Richards, D.

LBA10509 Background: The MCED test (Galleri) detects a shared cancer signal from cell-free DNA in blood and predicts a cancer signal origin (CSO) to guide diagnostic (dx) workup. PF2 (NCT05155605) is a large, prospective, multicenter, interventional study of the MCED test’s performance and safety in a diverse US intended-use population. Methods: PF2 enrolled participants aged ≥50y without clinical suspicion of cancer or cancer diagnosis/treatment within 3y of enrollment. Primary objectives were MCED performance and safety in terms of dx testing triggered by a positive (cancer signal detected) MCED test result. Participants with a positive MCED test underwent targeted dx workup guided by the predicted CSO(s). Participant-reported anxiety was assessed with the State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Results: PF2 enrolled 35,878 participants; 32,007 with a 12m cancer assessment were analyzable for performance. Of 287 (0.9%) with a positive MCED test, 173 were diagnosed with cancer within 12m, for a cancer detection rate of 0.5% (95% CI 0.5-0.6%) and positive predictive value of 60.3% (54.5-65.8%). Specificity was 99.6% (99.6-99.7%). 12m episode sensitivity was 69.8% (62.8-76.0%) in a prespecified subgroup of 12 cancers responsible for ⅔ of US cancer deaths, 66.2% (55.1-75.8%) in a subgroup of 6 aggressive cancers with low 5y survival, and 39.3% (34.9-44.0%) across all cancers. Overall CSO prediction accuracy was 91.3% (86.2-94.7%) across all cancers. The MCED test detected 151 new primary and 22 recurrent cancers; additional cancers detected by screening were those with USPSTF A/B (n=31) and C (n=60) recommended screening. Of 151 MCED-detected new primaries, 80 (53.0%) were clinical stage I-II; 107 (70.9%) were stage I-III. Of 80 MCED-detected stage I-II cancers, 71.2% had no USPSTF A/B screening recommendation. Of 35,335 participants analyzable for safety, 213 (0.6%) had invasive procedure(s) to evaluate a positive MCED test result, of which 90% were nonsurgical and 1.8x more likely for participants with vs without cancer diagnosis. Most (87.6%) had a CSO-guided dx evaluation. There were 5 study-related adverse events during the time of dx workup; none were serious. Anxiety temporarily increased for participants with a positive MCED test and cancer diagnosed, and returned to baseline by 12m. Of participants with a positive MCED test, median time from test result to dx resolution was 48d (95% CI 43-56). Few participants (7/63 [11.1%]) had cancer found by dx PET/CT after a targeted dx workup that did not reveal cancer. Conclusion: The MCED test demonstrated robust performance with a favorable safety profile. When MCED testing was added to USPSTF A/B screening, 6.5x more cancers were detected by screening, most at early stages. The diverse, representative PF2 participant population supports the generalizability of these findings to the US intended-use population. Clinical trial information: NCT05155605 .

TPS3675 Background: Multi-agent chemotherapy regimens (eg, mFOLFOX6) ± anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) or anti-epidermal growth factor regimens are currently the standard of care for patients (pts) with mCRC without targetable mutations. However, the 5-year survival rate remains low at approximately 16% (SEER, 2025). The addition of biological therapies (eg, bevacizumab [bev], an anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody) to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has demonstrated a synergistic antitumor effect in solid tumors. However, ICI monotherapy has limited activity in mismatch repair proficient (pMMR)/microsatellite stable (MSS) mCRC. Simultaneous bispecific targeting of programmed death 1 (PD-1) and VEGF in conjunction with cytotoxic chemotherapy has the potential to enhance antitumor activity. PF-08634404 is a fully human immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) bispecific antibody targeting PD-1 and VEGF. A phase 2 study of PF-08634404 with XELOX or mFOLFOX6 demonstrated promising antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile in first-line (1L) mCRC (Xu X, ESMO 2025; Abstract 796P). Methods: Symbiotic-GI-03 (NCT07222800) is an ongoing, double-blind, randomized, phase 3 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of 1L PF-08634404 + mFOLFOX6 vs bev + mFOLFOX6. Inclusion criteria are age ≥18 y; mCRC with measurable disease per RECIST 1.1; no prior systemic therapy for metastatic disease; ECOG PS 0 or 1; and adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function. Pts with BRAF V600E-mutant or mismatch repair deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) CRC, active central nervous system metastases, or clinically significant risk of hemorrhage/fistula will be excluded. Approximately 800 pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive PF-08634404 + mFOLFOX6 or bev + mFOLFOX6 until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death. Randomization will be stratified by region (North America, Europe, or rest of world), RAS status (mutant or wildtype), and presence of liver metastasis (yes or no). The dual primary endpoints are progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review and overall survival; for each, a stratified log-rank test will be used to compare arms. Hazard ratios with corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs will be estimated using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model, and medians will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method with corresponding 2-sided 95% CIs calculated using the log(-log) method. Secondary endpoints include PFS by investigator, objective response rate, duration of response, PFS after next-line therapy, safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and patient-reported outcomes. Enrollment began in December 2025. Clinical trial information: NCT07222800 .

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 .