent clearance of FGFR2 KD mutations. The emergence of resistance alterations including de novo FGFR2 mutations and bypass pathways activations indicates acquired resistance that may limit long-term benefit. These results support further investigation with expanded biomarker sampling to better characterize resistance evolution and guide therapy optimization in an ongoing Phase 3 trial. Clinical trial information: NCT04919642 .

608 Background: Tinengotinib, a spectrum-selective multi-kinase inhibitor with unique binding properties to FGFR , potently inhibited FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement and acquired resistant/gatekeeper mutations in pre-clinical models and exhibited antitumor activity in cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) patients (pts) in phase 1/2 trials. Here we present the overall survival (OS) data and biomarker correlative analysis from a phase 2 clinical trial of tinengotinib in CCA. Methods: Eligible pts with advanced/metastatic CCA who had received ≥ 1 prior systemic chemotherapy with ECOG PS 0-1 were treated with tinengotinib 10 mg QD across four Cohorts: A1: FGFR2 fusion(s) with primary progression on previous FGFR inhibitor ( FGFR i); A2: FGFR2 fusion(s) with progression after prior response to FGFR i; B: FGFR alteration(s) without FGFR2 fusion(s); C: FGFR wild-type. Efficacy was evaluated per RECIST v1.1 and safety was assessed by CTCAE v5.0. Genomic alterations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) were assessed by Foundation Medicine NGS panel at baseline, C3D1 and EOT. Planned correlative analyses of response (PR+SD>6 months) and PFS in pt subgroups based on ctDNA mutational status were performed. Results: 55 eligible pts were enrolled (18 in A1, 11 in A2, 13 in B, 13 in C) with median age 61.0 [range 24-81] years, ECOG PS 0 in 50.9% pts, 56.4% female, and 60.0% with ≥ 3 lines of prior therapy. Among 42 pts with FGFR alterations, 78.4% had ≥ 1 prior FGFR i, and 97.6% had prior chemotherapy. Median follow up time was 8.6 months (0.4-30.5). The median OS (months) was 17.1 (95%CI 7.5-19.5) in A1; not reached (95%CI 9.6, -) in A2; 18.0 (95%CI 9.6, -) in A1+A2; not reached (95%CI 8.0, -) in B; 6.5 (95%CI 4.8-16.4) in C. The OS rate in A, B and C was 100%, 91.7% and 75% at month 3; 83.7%, 83.3% and 66.7% at month 6, and 65.8%, 55.6% and 23.8% at month 12. Partial response was observed in 26% (10/39) of evaluable FGFR-altered pts (A1+A2+B). The safety profile was consistent with previous reports. The most common any-grade treatment-related AEs were hypertension (63.6%) and diarrhea (47.3%). Baseline ctDNA results were available in 46 pts, 35 in cohorts A+B and 11 in C. A positive correlation was shown in MED12 mutation vs response (P=0.03476). BCOR and ARID1A mutation were found to be negatively associated with PFS (P=0.01366 and P=0.0437). Acquired/secondary mutations at baseline were observed in cohort A, including V564F/I (3/24 and 5/24) and N549K/H (5/24 and 5/24); favorable anti-tumor activity was noted despite these resistant mutations, consistent with preclinical data. Conclusions: Tinengotinib has shown promising anti-tumor efficacy in CCA pts with FGFR fusion after prior FGFR i and in those with primary FGFR mutations. An ongoing randomized phase III study will investigate tinengotinib vs. chemotherapy in FGFR inhibitor refractory CCA (NCT05948475). Clinical trial information: NCT04919642 .

TPS2675 Background: Checkpoint inhibitor therapy is the standard first-line treatment for advanced/recurrent HCC, but there is a significant unmet therapeutic need for patients (pts) who progress after first-line treatment. Adoptive cellular immunotherapy may provide a novel treatment option. Glypican-3 (GPC3), a heparan sulfate proteoglycan, is overexpressed by tumor cells in HCC and virtually absent in healthy tissues, making it an ideal target for CAR-T therapy. AZD5851 is an autologous CAR-T product that expresses a CAR specific for GPC3 and a dominant negative (dn)TGFβRII as an armoring strategy. Expression of dnTGFβRII can block TGFβ signaling, protecting CAR T-cells from the immunosuppressive effects of this cytokine. Early clinical data with C-CAR031, a CAR-T product with the same GPC3-specific CAR and dnTGFβRII-armoring transgene as AZD5851, showed promising tolerability and antitumor activity in pts with HCC [1]. ATHENA (NCT06084884) is a first-in-human, single-arm, open-label, multicenter phase 1/2 study to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and antitumor activity of AZD5851 in pts with GPC3+ advanced/recurrent HCC, for whom ≥1 prior line of standard therapy failed or was not tolerable. Methods: Eligible pts are aged ≥18 years with histologically confirmed advanced/recurrent or metastatic and/or unresectable HCC, GPC3+ tumor sample as determined by immunohistochemistry, ≥1 prior line of standard systemic therapy, ≥1 measurable lesion per RECIST 1.1, Child-Pugh A, ECOG PS 0/1, and adequate organ and bone marrow function. Approximately 24 pts will be enrolled in Part A (Phase I, dose escalation) and 50 in Part B (Phase II dose expansion). Pts will undergo apheresis to collect peripheral blood mononuclear cells for AZD5851 production, after which they may receive approved bridging therapy for disease control. Upon successful generation of AZD5851 product, pts will undergo lymphodepletion before receiving a single dose of IV AZD5851. Subsequent follow-up is divided into 3 stages: Stage 1, active follow-up of all pts through 6 months post AZD5851 infusion; Stage 2, further evaluation of pts who have not progressed or started a new anticancer regimen during Stage 1; Stage 3, long-term follow-up for all pts who have received AZD5851. The primary endpoints are to assess the safety/tolerability of AZD5851 (both study parts), and to determine the recommended dose(s) of AZD5851 for expansion and phase 2 trials (Part A). Secondary endpoints include efficacy (objective response rate, best overall response, duration of response, disease control rate, durable response rate, time to response, progression-free survival, and overall survival) and pharmacokinetics. Exploratory endpoints include pharmacodynamic biomarkers and immunogenicity. Enrollment began Nov 2023. 1. Zhang et al. AACR 2023. Abstract CT097. Clinical trial information: NCT06084884 .

4017 Background: Combined MEK inhibition (MEKi) and PD-L1 blockade significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus PD-L1 monotherapy in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) following first-line chemotherapy (NCT03201458). Further study has shown MEKi enhances tumor immunogenicity but impairs host T cell activation/priming. The addition of immune agonists, e.g. a CD27 agonist, can rescue T cell function in the setting of systemic MEKi in vivo and may be an effective strategy to optimize MEKi’s immunomodulatory potential when used in combination with checkpoint blockade. Methods: We conducted a randomized ph 2 trial (NCT04941287) evaluating Atezolizumab in combination with the CD27 immune agonist (CDX-1127 [Varlilumab]) with or without the addition of a MEKi (Cobimetinib) in patients with unresectable, previously treated, BTC. Adults with pathologically-confirmed BTC, s/p at least 1 prior line (no more than 2) of systemic therapy, measurable disease, and ECOG PS ≤1 were enrolled. Patients who had received previous PD-[L]1 were eligible. The study was planned for 64 evaluable subjects randomized in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by BTC site, to either AV (Atezolizumab [840mg IV days 1,15])+ Varlilumab [3mg/kg IV days 1, 15]) or CAV (Cobimetinib [60mg oral daily days 1-21, off 22-28] + Atezolizumab + Varlilumab). Overall response rate (ORR) and PFS were co-primary endpoints. The primary correlative outcome was treatment-related changes in CD8+ infiltrating T cells. Results: A preplanned interim analysis based on objective response rates did not meet the threshold for continuance in either treatment arm, so the trial was closed early for futility. In total, 57 patients were enrolled (n = 29 [CAV], n = 28 [AV], 67% had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and 33% had received previous PD-[L]1. Both CAV and AV regimens were well-tolerated without new safety signals. Adding CDX-1127 did not appear to meaningful increase immunotoxicity beyond established PD-L1 toxicity profiles. ORR was 0% (CAV) and 4% (AV). With a median follow up time of 6.2 months, median PFS was 2.2 (CAV) and 1.8 (AV) months (HR 0.71 [0.40,1.25]). In PD[L]1-experienced patients, median PFS was 3.6 (CAV) and 1.7 (AV) months (HR 0.44 [0.14,1.33]). Median OS was 10.2 (CAV) and 6.1 (AV) months (HR 0.76 [0.37,1.55]). In PD[L]1-experienced patients, median OS was 6.4 (CAV) and 4.4 (AV) months for CAV and AV (HR 0.68 [0.19,2.42]). Primary correlative endpoint and updated survival will be reported at time of meeting. Conclusions: The combination of Atezolizumab and Varlilumab with or without Cobimetinib was safe but did not improve clinical outcomes in advanced stage BTC patients treated in later lines. Though not statistically significant, treatment with CAV demonstrated numerically favorable PFS/OS compared AV among immunotherapy-experienced patients. Clinical trial information: NCT03201458 .

Abstract Background: Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) alterations occur across various malignancies and are potent oncogenic drivers in multiple tumor types. FGFR inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in several cancers with FGFR alterations. Tinengotinib is a novel kinase inhibitor with high potency to a variety of FGFR 1/2/3 kinase domain mutations and has shown promising efficacy in several ongoing clinical studies. Here, we present pooled data of tinengotinib in previously treated solid tumor patients (pts) with actionable FGFR1-3 mutations from four trials (NCT03654547, NCT04742959, NCT04919642, NCT05253053). Methods: Eligible pts received tinengotinib orally once daily (daily dose ranging from 5-12mg) until disease progression. Analyses of best overall response (BOR) rate, disease control rate (DCR), median progression-free survival (mPFS), median duration of response (mDOR) and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were performed. Results: As of 3-Aug-2023, 53 solid tumor pts with actionable FGFR1-3 mutations were enrolled between Dec-2019 to Aug-2023 in the US and China. The median follow-up time was 14.5 (range, 3.3-43.8) months. Median age was 58 years (range, 29-83). Most pts were female (62%), had ECOG of 1 (68%) and were heavily pretreated with 55% having ≥3 lines of prior antitumor therapy. The most frequent FGFR mutation enrolled was in FGFR2 (77%) followed by FGFR1 (19%) and FGFR3 (11%). 25 pts (47%) had received prior therapy with FGFR inhibitor. A total of 45 pts were efficacy-evaluable, including cholangiocarcinoma (CCA, n=25), colon cancer (n=5), breast cancer (n=3), prostate cancer (n=3), head and neck cancer (n=3), urothelial cancer (n=3), pancreatic cancer (n=1), gastric cancer (n=1) and leiomyosarcoma (n=1). mPFS reached 6.83 (95% CI, 4.90-8.34) months. Partial responses were observed in 16/45 (35.6%) pts across 6 distinct tumor types, including CCA, breast, prostate, urothelium, colon and head and neck cancer. mDOR was 6.74 (95% CI, 3.52-9.46) months. For 44 pts with measurable target lesions per RECISTv1.1, the BOR rate and DCR were 36.4% and 86.4%, respectively. For 22 pts with prior FGFR inhibitor, mPFS was 5.98 (95% CI, 3.75-9.10) months and their BOR rate and DCR were 40.9% and 86.4%. TRAEs were reported in 46 (86.8%) pts, with 13 (24.5%) Grade (G) 1-2, 30 (56.6%) G3, 2 (3.8%) G4, and no G5. The most common TRAEs (≥20%) were hypertension, stomatitis, diarrhea, nausea, blood thyroid stimulating hormone increased, fatigue and anemia. Side effects were manageable and reversible with dose hold and/or dose reduction. Conclusions: We observed promising clinical benefit with tinengotinib in heavily pretreated solid tumor pts with FGFR1-3 mutations. The side effects profile was manageable and no new safety signals have been identified. Further research is planned to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tinengotinib in pts with FGFR1-3 mutations across a wider variety of tumor types. Citation Format: Sarina A. Piha-Paul, Chih-Yi "Andy" Liao, Lionel Fonkoua, Amit MahipaI, Sanjay Goel, Christos Fountzilas, Lin Shen, Daneng Li, Dustin Deming, Farshid Dayyani, Weiqing Han, Zuoxing Niu, Jean Fan, Peng Peng, Hui Wang, Peng Huang, Frank Wu, Milind Javle. Tinengotinib in patients with advanced solid tumors harboring actionable FGFR1-3 mutations [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 2 (Late-Breaking, Clinical Trial, and Invited Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(7_Suppl):Abstract nr LB162.

434 Background: Tinengotinib is a spectrum-selective multi-kinase inhibitor with unique binding properties to FGFR, potently inhibited FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement and acquired resistant mutations in pre-clinical models and in phase I trials that included cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) patients (pts). Here we present the efficacy and safety of tinengotinib in a phase II clinical trial. Methods: Eligible pts with advanced/metastatic CCA who had received ≥ 1 prior systemic chemotherapy therapy and ECOG PS 0 or 1 were treated with tinengotinib 10 mg QD. Four cohorts included: Cohort A1: FGFR2 fusion(s) with primary progression on previous FGFR inhibitor ( FGFRi), A2: FGFR2 fusion(s) with progression after prior response to FGFRi (acquired resistance); B: non-fusion FGFR alteration(s): C: FGFR wild-type ( FGFRwt). Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. CTCAE V5.0 was used for safety assessments. Results: As of 7Aug2023, 48 pts with CCA were enrolled, 13 in Cohort A1, 10 in A2, 12 in B, 13 in C. Median age 61.5 [range 25-81] years old, 41.7% male, 58.3% had ≥ 3 lines of prior therapy. ECOG PS 0 in 47.9% pts. Among 35 pts with FGFR alterations, 80.0% had ≥ 1 prior FGFRi therapy, and 97.1% had prior chemotherapy. Forty (40) pts were efficacy evaluable. In A1, 1 out of 11 pts (9.1%) achieved PR with tumor reduction of 31.8%. In A2, 3 out of 8 pts (37.5%) achieved PR with tumor reduction of 40.7%, 47.0% and 54.6%. In B, 3 out of 9 pts (33.3%) achieved PR with tumor reduction of 36.5%, 48.6%, and 60.6%. No PR was observed in C. Overall DCR was 94.7% (18/19) in FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement pts (A1+A2), 88.9% (8/9) in other FGFR alterations pts (B), and 75% (9/12) in FGFRwt pts (C). Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 5.26 months (95%CI, 2.86-9.10) in A1+A2, 5.98 months (95%CI, 1.87-NA) in B and 3.84 months (95% CI, 1.84-4.80) in C. Among 48 treated pts, treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in 45 (93.8%) pts, 14 (29.2%) in G1-2, 29 (60.4%) in G3 and 2 (4.2%) in G4. The most common G3 TRAEs were hypertension in 12 (25%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome in 3 (6.3%), diarrhea in 3 (6.3%) and stomatitis in 3 (6.3%). One subject had G4 increased TSH and G4 increased lipase, and another subject had G4 posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. No G5 TRAE was observed. Conclusions: Tinengotinib has promising clinical benefit for FGFR2 fusion CCA after prior FGFRi and for non-fusion FGFR alterations. Tinengotinib-related toxicities were manageable. An ongoing randomized, controlled phase III study will evaluate the clinical efficacy, safety, and pharmacodynamic effect of Tinengotinib vs Physicians’ choice in subjects with FGFR2-altered refractory/relapsed CCA after prior chemotherapy and FGFRi therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT04919642 .

Abstract Background: Radiation is a potent inducer of DNA double-strand breaks, and ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) is the rate-limiting enzyme in the synthesis and repair of DNA, making RNR-targeted therapy a rationale therapeutic strategy for radiosensitization. ETCTN 10388 (NCT04234568) evaluated safety and efficacy of the combination of lutetium 177 DOTATATE, a beta-emitting radionuclide in combination with triapine, a ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) inhibitor. Method: This study was a multicenter phase 1 dose escalation trial [using the Bayesian optimal interval design (BOIN)] of triapine in combination with fixed dose lutetium Lu 177 DOTATATE for well-differentiated somatostatin receptor-positive gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (GEP-NETs) after the failure of at least one line of prior systemic cancer treatment with an expansion cohort at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Oral triapine (100mg, 150mg, 200mg) was administered once daily on days 1-14 and Lu-177 DOTATATE [200 mCi] intravenously on day 1 of every 56-day cycle. A total of 4 cycles were administered. Response and adverse effects were assessed per RECIST and CTCAE 5.0, respectively. Exploratory correlative studies included tumor somatic and germline mutation testing, RNA sequencing, pharmacokinetics, deoxynucleosides and circulating cell free DNA analysis. Primary endpoints were safety and RP2D. Results: Overall, 31 patients were enrolled between 6 sites, 15 in the dose escalation phase and 16 in the dose expansion phase. Adverse events (AE) were assessed in all 31 patients per CTCAE 5.0. One DLT in dose level 1, seven DLTs in dose level 2, and one grade 5 DLT in dose level 3 were observed. The RP2D of the combination is triapine 150 mg QD (dose level 2) on days 1-14 in combination with Lu-177 DOTATATE on day 1 of every 56-day cycle. Detailed safety and adverse event data will be presented at the meeting. There were 28 patients evaluable for efficacy, of which 6 (21%) achieved a partial response. At 12 months, 6 patients had progressed, while 22 (86%) remained progression free. Median PFS has not been reached. PK data were available for 12 patients enrolled in the dose escalation cohort. The geometric mean (SD) AUC0-inf was 1159 (1.22) µg/L•h for the 100mg dose level and 1862 (1.76) µg/L•h for the 150 mg dose level, suggesting that exposure increased with dose, and inter-patient variability was as expected for an oral agent. Conclusion: The combination of triapine and Lu-177 DOTATATE was safe with preliminary efficacy signals, which will be further evaluated in ETCTN 10558, a randomized phase 2 study that is comparing the effectiveness of triapine and Lu-177 DOTATATE to Lu-177 DOTATATE alone. Citation Format: Aman Chauhan, Susanne Arnold, Jill Kolesar, William Carson, Heidi Weiss, Rani Jayswal, Donglin Yan, Riham El Khouli, Aman Khurana, Jan Beumer, Heloisa Soares, Mary Mulcahy, Thorvardur Halfdanarson, Daneng Li, Heather Jacene, Percy Ivy, Elise Kohn, John Wright, Larry Rubinstein, Zeta Chow, Piotr Rychahou, Mark B. Evers, Charles Kunos, Lowell Anthony, Bhavana Konda. ETCTN 10388: a first in human phase I trial of triapine and lutetium Lu 177 DOTATATE in well-differentiated somatostatin receptor-positive gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT194.

648 Background: Radiation is a potent inducer of DNA double-strand breaks, and ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) is the rate-limiting enzyme for conversion of ribonucleoside diphosphate to deoxyribonucleotide diphosphate, and thus repair of DNA in this setting. ETCTN 10388 evaluated safety of combination Lu-177 DOTATATE, a beta-emitting radionuclide in combination with triapine, a ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) inhibitor. Methods: This investigator initiated, NCI sponsored, multicenter phase 1 trial, enrolled a total of 31 patients in the dose escalation [using the Bayesian optimal interval design (BOIN)] and dose expansion cohorts. Oral triapine was administered on days 1-14 and Lu-177 DOTATATE [200 mCi] intravenously on day 1 of every 56-day cycle. A total of 4 cycles were administered. All enrolled patients had blood samples collected for triapine pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis in EDTA tubes prior to and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 8 h after oral administration during cycle 1. Results: Five patients were enrolled in triapine Dose Level 1 (100 mg/day), twenty-five to dose level two (150 mg/day), and one patient to dose level three (200 mg/day). PK data were available for 12 patients enrolled in the dose escalation cohort. The geometric mean (SD) AUC0-inf was 1159 (1.22) µg/L•h for the 100mg dose level and 1862 (1.76) µg/L•h for the 150 mg dose level, suggesting that exposure increased with dose, and inter-patient variability was as expected for an oral agent. Triapine PK parameter values observed in this trial, were comparable to previous reports that used a previous formulation [ 1 ]. While exposure was similar, variability appeared smaller with the current oral formulation. Adverse events (AE) were assessed in all 31 patients per CTCAE 5.0. A total of one DLT in dose level 1, seven DLTs (Transient cytopenia; primarily neutropenia and rarely thrombocytopenia) in dose level 2, and one grade 5 DLT (Death probably from progressive cancer and carcinoid heart disease but possibly from trial drugs) in dose level 3 were observed. Detailed AE profile will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: The RP2D of triapine is 150 mg QD on days 1-14 in combination with Lu-177 DOTATATE on day 1 of every 56-day cycle. Clinical trial information: 04234568 .