Shi, Qian

TPS3641 Background: Patients with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) BRAF V600E mutant high-risk stage II (T4) or stage III colon cancer have a substantial risk of recurrence despite standard adjuvant therapy. In patients with metastatic BRAF V600E mutant colorectal cancer, the combination of the RAF inhibitor encorafenib and the EGFR inhibitor cetuximab has been shown to improve overall and progression-free survival compared to standard therapy after at least one prior line of therapy. This study will evaluate if this combination improves disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with resected BRAF V600E mutant pMMR/microsatellite stable (MSS) high-risk stage II (T4) or stage III colon cancer after standard adjuvant therapy. Methods: The study has a seamless phase II/III design, enrolling a maximum of 394 patients. BRAF mutation status can be determined locally or submitted for central testing in trial pre-screening. Eligible patients will be randomized 1:1 to usual surveillance versus 6 months of treatment with encorafenib (300mg oral daily) plus cetuximab (500mg/m2 intravenous every 14 days). Stratification factors are adjuvant chemotherapy regimen (FOLFOX versus CAPOX), duration of adjuvant therapy (3 months versus > 3 months), tumor stage (T4N0 versus T1-3N1 versus T4N1/TanyN2), and ctDNA marker status (detectable versus undetectable) at randomization. Adjuvant therapy must be completed at most 8 weeks prior to registration. For the phase II component, in the ctDNA detectable cohort, the primary endpoint will be ctDNA clearance rate at 6 months, and, in the ctDNA undetectable cohort, the primary endpoint will be 6-month ctDNA recurrence-free survival, where events consist of death, recurrence, or ctDNA positivity. The primary endpoint of the phase III component is DFS, and secondary endpoints are overall survival, adverse events, and alternative DFS calculated from the date of primary resection, rather than date of study randomization. Patient reported symptoms (PRO-CTCAE) will be collected and analyzed as an exploratory endpoint, and serial blood banking will support future correlative studies. The trial will proceed to the phase III portion if either of the two endpoints in the phase II cohorts is statistically superior in patients receiving encorafenib plus cetuximab. The phase III study sample size will provide 80% power at a one-sided α of 0.05 to detect an approximately 10% improvement in the three-year DFS rate, assuming 68% in the control arm. Two interim analyses will be performed for DFS endpoint. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Pfizer, Eli Lilly; Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05710406. Clinical trial information: NCT05710406 .

TPS3640 Background: Recent data have demonstrated that in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), a total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) approach improves compliance with chemotherapy and increases rates of tumor response compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) alone. They further indicate that the optimal sequencing of TNT involves consolidation (rather than induction) chemotherapy to optimize complete response rates. Data, largely from retrospective studies, have also shown that patients (pts) with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy may be managed safely with the watch and wait approach (WW) instead of preemptive total mesorectal resection (TME). However, the optimal consolidation chemotherapy regimen to achieve cCR has not been established, and a randomized clinical trial has not robustly evaluated it as a primary endpoint. Collaborating with a multidisciplinary oncology team and pt groups, we designed this NCI-sponsored study of chemotherapy intensification to address these issues and to drive up cCR rates, to provide opportunity for organ preservation and improve quality of life for pts. Methods: In this Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology randomized phase II trial (1:1), up to 312 pts with microsatellite stable LARC, clinical stage T4N0, any T, N+ or T3N0 requiring abdominoperineal resection or coloanal anastomosis and distal margin within 12 cm of anal verge will be enrolled. Stratification factors include tumor stage (T4 vs T1-3), nodal stage (N+ vs N0) and distance from anal verge (0-4; 4-8; 8-12 cm). Pts will be randomized to receive neoadjuvant long course CRT (LCRT) followed by consolidation doublet (mFOLFOX6 or CAPOX) or triplet chemotherapy (mFOLFIRINOX) for 4 months. LCRT in both arms involves 4500 cGy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks (w) + 900 cGy boost in 5 fractions with a fluoropyrimidine (capecitabine preferred). Pts will undergo assessment 8-12 w post-TNT completion for the primary endpoint of cCR per previously validated criteria and recommended WW and surveillance if cCR is achieved or TME if an incomplete response is noted. Secondary objectives include time-to event outcomes (disease-free and overall survival, organ preservation time and time to distant metastasis) and adverse effects. Statistical power, based on cCR, incorporates a one-sided alpha = 0.048 and power = 90% yielding 312 patients (156 per arm). Biospecimens including archival tumor tissue, matched / normal blood samples and serial rectal MRI will be collected for exploratory correlative research. This study, activated in late 2022, is open across the NCTN and is actively recruiting. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24 CA196171; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT05610163 Clinical trial information: NCT05610163 .

TPS3629 Background: For patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), aggressive local therapy of isolated metastases, particularly in the liver, has been associated with long-term progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) primarily based on retrospective evidence. However, in patients with limited metastatic CRC that is deemed inoperable or those with additional disease outside of the liver or lungs, the role of local ablative therapies, including microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), to render patients disease free is less clear. Further, despite the long history of treating oligometastatic CRC with local therapy, which is provider biased and not evidence based, questions remain regarding the benefit of extending the paradigm of metastatic directed therapy to patients with more extensive disease. This trial seeks to use a pragmatic multimodality approach that mirrors the current clinical dilemma. This study is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all sites of disease to standard of care systemic treatment in those with limited metastatic CRC. Methods: A022101 is a National Clinical Trials Network randomized phase III study planned to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable) with ≤4 sites of metastatic disease on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted, and lesions must be amenable to any combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT with SBRT required for at least one lesion. Patients receive first-line systemic therapy for 4-6 months and are then randomized 1:1, stratified by number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and presence of metastatic disease outside the liver and lungs in at least one site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT which consists of treatment of all metastatic sites with SBRT ± MWA ± surgical resection followed by standard of care systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard of care systemic therapy alone. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. The study needs 346 evaluable patients combined in the 2 arms to demonstrate an improvement in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.7 to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial utilizes a group sequential design with two interim analyses (25% and 50% of events) for futility. The trial activated in January 2023 and recruitment is ongoing. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05673148 Clinical trial information: NCT05673148 .

3588 Background: Although anti-EGFR antibody plus doublet chemotherapy has become the standard of first-line treatment for RAS wild-type (wt), left sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the optimal molecular-targeted therapy for RAS wt, right-sided mCRC is not clear. Methods: To evaluate the efficacy between anti-EGFR antibody vs. bevacizumab combination therapy, from 40,889 Individual patient (pt) data from 59 studies in ARCAD mCRC database, 723 pts with RAS wt, right-sided mCRC who received a first-line molecular-targeted therapy with backbone chemotherapy (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI when anti-EGFR antibody combination, and FOLFOX/FOLFIRI/CAPOX/FOLFOXIRI when bevacizumab combination) were selected from 10 randomized studies (FIRE-3, CALGB80495, CRYSTAL, PRIME, CAIRO2, OPUS, TRIBE, TRIBE2, ATOM, and CCOG1201). Primary objective was overall survival (OS), and secondary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR); Hazard ratio (HR) and Odds ratio (OR) were adjusted for ECOG-PS, age, and gender. Propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) as sensitivity analysis were also performed. Secondary analyses were limited to BRAF wt pts. Results: Anti-EGFR antibody and bevacizumab were administrated in 329 and 394 pts, respectively, of whom 162 and 151 pts were BRAF wt, respectively. Baseline characteristics were as follows (anti-EGFR antibody/bevacizumab): median age, 63.0 years both; female, 47.1/46.4%; and ECOG-PS 0, 53.2/65.2%. The OS and PFS were significantly prolonged in pts receiving bevacizumab combination therapy compared to those receiving anti-EGFR antibody combination therapy (Table). These trends were more pronounced when limited to BRAF wt pts (Table). There were no significant differences in ORR for both overall and BRAF wt pts. These results were similar in the sensitivity analysis (Table). Conclusions: For patients with RAS wt or RAS/ BRAF wt, right-sided mCRC, bevacizumab combination therapy is preferred first-line treatment. [Table: see text]

3566 Background: According to the various types of clinical trials for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), ETS and DpR are suggested as the surrogates of OS. Whereas associations between ETS/DpR and OS/PPS in the era of chemotherapy (chemo) +anti-EGFR antibody (ab)/bevacizumab (bev) in 1st line therapy have not been elucidated. Methods: From 40,889 Individual patient data (IPD) from 59 studies in ARCAD mCRC database, 2,138 treatment-naïve pts with RAS wild-type (wt) mCRC were selected from 7 randomized studies (PRIME, CAIRO2, CRYSTAL, OPUS, CALGB80495, WJOG4407G, ATOM) of chemo with/without anti-EGFR ab or bev. The ETS was defined as 20%≥ tumor shrinkage at 8 ± 2wks (ETS+: ≥20%, ETS-: <20%). Multivariate Cox regression models for OS/PPS were performed to investigate associations between ETS+ and ETS- by primary tumor location (overall/left-sided/right-sided), adjusting for potential confounders. DpR was defined as tumor shrinkage at nadir. OS/PPS were evaluated across quartile limits of DpR by multivariate Cox regression models. Results: In pts with overall or left-sided RAS wt mCRC, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of OS/PPS between ETS- and ETS+ for chemo +anti-EGFR ab, chemo +bev, and chemo alone showed great improvement, respectively (Table). In pts with overall or left-sided RAS wt mCRC, HRs of ETS for OS/PPS are higher in pts treated with chemo +anti-EGFR ab compared to those treated with chemo +bev or chemo alone. Compared to the pts with highest quartile (defined as ≥ 75th percentile (Q3)) of DpR, HRs of OS/PPS for lower quartile groups showed upward trends in pts with RAS wt & overall (Table). Conclusions: ETS/DpR in pts with RAS wt mCRC might be a potential prognostic marker of OS/PPS regardless of targeted therapy and primary tumor location. Superior prognostic values of ETS+ are expected in pts treated with anti-EGFR ab. [Table: see text]

3554 Background: Approximately 30% of patients (pts) diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) develop liver metastases (LM). Liver is the most common organ of metastasis of CRC. The ARCAD database contains individual patient data of randomized trials that included CRC pts with initially unresectable metastases treated with systemic therapy. The aim of this study was to assess the response and survival outcomes in non-LM (NLM) vs LM across different lines of treatment. Methods: We analyzed survival outcomes of mCRC pts with either single site (SS) or multiple sites (MS) according to LM status in the following treatment groups: A: chemotherapy (CT) alone, B: CT + VEGF-antibodies, C: CT + EGFR-antibodies in KRAS wild-type tumors, within first-line (1L) and second line (2L) of therapy and D: pts enrolled on third line (≥3L) trials treated with trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib and placebo. The primary and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) which were assessed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and adjusted Cox models on ECOG PS, age, and gender. Results: We included 26 trials with 17924 pts. 14066 pts had LM. Pts with LM had a higher rate of colon vs rectum as primary tumor (72 vs 62%; P < .001) and less SS (31 vs 47%; P < .001) than those with NLM. OS and PFS results in subgroups are reported in the table. In groups A and B, we found better OS and PFS outcomes in NLM pts as either SS or MS in 1L and 2L. In group C from 1L, we found better survival outcomes in pts with SS LM. In pts with MS, NLM superiority was observed in OS but not in PFS. However, these results were influenced by primary tumor sidedness. In group D, better OS and PFS was observed in pts without LM than those with LM whether in pts with SS or MS. Response rates were higher in LM than in NLM in most 1L and 2L subgroups. Conclusions: LM is a poor prognostic factor for mCRC increasing from the 1L to ≥3L. Survival with CT alone and CT + anti-VEGF according to LM and NLM differs significantly in 1L and 2L but not with CT + anti-EGFR. This data justifies using LM as a stratification factor at least in ≥3L trials. [Table: see text]

3542 Background: Solid tumors can be characterized by distinct immune phenotypes based on the level of T cell infiltration in the tumor microenvironment (TME) which may provide prognostic information and also inform strategies to restore the anti-tumor immune response. Immune phenotypes were determined using an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm in digitized whole-slide images (WSI) of tumors with deficient (d) mismatch repair (MMR) vs proficient (p) MMR. Methods: Stage III colon carcinomas (N = 401; 393 met QC) from participants in a phase III trial of FOLFOX-based adjuvant chemotherapy were analyzed including all available tumors with dMMR (n = 196) and a randomly selected cohort of pMMR tumors (n = 195). Using an AI algorithm (Lunit SCOPE) previously trained on solid tumors, digitized tumors were categorized into three immune phenotypes based on epithelial and stromal TIL data-driven cutpoints in dMMR and pMMR (inflamed: TIL high in epithelium (> upper 25%); excluded: TIL high in stroma (>lower 25%), low in epithelium; and desert: TIL low in epithelium and stroma). Phenotypes were then examined in relationship to disease-free survival (DFS) using Kaplan-Meier methodology. Results: Of the 3 immune phenotypes in dMMR tumors, 25% were inflamed, 50% were immune-excluded, and 25% were immune-desert. Based on univariate results, multivariable modeling was performed incorporating immune phenotype in addition to age, histological grade, N stage, T stage, performance status, treatment arm, BRAF and KRAS status and identified immune phenotypes and N stage to be significantly associated with DFS. Among dMMR tumors, immune desert phenotype was associated with the poorest DFS (Desert: HR adj 1.95, 95%CI (1.01, 3.80); Excluded: HR adj 0.89, 95%CI (0.47, 1.69); Inflamed: ref; p:0.01). When compared to immune desert tumors, immune-excluded tumors had significantly better DFS (HR adj 0.49, 95%CI (0.27, 0.88), p:0.01). At a median follow-up of 60 months, 3-year DFS of patients with dMMR was 71.2% with Immune inflamed, 78.5% with Excluded, and 54.5% with Desert phenotypes. In contrast to dMMR, univariate analyses of data-driven cutpoints in pMMR tumors was not prognostic. Using a different data-driven cutpoint (15%), the revised immune phenotypes remained non-significant for DFS within pMMR tumors. Conclusions: Distinct AI-derived immune phenotypes in the TME were identified that were significantly prognostic in patients with dMMR, but not pMMR colon cancers. A data-driven immune-desert phenotype was identified in dMMR tumors that was associated with significantly poorer survival. Further investigation of the potential predictive utility of these phenotypes for immunotherapy are planned. Support: https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00079274 .

3536 Background: Early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC, initial CRC diagnosis at age < 50 years) has been increasing in the past two decades especially in Western countries. This study evaluates somatic and germline profiles in eoCRC compared to average-onset CRC (aoCRC, initial CRC diagnosis at age ≥ 50 years). Methods: This is a retrospective, cross-sectional study utilizing data from de-identified records of colorectal cancer patients tested with the Tempus xT assay from 2017 to 2022. Briefly, the assay is a targeted panel that detects single nucleotide variants, insertions and/or deletions, and copy number variants in 598-648 genes, as well as chromosomal rearrangements in 22 genes with high sensitivity and specificity. Baseline characteristics and immunologic markers were compared between eoCRC and aoCRC by Wilcoxon Rank Sum or Chi-squared test (reporting p-values). Somatic and germline mutations were compared between two age groups with false discover rate adjustments (reporting q-values). Results: In this study, 2,379 eoCRC and 8,627 aoCRC patients were included, with the majority diagnosed with stage IV disease. Additionally, germline alterations were assessed on a subset of 6,311 patients with tumor/normal match testing (eoCRC = 1,413 and aoCRC = 4,898). Left-sided primaries were more common in eoCRC (85% left/rectum in eoCRC vs. 75% left/rectum in aoCRC (p < 0.001), and rates of microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) were lower compared to aoCRC (4.2% vs. 6.8%, p < 0.001). eoCRC has a unique somatic mutation profile compared to aoCRC. A higher prevalence of germline mutations was observed in eoCRC overall (6.9% vs. 5%, p = 0.006); however, no statistically significant differences were observed in individual germline genes compared to aoCRC, likely due to relatively small numbers. Conclusions: eoCRC has a unique mutational profile and presence of germline mutations in 6.9% of eoCRC, indicating a potential role for universal germline testing in CRC. [Table: see text]

3527 Background: Advances in deep learning may improve the ability to evaluate and quantify pathological features in solid tumors to improve prediction of patient disease-free survival (DFS). We used an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm to quantify morphological features in the tumor microenvironment of stage III colon cancers. Methods: We analyzed digitized stage III colon carcinomas (N = 402; 382 met QC) from participants in a phase III trial of FOLFOX-based adjuvant chemotherapy that included all available tumors with dMMR and a randomly selected cohort of pMMR tumors (median follow-up 60 months) [NCCTG N0147; Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology]. Fifteen morphological features were extracted using the QuantCRC algorithm that segments images into carcinoma (low-grade, high-grade, signet ring cell), stroma (immature, mature, and inflammatory), mucin, tumor/stroma ratio, tumor budding/poorly differentiated clusters (TB/PDC), necrosis, smooth muscle, fat, and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and tumor area (mucin, epithelium and TB/PDC). Analysis of AI-derived features with clinical variables, molecular alterations ( BRAF/KRAS), and DFS were examined using Kaplan-Meier methodology and multivariable Cox regression. Results: Among the 15 AI-derived morphological features, the following differed significantly between dMMR (n = 191) and pMMR (n = 189) whereby dMMR tumors had lower mature stroma, but higher inflammatory stroma and tumor, higher tumor grade and increased mucin, TB/PDCs, signet ring cells, and TILs (all p< 0.05). Among dMMR tumors, multivariable analysis revealed that tumor area [mucin, epithelium and TB/PDC] (HR adj 0.45, 95%CI (0.24, 0.84), p:0.01, [Q2/3 vs Q1]) and N stage were the only significant and independent prognostic variables. Among pMMR tumors, multivariable analysis identified that tumor budding/poorly differentiated clusters (TB/PDCs) (HR adj 0.20, 95%CI (0.06, 0.61), p:0.01, [Q1 vs Q4]) was the strongest prognostic variable and the only morphological feature that was significantly associated with DFS along with age, N stage and T stage. Conclusions: Using AI, we can extract and quantify distinct morphological features in tumor sections that differ between dMMR and pMMR and multivariately, can significantly and robustly enhance prognostication within each MMR group. Among pMMR tumors, tumor budding/poorly differentiated clusters was the strongest predictor of DFS. Support: NIH U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171, R01 CA210509 (to FAS). Study NCCTG N0147 received funds from Sanofi https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00079274 Key words Artificial Intelligence; Tumor Microenvironment; Colonic Neoplasms; Disease-free survival.

1535 Background: Ambulatory management of select patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) may substantially decrease patients’ burden of illness and improve their quality of life, and is recommended by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines. However, in the United States, inpatient management remains the universal standard. We hereby report the health care utilization associated with the DEFeNDR remote patient monitoring (RPM) program, which leverages technology and virtual centralized nurse monitoring to facilitate ambulatory management of FN as an alternative to hospital-based care. Methods: Adult patients with cancer hospitalized with FN were assessed daily for eligibility to participate in the DEFeNDR program. Eligibility criteria included MASCC score >21 (per ASCO guidelines), and clinical judgment of the attending provider. Patients receiving cellular therapy (CAR-T, BMT) in the prior 100 days were excluded. Eligible patients agreeing to participate in the 30-day program were provided a kit containing cellular-enabled, pre-connected devices to facilitate monitoring, including twice-daily vital signs and electronic symptom questionnaires. Data were EHR-integrated in real-time and embedded decision trees facilitated alerts for adverse trends. RPM nurses responded to alerts and escalated care as indicated by pre-specified care pathways. Program assessment was performed at 20 weeks after full implementation. The primary outcome was the mean proportion of evaluable days spent inpatient (mPEDI) within 30 days of eligibility compared between those who participated in the program vs. those who declined. Results: 35 patients were offered participation in the DEFeNDR program. Of these, 17 participated and 18 declined. Baseline characteristics are provided. Participating patients experienced mPEDI of 6.9% (Standard Error [SE], 3.7%), compared with 17.7% (SE, 3.6%) for patients who declined participation. Due to small sample size, this difference (10.8%) did not reach statistical significance (Wilcoxon Rank Sums p-value, 0.15). 30-day mortality did not differ between groups. Mean inpatient days were also lower for patients participating in the program. Additionally, when readmitted, patients participating in RPM experienced a trend toward shorter length of stay and lower rates of intensive care unit utilization. Conclusions: A trend towards decreased burden of inpatient care is evident among patients participating in the DEFeNDR program. Further studies are warranted to assess comparative effectiveness of this model vs usual care.[Table: see text]