Gbolahan, Olumide B.

Abstract Background FGFR alterations are known to be driver alterations in several tumor types. We aimed to assess the efficacy of pemigatinib, an oral FGFR1-3 inhibitor, in patients with metastatic or unresectable colorectal cancer whose tumors harbored FGF/FGFR alterations. Patients and Methods The ACCRU-GI-1701 is a single-arm phase II trial which enrolled patients with previously treated FGF/FGFR-altered metastatic colorectal cancer to receive oral pemigatinib daily in 21-day cycles. The primary endpoint is objective response. Secondary endpoints include clinical benefit, progression-free survival, overall survival, quality of life, and adverse events (AEs). This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04096417). Results Of the 14 patients included in the interim analysis, the objective response rate as well as clinical benefit rate were 0%. Given these results, the trial closed to enrollment after stage one due to futility. A total of 42.9% of patients had at least one grade 3 or higher AE, the most common being anemia and fatigue. Conclusion Pemigatinib monotherapy did not lead to objective responses in patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer harboring FGF/FGFR alterations, although it was overall relatively well tolerated with no new safety signals. Notably, 93% (n = 13) of patients had only FGF/FGFR mutations and amplifications; one patient had an FGFR3-WHSC1 fusion at a low cfDNA percentage (0.02%).

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: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignancy with dismal prognosis. Most patients present with advanced stages. Heightened levels of serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) are associated with carcinogenesis, immune suppression, and poor prognosis in PDAC. Preclinical data of dual inhibition of IL-6 and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) facilitates CD8+ T-cell migration into pancreatic tumors and was effective in controlling tumor growth in syngeneic and genetically engineered PDAC mouse models. Siltuximab (Sil) is a chimeric monoclonal antibody which targets the IL-6 molecule specifically. Spartalizumab (Sparta) is a high-affinity ligand-blocking humanized IgG4 antibody against the PD-1 receptor. We developed a phase Ib/II trial to evaluate the safety, immunogenicity and preliminary antitumor activity of Sil and Sparta in metastatic PDAC (mPDAC). Methods: Patients (pts) with mPDAC 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 v1.1. The phase Ib trial design is standard 3+3, with a primary endpoint of recommended phase II dose (RP2D). An additional 24 patients were planned for an expansion cohort. Sil was administered at escalating dose levels of 6 mg/kg (DL1) and 11 mg/kg (DL2), in combination with Sparta at 300 mg IV on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Key secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR = CR + PR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: We enrolled 4 patients on DL1 and escalated to DL2/RP2D in the absence of a dose limiting toxicity (DLT). A total of 31 patients were subsequently treated at the RP2D (escalation + expansion). The median age was 68 years, 42% were male. Majority were White (63%) and 20% were Black. About 43% had head of pancreas primary tumors and 86% had liver involvement. The median number of lines of prior therapy was 3 (range 1-4). There was no objective response among the 4 patients on DL1; 1 had stable disease (SD) for 11 weeks as best response. 17 of 31 patients on RP2D had only a baseline assessment and came off study for progression of disease, prior to follow-up imaging assessment for response evaluation. Of the 14 RP2D patients with a follow-up assessment, ORR was 0% (3 were SD and 11 had progression of disease (PD) as best response), mPFS - 2.2 mos (95% CI: 1.9, 2.6), mOS - 5.5mos (95% CI: 2.8, 6.5). Treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade included fatigue (23%), anemia (18%), and increased liver enzymes (9.5%). There were no grade 4-5 TRAEs. Conclusions: The combination Sil/Sparta had an acceptable safety profile but did not elicit responses in advanced PDAC pts. Correlative studies using paired biopsies and blood are ongoing to determine how dual IL-6/PD-1 blockade impacts stromal and immune biomarkers in relationship to the clinical outcome measures. Funding and medications for the study were provided by Novartis and Recordati Rare Diseases Inc (NCT04191421) and NIH/NCI (R21CA266088). Citation Format: Olatunji B. Alese, Olumide Gbolahan, Kathleen M. Coleman, Yichun Cao, Sujata Kane, Sarah Craven, Emily Greene, Natalie Horvat, Andrew McDonald, Walid L. Shaib, Christina S. Wu, Mehmet Akce, Maria Diab, Jeffrey M. Switchenko, Gregory B. Lesinski, Bassel F. El-Rayes. Phase Ib study of siltuximab and spartalizumab in advanced pancreatic cancer [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 CT136.

TPS578 Background: Liver transplantation is a curative treatment option in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) however; up to 20% of patients develop recurrent disease. HCC recurrence post-transplant is usually extrahepatic (up to 67%) hence requires effective systemic therapy options. Available data are limited and restricted to small non-randomized studies and case series. Lack of prospective clinical trial data and limited data indicates an area of unmet need in treatment of recurrent HCC after liver transplantation. This phase II study aims evaluate the safety and efficacy of lenvatinib in patients with recurrent HCC after liver transplantation. Methods: This is a multi-institutional phase II trial with lenvatinib in patients with recurrent HCC after transplantation. Lenvatinib is administered 12 mg daily orally in patients ≥60 kg, and 8 mg daily orally in patients <60 kg. Each cycle is 28 days. Restaging scans will be performed every 8 weeks. Eligible patients must have histologically proven HCC that has recurred after liver transplantation and not amenable for surgical resection, age ≥18 years, ECOG PS 0-1, Child Pugh Class A, measurable disease per RECIST version 1.1, adequate organ function, no prior systemic therapy with lenvatinib or another systemic therapy in the post-transplant setting. Prior liver directed therapy is allowed, should be at least >28 days prior to the study enrollment, and should have at least one measurable untreated lesion by RECIST 1.1 Primary endpoint is overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints are safety/tolerability, progression free survival, and overall survival. Pre-treatment and on-treatment peripheral blood samples will be collected for correlative research. A Simon`s two stage Minimax design is employed (H0: ORR = 5%; H1: ORR = 24%; Type I error = 0.05; power = 80%). In the first stage, 11 patients will be accrued, and if there is no objective response among them, the study will be stopped for futility. Otherwise, additional 6 patients will be accrued for a total of 17 patients. This study is currently enrolling patients. Clinical trial information: NCT05103904 .

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 .

139 Background: The fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) pathway plays a key role in cellular proliferation, migration, survival and angiogenesis. Aberrant signaling through FGFR in colorectal cancer and other malignancies results from gene amplification or mutation, chromosomal translocation or ligand-dependent activation of the receptors. Pemigatinib is an oral inhibitor of FGFR1-3 with proven efficacy in FGFR-altered cholangiocarcinoma and myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms, among others. We hypothesized that pemigatinib would improve response rates compared to historical controls in patients with refractory FGF/FGFR-altered mCRC. Methods: ACCRU-GI-1701 was a multicenter, single-arm, Simon’s two-stage phase II clinical trial (NCT04096417) of the FGFR inhibitor pemigatinib in patients (pts) with FGF/FGFR-altered mCRC. Eligible pts had received prior fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and anti-VEGF/anti-EGFR/anti-PD-1 if eligible. Pts received pemigatinib 13.5 mg once daily on d1-21 of each cycle, with option to escalate to 18 mg in c2 if well tolerated. The primary endpoint was (unconfirmed) objective response (OR). A sample size of 21 evaluable pts would provide 82% power to detect a true OR rate of 20% or greater compared to a historical control of 5 % with a one-sided type I error rate of 0.1. A prespecified interim analysis for futility was planned after 12 evaluable patients. Results: A total of 14 patients were enrolled in the first stage of the study, and all were evaluable for the primary endpoint. No OR were observed (out of 12) crossing the futility boundary and resulting in permanent closure of the study. Among all enrolled patients, median age was 60.5 years, 71.4% were male, 92.9% Caucasian, 42.9% with no prior exposure to TAS-102 or regorafenib, and 64.3% with left-sided primary tumors. Treated patients all had tumors with FGFR1-4 mutations and/or FGF/FGFR amplifications by tissue- and/or blood-based molecular testing; no FGFR translocations were present. OR rate for this study was 0% (95% CI, 0-23.2%), with one patient achieving stable disease as best response. Median progression-free survival was 9.1 weeks (95% CI, 7.9-not evaluable [NE]), and median overall survival was 7.9 months (95% CI, 3.4-NE). Grade 3+ adverse events (AE) were seen in 42.9% of treated patients (including 1 grade 5 AE). Most commonly occurring AEs of any grade were anemia, hyperphosphatemia, alkaline phosphatase increased, aspartate aminotransferase increase, and fatigue. Conclusions: Pemigatinib demonstrated evidence of safety but not clinical activity in this population of patients with FGF/FGFR-altered mCRC. It is unknown whether pemigatinib would be active in mCRC patients with FGFR translocations/fusions as these were not represented in our trial. Translational studies are planned to investigate mechanisms of resistance to this therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT04096417 .