Davis, Elizabeth J.

11503 Background: Collectively, sarcomas have demonstrated less benefit from immunotherapy than many other cancers. Pts with AS have limited options, particularly after taxane chemotherapy. Although AS is a vascular malignancy, anti-VEGF therapies have minimal monotherapy clinical activity. Some cutaneous AS have a high UV damage signature, but other AS often do not. Cabozantinib (C) is a multikinase inhibitor that may alter PD-1 expression in regulatory T cells, promoting an immune permissive environment when combined with nivolumab (N), a fully human anti PD-1 MAB. We hypothesize that the combination of C+N will be an effective therapy in AS, across AS subtypes. Methods: This open-label multi-arm study enrolled pts with locally advanced/metastatic AS. Arm 3, reported here, enrolled pts who had received a taxane for AS (including adjuvant) prior to study enrollment. Pts were not restricted on number of prior lines, but prior anti-VEGF and immunotherapies were not allowed. Eligible pts received C (40 mg po daily) with N (480 mg IV every 4 wks). Treatment was permitted beyond progressive disease (PD) in the 1st 12 wks (4 wk confirmatory scan), but PD response was censored at 12 wks. The Simon 2-stage design (null and alternative overall response rate (ORR) were 10% and 35%, respectively) required ≥1 confirmed response in 9 pts in the 1st stage, and >4 of 18 pts (91.4% power, alpha 0.095) for the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were adverse events (AEs), progression free, overall survival (PFS, OS), and pt-reported outcomes (PRO). Results: 21 eligible pts [median age 66 yrs (32-92), 10 female] received ≥1 dose of C+N. Primary disease sites: 12 cutaneous (scalp/face), 1 liver, 2 breast, 6 other. All pts received prior taxanes (11/21 = 52% as adjuvant therapy) and 5/21 (24%) had also received prior anthracycline (all relapsed AS). Primary endpoint: 13 of the first 18 evaluable patients (72%) experienced objective response (OR, 95%CI: 47%-90%). After a median follow-up of 11.2 mo, 13 of 21 pts achieved OR (11 partial response, 2 complete), for ORR 62% (95%CI: 38-82%). Responses were seen in pts with primary cutaneous disease 7/12 (58%) and noncutaneous disease 6/9 (67%). Median PFS was 9.6 mo (5.3-NR), and OS 20.5 mo (14.4-NR). Off treatment reasons include: progressive disease (14), comorbid condition unrelated to AS or study (1); 6 pts remain on study. Grade (G) 3 hypertension was the only possibly treatment related AE (TRAE) occurring in ³10%. No G 4/5 TRAE were reported. Conclusions: C + N demonstrated significant antitumor activity in taxane-pretreated AS and was well tolerated without new safety concerns. Activity of the combination was seen across AS subtypes. PRO and exploratory analyses are ongoing. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; U10CA180820; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . U10CA180868; U10CA180888. NCT04339738. Clinical trial information: NCT04339738 .

ImportanceCytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.ObjectiveTo determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.ExposuresImmunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.ResultsThe median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).Conclusions and RelevanceThis cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701

PURPOSE Antitumor activity in preclinical models and a phase I study of patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DD-LPS) was observed with selinexor. We evaluated the clinical benefit of selinexor in patients with previously treated DD-LPS whose sarcoma progressed on approved agents. METHODS SEAL was a phase II-III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients age 12 years or older with advanced DD-LPS who had received two-five lines of therapy were randomly assigned (2:1) to selinexor (60 mg) or placebo twice weekly in 6-week cycles (crossover permitted). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included for safety analysis (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02606461 ). RESULTS Two hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled (selinexor, n = 188; placebo, n = 97). PFS was significantly longer with selinexor versus placebo: hazard ratio (HR) 0.70 (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.95; one-sided P = .011; medians 2.8 v 2.1 months), as was time to next treatment: HR 0.50 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.66; one-sided P < .0001; medians 5.8 v 3.2 months). With crossover, no difference was observed in overall survival. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade versus grade 3 or 4 with selinexor were nausea (151 [80.7%] v 11 [5.9]), decreased appetite (113 [60.4%] v 14 [7.5%]), and fatigue (96 [51.3%] v 12 [6.4%]). Four (2.1%) and three (3.1%) patients died in the selinexor and placebo arms, respectively. Exploratory RNA sequencing analysis identified that the absence of CALB1 expression was associated with longer PFS with selinexor compared with placebo (median 6.9 v 2.2 months; HR, 0.19; P = .001). CONCLUSION Patients with advanced, refractory DD-LPS showed improved PFS and time to next treatment with selinexor compared with placebo. Supportive care and dose reductions mitigated side effects of selinexor. Prospective validation of CALB1 expression as a predictive biomarker for selinexor in DD-LPS is warranted.

11523 Background: Sarcoma pts often receive aggressive, highly immunosuppressive therapy and may be at high risk for severe COVID-19. Demographics, outcomes and risk factors for pts with sarcoma and COVID-19 are unknown. We aimed to describe the course of COVID-19 in sarcoma pts and to identify factors associated with adverse outcomes. Methods: The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (NCT04354701) is an international registry of pts with cancer and COVID-19. Adult pts (≥18 years old) with a diagnosis of sarcoma and laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 were included from 50 participating institutions. Data including demographics, sarcoma diagnosis and treatment, and course of COVID-19 infection were analyzed. Primary outcome was the composite rate of hospitalization or death at 30 days from COVID-19 diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were 30 day all-cause mortality, rate of hospitalization, O2 need, and ICU admission. Descriptive statistics and univariate Fisher tests are reported. Results: From March 17, 2020 to February 6, 2021, N=204 pts were included. Median follow up was 42 days. Median age was 58 years (IQR 43-67). 97 (48%) were male. 30 (15%) had ECOG performance status ≥2. 104 (51%) received cancer treatment, including surgery or radiation, within 3 months of COVID-19 diagnosis. 153 (75%) had active cancer, of whom 34 (22%) had lung metastases. 100 (49%) pts met the composite primary endpoint; 96 (47%) were hospitalized and 18 (9%) died within 30 days from COVID-19 diagnosis. 64 (31%) required oxygen, and 16 (8%) required ICU admission. Primary endpoint rates were similar for pts who received cytotoxic chemotherapy (38/58, 66%) or targeted therapy (16/28, 57%). Pts with higher rates of the primary endpoint included patients ≥60 years old (59% vs 40%, OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.12-3.74, p=0.016), pts with ECOG PS ≥2 vs 0-1 (90% vs 41%, OR 12.2, 95% CI 3.44-66.8, p<0.001), pts receiving any systemic therapy within 3 months of COVID-19 diagnosis (62% vs 39%, OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.43-4.97, p=0.001), and pts with lung metastases (68% vs 42%, OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.19-6.79, p=0.013). Primary endpoint rates were similar across sarcoma subtypes (Table). Conclusions: This is the largest cohort study of pts with sarcoma and COVID-19 to date. Sarcoma pts have high rates of complications from COVID-19. Older patients, those with poor performance status, those recently receiving systemic cancer therapy, and those with lung metastases appear to have worse outcomes.[Table: see text]

11503 Background: EHE is a rare vascular cancer arising in liver, lung, soft tissue and bone. The natural history of metastatic disease varies considerably from indolent growth over years to rapid growth with fatal outcome in months. Treatment of patients (pts) with metastatic EHE with antiangiogenic therapy induces tumor response in a minority of pts, and median PFS is 6-12 months. TAZ-CAMTA1 translocation results in activation of MAPK pathway and is an oncogenic driver in EHE. We sought to evaluate the effect of MEK inhibition using trametinib in pts with unresectable EHE. Methods: A phase 2 trial of trametinib 2 mg daily was conducted in pts with EHE though the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network supported by NCI in collaboration with SARC. Additional support was provided by the EHE Rare Cancer Charity and the EHE Foundation. Pts had to have evidence of objective tumor progression or EHE-related pain requiring narcotics for relief prior to enrollment. Presence of TAZ-CAMTA1 translocation was analyzed by fusion-FISH after enrollment. Primary trial endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST1.1 with at least 1 objective response required in the 1st 13 pts to expand enrollment to 27. The trial was amended after stage 1 to continue enrollment to 27 pts with TAZ-CAMTA1 detected by FISH with goal of >4 objective responses in this group. Secondary objectives were PFS and OS rates, safety and change in pt-reported global health and pain scores per PROMIS questionnaires. Results: 43 pts were enrolled between 6/2017 – 9/2020 across 10 sites and 41 started therapy. TAZ-CAMTA1 fusion was detected in 26, not detected in 7, test failed in 5 and was not performed due to insufficient tumor in 5. Median pt age was 54 (range 22-81 yrs) and 11 were >65 yrs; 25 were female; ECOG was 0 in 23, 1 in 16 and 2 in 3 pts. Most pts experienced reduction in tumor size. ORR per RECIST was 7% (3/41); in pts with TAZ-CAMTA1 detected, the ORR was 0% (0/26). Mean pain intensity and interference scores had a statistically significant improvement and global quality of life scores did not statistically change after 4 weeks of therapy. 17 pts remained on treatment > 6 months and 7 > 12 months. 25 pts stopped trametinib due to EHE progression, 6 died during treatment, 6 withdrew from treatment, 3 stopped drug due to adverse event and 1 is on treatment. The most common AEs related to trametinib were rash, fatigue, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, alopecia and edema; Grade >3 AEs included anemia, dyspnea, hypoxia, hypotension, syncope and dermatitis. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the largest prospective clinical study focused on pts with EHE. Although the trial did not meet the ORR goal, stable disease > 6 months was seen in 40% of pts, and EHE-related pain improved on treatment. Trametinib was associated with expected cutaneous and GI adverse effects. Additional pt-reported outcomes and biomarkers of inflammation are undergoing analysis. Clinical trial information: NCT03148275.