Liu, Yuan

Abstract Systematic multiomic analysis has revealed ancestry-dependent molecular alterations, but their impact on the efficacy of anticancer treatment is yet largely unknown. In this study, we analyzed clinical trials from ClinicalTrials.gov and found that only 8,779/102,721 (8.5%) oncology clinical trials posted information on enrollment by race/ethnicity. The underrepresentation of non-White populations suggests that it remains challenging to determine differences in the efficacy of antitumor treatments among different racial groups. Through a comprehensive analysis of clinically actionable genes, imputed drug responses, and immune features, we identified potential differences in treatment responses to targeted therapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy between different ancestral populations. Further analysis of multiple independent cohorts confirmed some of our key findings. Such potential ancestral effects are also identified in response to emerging new treatments like chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy and proteolysis-targeting chimeras. These findings are made publicly available in a comprehensive web portal, Ancestral Differences of Efficacy in Cancers (https://hanlaboratory.com/ADEC), to facilitate their further investigation. Significance: Our study charts a global landscape of ancestry-associated differences in therapeutic efficacy, highlighting the importance of considering ancestry in anticancer therapies.

3580 Background: TAS-102 (FTD/TPI) is a combination of a nucleoside analogue and a thymidine phosphorylase inhibitor, and has showed activity in 5FU-resistant CRC. Nal-IRI achieves higher intra-tumor concentrations than irinotecan (Iri; 142-fold) and its major metabolite, SN-38 (9-fold). This resulted in superior anti-tumor activity compared to free Iri in multiple tumor xenografts. Furthermore, multiple clinical trials have established the activity of nal-IRI in combination with 5FU in pancreaticobiliary cancers. The combination of nal-IRI with the more potent nucleoside analogue TAS-102 may thus result in a more effective systemic therapy. We conducted this study to define the safety and efficacy of the combination of TAS-102 and nal-IRI in advanced CRC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) on this investigator-initiated phase II study had advanced CRC and must have had disease progression on at least one prior therapy. Additional inclusion criteria - measurable disease, ECOG PS 0-1 & adequate organ function. Based on previously published dose escalation phase I data, the pts were treated at the recommended phase II dose of TAS-102 (given orally at 35mg/m2 bid on days 1-5) and nal-IRI (60mg/m2 IV on day 1) in 14-day cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) = complete (CR) + partial (PR) response per RECIST v1.1. Multiple secondary endpoints included safety/tolerability, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR) and duration of response (DoR). Results: Twenty-two pts were enrolled, of whom 20 were evaluable for response. Male - 50%; ECOG PS 1 – 75%; African Americans – 38%; median age - 58yrs (interquartile range [IQR] 49-67). Median line of prior therapy was 1 (IQR 1-2) and 13.6% (3 pts enrolled during the dose escalation phase) had received prior Iri. 47.6% received concurrent Bevacizumab. ORR was 15% (3 PR, 0 CR). 60% had stable disease (SD) as best response; DCR of 75%. mPFS - 9.7 mos (95% CI: 5.6, 14.2); mOS - 10.1 mos (95% CI: 7.3, 15.9). 12-month PFS and OS rates were 34.6% and 39.5% respectively. At a median follow up of 11.9 mos, DoR was yet to be determined and 50% of the pts had maintained response for 12 mos. Median duration of progression free among pts with SD was 7.6 mos (95% CI: 4.6, 13.2), with a 12-month survival rate of 47.7% (95% CI: 15.5%, 74.5%). Median time to response (TTR) was 4.8mos. Most common treatment related toxicities included fatigue and neutropenia (G3; 27.3% each); anemia and leucopenia (G3; 18.2% each). Other G3 AEs included febrile neutropenia, diarrhea, hypokalemia, lymphopenia and nausea (4.5% each). Conclusions: We demonstrated that the combination of TAS-102 and nal-IRI had an acceptable safety profile, and showed antitumor activity in patients with advanced CRC. Additional biomarker analyses such as survival correlation with UGT1A1 phenotype and RAS mutational status are ongoing. (NCT03368963). Clinical trial information: NCT03368963 .

3579 Background: Panitumumab (Pmab) is a recombinant monoclonal antibody that binds specifically to the human epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and it is indicated for the treatment of metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC). However, the objective response rates (ORR) for the single agent are historically about 8-11%. EGFR inhibition induces synthetic lethality with poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) such as Niraparib, by attenuating DNA repair pathways. Combining PARP and EGFR inhibition has the potential to confer synergistic benefit, while also ameliorating resistance mechanism to EGFRi. We conducted this study to define the safety and efficacy of the combination of Niraparib and Pmab in RAS wildtype (WT) mCRC. Methods: Patients (pts) with RAS WT mCRC who have progressed on at least one line of systemic chemotherapy were eligible for the trial. Other selected inclusion criteria were ≥18 years of age, ECOG PS 0-1 and measurable disease per RECIST 1.1. Pmab was administered at 6 mg/kg IV on days 1 & 15 of each 28-day cycle, while Niraparib was taken orally at 200mg or 300mg (based on body weight and platelet count) daily throughout the cycle. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR) defined as complete (CR) + partial (PR) response + stable disease (SD) per RECIST v1.1. Multiple secondary endpoints included safety/tolerability, ORR, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and duration of response (DoR). Results: A safety run-in cohort of 6 pts was initially enrolled. Following a preplanned safety analysis showing an acceptable toxicity profile, an additional 19 pts were enrolled. Of the total 25 enrolled pts, 24 were evaluable for response. Male - 50%; Whites/African Americans/Asians – 65.2%/21.7%/13%; median age – 58.5yrs. The majority had left sided tumor (92%) and the median line of prior therapy was 2 (range 1-4). CBR was 83.3% (0 CR, 6 PR, 14 SD) and ORR was 25%. mPFS – 5.6mos (95% CI: 3.7, 6.9); mOS – 20.9mos (95% CI: 9.2, NR). Six-month PFS and OS rates were 48.4% and 100% respectively. At a median follow up time of 7.5mos (95% CI: 4.2, 10.4), 3 patients remained on treatment and DoR was yet to be determined. Muco-cutaneous adverse events (AEs) of any grade included rash (58.4%), oral mucositis (20.8%), dry skin (16.7%) and paronychia (4.2%). Most common (grade > 2) treatment related AEs (TRAEs) were anemia (G3; 12.5%), dermatitis, oral mucositis, hypertension and neutropenia (G3; 4.2% each). There were no grade 4-5 TRAEs. Conclusions: The combination of Pmab and Niraparib had an acceptable safety profile, and showed considerable antitumor activity in pts with advanced RAS WT mCRC compared to historical rates. Additional biomarker analyses such as survival correlation with immune cell infiltration in paired skin biopsies and HER2/BRAF mutational status are ongoing. Funding and product (Niraparib) for the study were provided by GSK (NCT03983993). Clinical trial information: NCT03983993 .

Background To determine whether antibiotic treatment is a risk factor for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) across different patients with cancer receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies. Methods The retrospective analysis includes clinical information from 767 patients with cancer treated at Hunan Cancer Hospital from 2017 to 2020. The pharmacovigilance data analysis includes individual cases of 38,705 safety reports from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) from 2014 to 2020, and 25,122 cases of safety reports from the World Health Organization database VigiBase from 2014 to 2019. All cases that received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment were included. Multiomics data from patients across 25 cancer types were download from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Logistic regression and propensity score algorithm was employed to calculate OR of irAEs. Results Retrospective analysis of in-house patients showed that irAE potential risks are higher in all cancer (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.22, false discovery rate (FDR) adjusted-p=1.93×10−3) and patients with lung cancer (OR 3.16, 95% CI 1.67 to 5.95, FDR adjusted-p=1.93×10−3) when using antibiotics. Potential risk of irAEs in patients with lung cancer with antibiotic treatment is significantly higher in FAERS (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.59; FDR adjusted-p=1.62×10−5) and VigiBase (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.59, FDR adjusted-p=0.05). Mechanistically, decreased microbial diversity caused by antibiotics use may increase the irAE risk through mediating the irAE-related factors. Conclusions Our study is the first to comprehensively demonstrate the associations of irAEs and antibiotic during anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy across a wide spectrum of cancers by analyzing multisource data. Administration of antibiotics should be carefully evaluated in patients with cancer treated by anti-PD-1/PD-L1 to avoid potentially increasing irAE risk.

413 Background: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and VEGF receptor (VEGFR)-mediated signaling and angiogenesis contribute to the pathogenesis and progression of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PCA).VEGF is expressed in all PCA tumors. VEGF-A/VEGFR-2 signaling plays an important role in inducing invasion and migration of PCA cells. The pVEGFR-2 is significantly associated with invasion of the anterior capsule of pancreas and arteries. In preclinical studies, the anti-tumor activity of fluoropyrimidines, but not that of gemcitabine, caused the release of bone marrow derived circulating endothelial progenitor cells (CEPs) and Tie-2 expressing monocytes (TEMs) as well as the induction of pro-angiogenic growth factors. Methods: This phase II randomized, multi-center, and double-blinded trial was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of mFOLFIRINOX/ramucirumab (Arm A) versus mFOLFIRINOX/ placebo (Arm B) as front-line therapy in recurrent or metastatic PCA patients. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) at 9 months, and the secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and response rate. Results: A total of 86 subjects were enrolled, 82 were eligible (42 in Arm A v. 40 in Arm B). The mean age of the subjects in the two arms were comparable (61.7 v. 63.0, respectively); 43 male, 69 Caucasian. On the univariate analysis, there was no difference in distribution between the 2 arms for age, gender, race and ethnicity. The median PFS was 5.6 in Arm A compared to 6.7 months in Arm B (one-sided log-rank, p = 0.322). At 9 months, the progression free rates were 25.1% v. 35% for Arms A and B, respectively. The mFOLFIRINOX/ramucirumab combination was well tolerated. Patients in Arm A reported a slightly higher number of adverse events (AEs) encounters, most commonly diarrhea (29 vs 28), fatigue (25 v. 25), vomiting (24 v. 14), weight loss (23 v. 17), and abdominal pain (20 v. 15). Arm A had more SAEs than Arm B (43 v. 25), with sepsis most commonly reported in both arms (3 in each), vomiting (3 v. 2), diarrhea (3 v.1) and duodenal obstruction (3 v. 0). Arm B had a slightly higher response rate (22.58%) compared to Arm A (17.65%) that was not statistically significant. The median OS in Arm A was 10.3 compared to 9.7 months for Arm B (one-sided log-rank, p = 0.094). Conclusions: In this randomized phase 2 study, the addition of ramucirumab to mFOLFIRINOX did not improve PFS, response rate, or OS as initial therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer. FOLFIRINOX/Ramucirumab combination was well tolerated in the treatment of PCA. Clinical trial information: NCT02581215.